Joan of Arc background

[Dan Saunders]

Hi everyone,

In regards to light on the shadow side of the face, let us not forget the simple natural properties. Light travels in a straight line and cannot turn a corner.

If a section on the shadow side of the face is lit (i.e. the side of the mouth), it is due to a "puffiness" characteristic of that person. Start eliminating these characteristics for the sake of an academic point of view and you change the anatomy of that person. A simple fact.

Dan

[Jim Riley]

Dan,

I hope this does not lead to confusion but the question of light on the shadow side of the face may have as much to do with the color of those highlights than it does with value. Those lights on the shadow side tends to look more like a reflected light. In other words, much warmer than you might expect from main light source from our left.

Jim

[Mike McCarty]

Dan,

I don't think I've seen any mention of this. The way the clouds intersect with the side of joan's face creates a bothersome tangent for me. Maybe because they are so close in value. For me I think it works better if the head is separated as below.

[Mike McCarty]

Oops,

I now see that I did some meddling with the clouds on the left side of what I see is the cropped section of the painting. But, maybe you get my drift.

[Dan Saunders]

Hi Jim and Mike,

Good points. The question of light is that for this young lady, if you view the photo of her you will see that she has puffiness at each section of her mouth. The shadow side is puffy enough that it catches the direct light. Toning this down slightly would work but you don't want to lose the character.

I like the cloud changes, but yes it does look a little cropped. Since posting that photo I extended the clouds to the left side of the canvas. I have "lightened" the clouds on the right side at the hair (plus I added a slight reflected light to the hair there).

The model has severe allergies and when I photographed her, her eyes were puffy, swollen and teary...I took some of that purpleish puffiness out of them.

Thanks again guys.

Dan

[Steven Sweeney]

Start eliminating these characteristics for the sake of an academic point of view and you change the anatomy of that person. A simple fact.

Yes, it's true and basic ("simple") that light defines form. I don't know that anyone is espousing an "academic point of view" otherwise at the expense of the realistic quality of the picture.

But let's understand here that we're not looking at the subject in the "true" light of the setting, but rather in a strong, directional studio light quite removed from that setting. It's then the translation of that reference to an invented outdoors location -- and a dark, moody one as well -- that is making elements of the studio lighting seem too prominent, whether in shape, value, or as Jim has just suggested, hue or temperature. We're working with pieces from two or three different puzzles (studio figure, invented armor, imagined landscape) and we're just trying to adjust and assemble them into a new, artistically rational picture. (The way around this is to just have Joan pose in this setting, and paint fast.)

No one has said anything about eliminating characteristics.

[Dan Saunders]

Hi Steve,

Yes, assembling this puzzle has been most interesting. I have worked this way for many years and each painting has new and different challenges.

I have had to take the studio light (blue photo bulb) image and warm the skin tones to match the new and moody surroundings.

The armour, thank God, I was able to "mould" to her own figure. Then again, match the light and reflected colors of the surrounds.

HaHa....yes Steve, I can see me now with Joan on a hillside in France at dusk painting faster then the speed of light...

Dan

[Dan Saunders]

Just thought I would post the allergy tear pic, just for the fun of it....

[Dan Saunders]

Hi everyone,

Here are the latest images. Please excuse the glare at the top of the canvas. I did these quickly.

Dan

[Dan Saunders]

Here's a close-up.