Portrait in watercolor

Margaret Elvin · 02-08-2002, 07:20 PM

Hello everyone,

I recently signed up as a new member, but I've been reading the boards as a guest for about a year. As so many new members have already said, I think this forum is a wonderful resource. Thank you Cynthia for creating and maintaining it, thank you to members who raise/respond to questions that go to the heart of portrait painting, and finally thank you to the professionals who share their expertise with a generosity that inspires!

It's been quite an ordeal getting a photo of one of my portraits onto the computer. I borrowed a Sony digital camera DSC-S75, employed some dusty Corel Photo House software and climbed a very steep learning curve. I'm not thrilled with the results, but the pics actually came out much better than prior ones taken with a 35mm camera and professional slides I had made. Apparently watercolor flestones are not easy to photograph.

This is a w/c portrait of an 83 year old woman. I took the reference photos, but was strong-armed by the daughter into choosing a photo I didn't love. The subject has Parkinson's and couldn't sit straight, so her jacket and blouse are hanging in an odd way. Also the color under her right eye reads more red than in the actual painting. Please feel free to comment openly: I want to improve.

Margaret Elvin · 02-08-2002, 07:40 PM

Here's a close-up of the head. Any comments as to values and colors would be especially appreciated. I have to say that I don't think I captured her skintone. I think her complexion was more 'olive'.

Thanks for taking the time to view these pictures!

Margaret

Steven Sweeney · 02-09-2002, 08:39 PM

I'm afraid I can offer nothing constructive about the water colour aspects per se, for it is a medium that has remained, as to me, coy and aloof, easily resisting even my most ardent advances. More successful courtiers will have to speak to this element.

I do understand the learning curve involved in capturing and transmitting acceptable digital images via the myriad platforms and protocols and formats. (Note the glaring dearth of images I've posted on SOG.) I was hugging the heights of that curve but lost my footing and am presently lying face up at its base, looking for shapes in the clouds and considering career options while tattered pages of computer manuals continue to descend upon me. You will surely think I am exaggerating.

I do think you've done really quite well with a challenging subject and situation. Many presumptions about placement and proportions of features are of little use when considering the likeness of an aged or infirm subject; the flesh and underlying musculature begin to defy our textbook expectations. There's nothing about the rendering that suggests that you have not accurately captured the features and likeness of this subject. In a piece in which the values are high throughout, you have nonetheless wisely and adeptly portrayed a lighted and a shadow side of the subject. It's a bit difficult to detect in the reproduction, but it appears that there are good transitional halftones between the lights and darks. Two small suggestions in that area: there's a small triangle of light in the shadow (on the viewer's left) on the jaw line right below the corner of the mouth, which seems too bright for its position and, in any event, is diluting or breaking up the effect of that large useful shadow shape on that side of the face -- I would tone that triangle way down; and secondly, the edges at the base of that triangle and at the base of the chin are extremely sharp (due, I suspect, to the photo reference), and even if the subject's features in those areas are particularly prominent and hard-edged, there nonetheless must be some turning of the form underneath at those sites, where the plane of the form turns away from the light and becomes darker in value. I think that if you squint down you will see both the effect of softening those edges, as well as the interference caused by that triangle of light.

You suggest that the photography unduly accentuated the red hues beneath one eye. I occasionally like to snap a photo or two of a work in progress, just to see what the camera sees. (I should note that this practice will infuriate some purists, and might most profitably be done during their lunchbreak absences.) Once in a while I find the "second opinion" quite useful. You might revisit such areas in the future and see if the photo image is "on" to something that you might have missed. You needn't reveal your methodology to anyone.

I had an impulse to suggest a darker background in a different hue, but I haven't sold myself on it yet. Perhaps it's okay that the white hair is somewhat "lost" against the background, and that the overall brightness of the piece serves perhaps as a counterweight to the emotional pull of the frailty and circumstance of the subject. Still . . . the abundance of that same tone and hue of blue does make me wish that the blouse, or at least the chain-link design along the jacket edges, were a different color.

Lastly, I guess I would have to recommend that you not try to "weave" your signature into the work, especially when, as here, it does somewhat compromise an edge. (I do, however, think that the edges on the shoulders should be softened.) And anyway, your signature on a portrait is part of the composition of a portrait, an announcement of professionalism and "ownership" of the work, by which you say "I am an artist and this is something created by me." Also -- you wouldn't want a prospective client to pore over the portrait and not be able to figure out who painted it!

More rambling than useful, but a place to start.

Best wishes,
Steven

Steven Sweeney · 02-09-2002, 08:49 PM

P.S.

