Self-portrait for critique

John Zeissig · 09-16-2002, 09:02 PM

Hello,

This is a digital photograph of a 11"x 14" oil on wood panel self-portrait on which I would like to get feedback/criticism. The reference photo I used will appear in the following post. Obviously I've deviated in a number of ways from the reference photo. I also did an interim pencil sketch from the reference photo to test the change in expression and enlarge the size to the size of the painting. If there is any interest, I can scan and post that as well. I guess that sooner or later we all have to do a self-portrait, don't we?

John Zeissig · 09-16-2002, 09:07 PM

This is the reference photo used in the self-portrait above.

Denise Racine · 09-21-2002, 10:49 AM

I think you captured a good likeness of yourself. I like that you went beyond the photo content and were very creative with the colors. The background is very original and gives it an almost surrealist effect. The only thing I find a little "scary" is the eyes looking towards the right. The dark pupil and white eyeball give the portrait an eerie feeling. Maybe that is what you wanted? When I look at the reference photo, the eyes look filled in with darks.

John Zeissig · 09-21-2002, 12:05 PM

Hi Denise,

Thanks for the feedback. I thought the photo was deficient in a couple of respects. Although the light and shadow on the face are dramatic, it's just another snapshot of a graying guy squinting into the sun against a cluttered background. There's nothing there to engage the viewer. So I thought I'd open the eyes and move the irises/pupils toward the viewer to generate some interest. I didn't like the blue shirt, so I changed it to black.

It's interesting that you find the expression to be "scary". I was shooting for something more like "low native cunning", but I'll settle for scary. I think scary might just be a notch or two up on the emotional scale that I think we're talking about.

On the background, it's the view across the SF Bay from where I live. I just deleted the parts of the city of SF that I don't like, which pretty much left some bare hilltops and fog! That allowed me to put in the blue that used to be in the shirt, along with the warm sunset colors to give some credibility to the flesh tones. Again, I'll go along with eerie as a description of the overall effect, although I was trying for something a little less intense. I can't think of the right adjective at the moment.

I'm really grateful for your comments on this painting, because they indicate I may have gone too far. I've done the same sort of thing to my favorite model, and I suspect I may be overdoing it. One problem for me is that it is no easier to get a good photo of someone than it is to paint them from life, except that you can get more photos in a hurry. How do you work? Do you encounter the problem of getting a model to give you the right expression regardless of whether it's a photo or drawing session?

Denise Racine · 09-21-2002, 01:43 PM

Please note that I meant "scary" in a positive way!

I forgot to mention that I appreciate the way you treated the shadow on the face. The picture is quite dark in that area and I know, by experience (I just posted a painting with the same problem under the oil critique section) that the dark side of the face can get hard to render!

Usually I will have the model setup in front of me and I determine the background, lighting, pose...etc. So the direction of the eyes is pretty much decided on the spot, depending on the pose.

I work from life in the beginning and finishing stages. In between I rely on pictures & sketches.

Keep up the good work!

John Zeissig · 09-21-2002, 06:16 PM

Hello Denise,

Yes, I know what you mean, positively scary! But, hey, it keeps panhandlers and kids away from me on the subway.

I did bring up the value in the shadow side from what it is in the photo, it's not just an artifact. Both the photo jpeg (scanned from a print) and the portrait jpeg (digital photo) are pretty accurate with respect to color and value.

This is the only one that I've done using only a photo. My approach is currently best described as "by whatever means necessary", since I'm not as experienced as you are; but I tend to use as many sources as possible, which sounds like a less organized version of your methods. This is at least somewhat reassuring.

Now I'm going to get even with you by going to your post and critiquing it!

Michele Rushworth · 09-29-2002, 11:17 AM

I really like the angle and the lighting in your portrait. Having the eyes turned toward the viewer doesn't really bother me.

What does seem very much out of place to me is the made-up background. It takes away from what would be a terrific strong painting, otherwise. I would have just put a plain "studio" background behind this very powerful head and shoulders portrait.

As to your question of getting good reference photos, I take a hundred or more shots of the subject in photo session and I'm bound to get a few that are exactly what I want to paint.

It took me a while to learn how get the photos I wanted, though. My first photo sessions produced a hundred or more BAD shots!

There is some great info in other sections of this Forum on how to shoot good reference photos, and some suggestions of books with simple tips that can make all the difference.

Hope that helps!

John Zeissig · 09-29-2002, 08:12 PM

Thanks for your response, Michele.

Denise characterized the background as surrealistic, so I guess maybe I went overboard in putting it in. To me it just seems like an ordinary sundown on the bay with the fog rolling in, but I guess it is distracting. If that's the case I'm going to take a licking, because some of the other paintings that I'm planning to post for critique are even worse in that respect. In fact I just posted another which has probably the least dramatic background of the five that I've done. If I get the same reactions to that one that this self-portrait is getting vis-a-vis the background then I'll have to really moderate what I'm doing.

The good news is that I've got plenty of paint so the fix is fairly easy. I'm not sure what you mean by a plain studio background, but I guess that means basically a neutral wall or anything undramatic. I'd considered a simple dark background like in Denise's painting of Ronald, and I admit that I like the force and impact of that work. I should probably try plain backgrounds digitally before doing anything else to this self-portrait.

I agree with you about taking a lot of shots when photographing. But on this one I obviously wasn't the culprit. My wife took the reference photos, and, believe me, this was the best of the lot. Look what she gave me to work from! LOL!