Ben and Samantha

Michele Rushworth · 08-17-2003, 08:48 PM

Here's my latest. Please let me know what you think of it.

The painting is 30x40".

Thanks!

Michele Rushworth · 08-17-2003, 08:48 PM

Here's the first closeup.

Michele Rushworth · 08-17-2003, 08:49 PM

And the second closeup.

Mike McCarty · 08-17-2003, 09:29 PM

Michele,

You show a lot of grit posting this fine painting in this section, you are to be commended. It will be most helpful to everyone to see a critique of this lovely painting.

My own nit pick would be as follows:

You may want to distinguish the boys left nostril a little more. I'm sure it is mostly lost in the light but maybe not quite this much.

The boys right ear could use a little more modeling and maybe a reduction in contrast within that form.

The love seat arm on our left at the top, I think this could benefit from a more gradual rounding of form as it falls away.

I find that the composition might have been more satisfying if you had omitted the cushion in front. Maybe there were considerations that are not obvious.

In my opinion, this is a very fine portrait. The childrens faces are wonderful. Congratulations!

Peter Jochems · 08-17-2003, 10:18 PM

Hi Michele,

I feel a bit awkward to comment on this quality of painting. But since you placed it here, my personal remarks.

You paint the eyelashes very solid. I would prefer to paint them as a series of accents, to break up the solidity.

There is a strong division between the white of the eyeball and the pink or the reddish accent of the corner of the eye (towards the nose). Maybe an accent of a subtle mixture of grey and pink would make this transition a little softer.

For some reason the boy's eyes look very blue to me, maybe a bit more greyish blue would make it even livelier (but it's hard to judge, not having seen the painting in real life.)

The background looks very warm to me, but I like it, it enhances the atmosphere.

I like the contrast between the rougher treatment of the seat and the more refined modelling of the faces. Maybe an even more extreme contrast in the handling of the paint would be possible and bring even more dynamics to your paintings.

Since you placed a book there, playing with the lighting and showing the effect of the light reflected by the white of the pages of the book would have been an option (a subtle lighting of the faces from below). Rembrandt used this effect more than once.

I like the painting very much. The composition of the two figures, the way the boy has his hand on his foot, the placing of the book, the way the girl looks up. (For some reason, I think of the option that the boy looks up with his eyes to where the light is coming from instead of looking in the book, (without changing the position of his face) but I don't know whether that would have been better, perhaps not.)

I hope I didn't sound too nit-picky, since I'm commenting on a very good painting.

Kimberly Dow · 08-17-2003, 11:08 PM

Michele,

I am so impressed with the girl's mouth especially. The tiny glimpse of teeth is perfect. In the close-ups they look so soft. Beautiful. I cannot critique this, but I can tell you that the girl has an almost identical twin - my niece used to look exactly like this. She's now a 17-year-old terror.

Jean Kelly · 08-18-2003, 12:21 AM

I certainly would not attempt to critique this. I remember your portait from a couple of years ago, and you're really accomplishing what you set out to. I love both faces, and the looser handling of the rest. It is so hard to come up with a believable pose between siblings, this looks fresh and real.

Jean

Michele Rushworth · 08-18-2003, 03:00 PM

You are all too kind! Thanks for your suggestions of the changes in the small areas, but I think there's something very big that I'm missing.

Here's what I'm aiming for and I don't know how to get there:

Kimberly Dow · 08-18-2003, 04:15 PM

Michele,

You could start with less attractive children to begin with.

08-18-2003, 05:33 PM

Hey that's what I was going to say!

But seriously folks, why don't you try it? When I look at your painting and the JSS painting for technical similarities, there are a lot, IMHO. And I know there are technique gurus on here so I won't even give it a whack. But, the hand you have on the boy's foot, the treatment of light and shadow on her face, these things, I think are awfully well done. From my monitor, there's no glaring difference between your handling of those subjects and his - it seems graspable from where you are now.

(Ooh, please don't anybody beat me for saying that! I do realise he is a god.)

Your scenery is casual and common, both the pose and the objects. The overstuffed armchair, the brass lamp in the background, the bare feet and the book - I could have those in my house. I don't have a Kazakstanian (or whatever) rug draped over a bench, though, like he does. JSS' children are formally dressed, in high contrast to each other and the background. Their facial expressions are serious, and their relationship to each other is in opposition (body positions), whereas your pose is natural and chummy.

If you took these kids, made them look dour and unfriendly, warmed your light source, threw in shinier, redder skin and wetter eyes, and created a scene of uncommon luxury, I think you'd be smack in the running.