Regarding the intermediate photographs of the work in progress: if instead of photography you're working from life (portraiture or still-life), one of the most useful -- essential, I think -- "second opinions" will be found in a mirror in which you can view both the subject matter and the painting at the same time. It's amazing what differences and nuances can be revealed by this method. I use a small hand-held mirror but many studio artists have mobile, full-length mirrors just for this purpose.

Steven Sweeney · 02-09-2002, 11:24 PM

(Geez, is he still here?)

Sorry -- I confused an issue by referring to the placement of the light triangle on the viewer's left. It is on the viewer's right, in the shadow side of the face.

Stanka Kordic · 02-10-2002, 07:02 PM

Really can't add to Steven's thoroughly informative critiques, but would like to share what I do at the photography review.

I edit all my photos before showing the client. I take out any photos that would absolutely, positively, NOT work as a painting. In addition, I choose 2-3 of my favorites from this selection to do as a pencil sketch, in proportion to the final piece. These may be a combo of several photos. That way, the client will understand there is a difference between a good shot as a photo, and a good piece of reference for a painting that may a summary of several.

I do like your portrait. The colors are clean, fresh, and I get a good sense of her personality. Nice job on this one, watch the harshness of edges on the next one.

Margaret Elvin · 02-11-2002, 06:27 PM

Steven,
You are right about the triangle on her jawline being too bright and also about her chin being too hard-edged. These were oversights and I appreciate you pointing them out. Your squinting suggestion really highlighted the problems and will be a useful tool for the future.

I so agree with you about the background not being quite right, but I'm unable to come up with anything better. I applied various washes to some water media acetate which I then placed over the painting. Most colors drained the life from her. But I always have problems with background colors. After reading the thread on 'Clothing doesn't make the person' in Cafe G., I realize I'm not paying enough attention to color when setting up the portrait. Karin Wells suggestions are making me rethink my approach or lack thereof. I have so much to learn!

I don't like the placement of my signature either. It looks silly and distracting perching on her shoulder, but I sign in pencil and it wouldn't show on her black jacket. I may need to learn to sign using an opaque w/c like guoache (sp?) for this.

Good suggestions for seeing what the camera has to say about a work in progress. I'll try it with my new digital camera. I do use a mirror and that helps too.

Your mountain imagery about the learning curve in getting acceptable pics onto the computer made me laugh! Why would I think you are exaggerating?!

Thanks for your insightful comments Steven. Good luck with the mountain climbing...don't give up!

Margaret

Margaret Elvin · 02-11-2002, 07:06 PM

Stanka,

I really like your ideas on how to handle the photograph selection. I did narrow it to six for this client (the daughter of the subject), but I put in one or two I was hesitant about and of course she picked one of those.

I think doing a preliminary sketch to steer the client in the direction you believe would work best is an excellent idea. I suspect that would have won over this particular client because as you say, it would have demonstrated the difference between a good photo and a photo useful as reference material. I do sketches from the photos anyway so I might as well do them before, rather than after the final pose is selected with the client. I also have the feeling that a client would warm up to a sketch and even become attached to it as the concept for the painting.

I do agree about the hard edges in my portrait and will try to soften them. Thanks for reinforcing the need to watch out for that in the future.

Stanka, thanks very much for taking the time to review my portrait and give me feedback. Thanks too for generously sharing your knowledge and experience in handling the potentially tricky process of selecting the final pose. It makes me more confident for next time.

Margaret

Lon Haverly · 02-13-2002, 06:58 AM

Nice job with a delicate subject! I have a few thoughts on this one. I generally pose the model to the right or to the left, and rarely straight on. I almost always turn the shoulders in a different direction then the head. Can't do that when working from a photo. Try to avoid the "mug shot" pose. Perhaps a different picture would present a better angle.

ALso, it is not always necessary to paint the subject all the way to the edge of the painting. In this painting, the large dark clothing all the way down to the bottom does not add to the painting. Perhaps fading it out in a vignette would work better in this instance. Watercolor lends itself well to fading washes of this nature.

Keep up the good work!

Margaret Elvin · 02-13-2002, 12:36 PM

Thanks for the feedback on my 'Please Critique' post. I think you're right about the mug shot pose not being appealing. It was not my first choice from my reference photos, but now I realize even more clearly what was lost in the painting by not insisting on a more poetic pose. It is so useful to get honest observations in a critique!

I usually paint to the edge of the page, but maybe I'll experiment with fading off to see how I like that. It might have worked better with that jacket. I'm also wondering if the jacket is just too dark altogether for this particular portrait and subject.

Thanks again,
Margaret