Father's Day portrait

[Sandra Jackson]

This is a portrait of my father holding my daughter for the first time, when she was one week old. I just blocked in the background. I would appreciate any suggestions you have. Digital critique would be great, too.

[Mischa Milosevic]

Sandra, I was just searching through the forum and came upon your post. First let me say you have two wonderful subjects whom I'm sure you love very much.

From what I can see you have done a good job in representing your two subject. The drawing is well executed. The distortion I'm not an expert at, as far as photos are concerned, but all seems ok in that regard.

It is difficult at this distance to be accurate in judgment. So, accept my words with a grain of salt. First thing that I notice is the high chroma in both figures. The two figures in pose are quite natural and I like that, but the light and atmosphere I would question. Especially the chroma and color in both faces. You might be accurate in regard to your ref-photo and some men do have reddish faces but I would still question this.

I visited your page and your work is quite impressive. The portfolio page is acting up though.

Sincere regards,
mischa

[Chuck Yokota]

Hi Sandra,

I think you have expressed your father being overcome with emotion very well.

One thing in the painting that I find distracting is the father's hand. I find myself taking extra effort to "read" the hand position. The highlight along the lower thumb looks too close to the palm side, so I don't see the rounding as the surface curves away from us. The rest of the thumb looks a bit unnaturally straight. The lack of any hint of the back of the hand or knuckles also makes it harder to read the hand.

[Michele Rushworth]

You'll find much greater success working from life or from photos that were not taken with a camera flash. Also, the expressions on the faces of the two subjects look like they are both grimacing. If you want to work from photos take some top notch pictures of subjects with a natural relaxed expression and with one source of natural daylight off to the side (ie a window). If you study the threads in this forum on how to take reference photos you will be light years ahead.

[Sandra Jackson]

Hi everyone,

Thank you so much for your thoughtful responses. I appreciate you taking the time to help me out.

[Chris Saper]

Dear Sandra,

Michele's advice is excellent. Starting with poor photo resource material establishes constraints that can't be overcome. Starting with any photo resource material, even great photo material, still presents the painter with many obstacles - and false information with regard to color, value, edges and form, and the only way to become skilled at interpreting the photo is through many many hours of practicing from life.

Other threads that you might search out here include value-massing, edges, color temperature, and value in general.

I think that it would be helpful to you to work in monochrome, so that you can increase your skill at rendering 3-D form. Even working with still life objects from life will help you more quicky than working from photographs.

Hope this is helpful.

[Garth Herrick]

Hi Sandra,

I quite agree with both Michele's and Chris' excellent advice. Your biggest limitation here is the quality of your photographic reference. I have no doubt you copied it well; your drawing is very plausible. I am not sure how or why you would take this painting any further than it is already; it is a step on the learning curve of painting. The worst problem with these standard flash photographs is they completely flatten and nullify any semblance of form. Look at your daughter's garment: it is completely flat like a flattened wrinkled sheet of aluminum foil, and only the outline edges serve to indicate the forms our viewing eyes must reconstruct. Unfortunately, we are beholden to the lighting provided by the photograph, whereever it is, because unlike life, we cannot walk around the subject, or see it in stereo-3-D with both eyes. So in keeping with Michele and Chris, it is supremely important to start with the best possible prepared photographs when used for references, and not just take them literally, but observe from life, too.

Catch as catch can, by all means do more photographs and studies of your father and daughter as a group. There is no doubt you will arrive with emotionally compelling material, as you have here. As a baby, there is not much choice other than photo references for painting your daughter, but add to the photo references, your firsthand observation of delecate and vibrant color relationships only your eye and memory can furnish. The camera won't!

I work from photos all the time; complaining all the time about their limitations as well! The most important thing for me is to accompany photo refernces with live sittings and observations whenever possible. If my subject is not available, then I will observe similar individuals and lighting situations out and about on the street, and mentally sketch this information into my brain as a backup reference resource of experience. Always scavenge for useful tidbits of information with your eyes, that can augment the inevitable untruths in the camera's eye.

I take it you are striving for realism, as your portrait is real as your photo. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with being poetic with the flat lighting The historic Gustav Klimt might well have relished your flash photo toward his aesthetic ends. He could greatly design with edges of flattened forms, and that is part of artistic licence.

Best,

Garth