Ronald - Page 2

Tammy Nielsen · 09-22-2002, 12:21 PM

Steven,

Keep the critiques coming that's what we're here for. Thanks.

Tammy

Denise Racine · 09-22-2002, 01:14 PM

Everyone, thank you very, very much for your critiques. I sincerely appreciate all the advice and I will be working to improve this painting as of today!

I believe that honesty is a necessity. Reaching the quality that I strive for is made much easier with constructive criticism from people who know what they are talking about.

Watch for a new improved version sometime next week.

Thanks again!

Chris Saper · 09-22-2002, 05:10 PM

Hi Denise,

I wanted to add one more note about the ear. It looks to me as if there may be a "fish-eye" type of distortion in the reference photo. If you are too close, or use too short a lens, the photo will often exaggerate the perspective in features, i.e., the nose larger than it should be, the ears (because the perspective is distorted)smaller, etc.. I agree that the reference photo shows a small ear, however, the reference photo itself can sometimes be distorted.

Denise Racine · 09-22-2002, 06:06 PM

I just couldn't control that nagging urge to paint! So here is the portrait, corrected with the following suggestions:

1) Yes everybody, the ear was too small and too low...I think I got it right this time!

2) Corrected the angle of the top of the head and lowered the hair line

3) Increased the value on the shadow side (did I go too dark?)

4) Increased the value on the light side

5) Decreased the side of the sitter's left jaw (mandible)

6) Soften turning edges in the shadows

7) Accented the shadow under the nose trying to be very carful about that highlight on the cheek, Steven!

8) Put the sitter's left eye more into the shadow

That's about it! Any more comments or suggestions? Or are you fed up with hearing about this one?

Steven Sweeney · 09-22-2002, 11:18 PM

A good revision. Last couple of notes:

1-- I think the light goes just a little too far around the bearded chin, and around the flesh (double-chin, for want of a better description) under that beard. A slight darkening of the leftward (is that a word?) portions pulls the chin back over a bit.

2-- I would go back into the cheekbone area on the shadow side and warm it up just a bit. I think the decrease in value helped define the form, but the overall effect got a little too cool.

3-- You might want to shave off just a slight crescent from the top right side of the head, just right of the top center of the skull. Just a tad, to nudge that center a bit more to our left. Right now, too, there's a bit of highlight on that edge (right at the top center of the skull). I'd tone that down, so that the plane of the skull turns away from the light and the contrast between the skin and the background is reduced, contributing to the recession of that form.

Excellent attention and effort. Congratulations.

Michele Rushworth · 09-25-2002, 06:28 PM

Great portrait! My first thought when I saw it was that the reference photo was taken with too wide an angle lens, as Chris Saper suggested. That would account for the distortion in the features. The chin seems large in comparison with the rest of the face, etc. If you use a camera with a zoom lens, try zooming in a couple of steps before you take pictures of subjects or paintings. That will greatly reduce distortion.

Overall, though, a great job!