Rhapsody in Blue

Janet Kimantas · 09-21-2005, 05:07 PM

Rhapsody ? ! ?

Seriously, I don't want to be greedy with the critiques, but I was offered an unexpected week off work and took it. Heaven. That's the only reason I'm posting so much. Sorry. And also because I've been so inspired by the other work posted. Sorry.

Anyway, my two blue-eyed guys (the green-eyed one appeared previously). I can see that I need to take down the contrast on the shirt. Painting my hubby takes care of my tendancy to put facial features in the wrong place: his are already there! Ah, I love him anyway. I also hope that the intensity of the dog's gaze doesn't take attention away from Derek. I realize the dog should have been a Corgi. Any other suggestions are very, very welcome.

Thanks, Janet

Luca Vallifuoco · 09-22-2005, 02:27 AM

Hello Janet,

Nice job but I found something that not works for me. The eyes for example: in the reference photo they are more closed than the paint in which are more open. The color of jeans go into violet but this can be a your choice and the highlight in the shirt I think that are so strong than they are in real. This is only my opinion but complessively it is a nice paint.

If you can post some close up of eyes.

Bye, Luca.

Alexandra Tyng · 09-22-2005, 09:16 AM

You really have a knack for posing people, Janet. I love the way your husband is relaxing on the step and his expression. He and his dog are bonded together in a superbly natural way. I also like the way the figures fill the canvas.

I wanted to mention a few areas you might want to look at.

1) The value contrast on the shirt is a little too exaggerated. Also, if you try to simplfy the wrinkles and folds down to the ones that are necessary to describe the form underneath and the stresses of the fabric, you will go a long way towards quieting the agitated appearance of the shirt.

2) I'd like to see a closeup of the face, but from "far away" it appears that the mouth on our right is too stretched, adding to the asymmetry of his face (which is in reality quite charming).

3) I like how you have painted your husband in a real setting. I know it's hard to decide what to put in an what to leave out. The steps are well done. Towards the right side of the canvas the amount of stone planter seems a little overpowering, and then there is a distracting little bit of scene at the far right that leads the eye away but doesn't say much (to me at least). Why not follow the photo more, showing at least one window, loosely suggested (here you bring in the blue/green theme with the reflection on the edge of the glass), continue the house to the right edge, and move the Japanese maple (?) to the right edge also.

Alex

Terri Ficenec · 09-22-2005, 09:33 AM

Hi Janet,

I've got to agree, it's a great pose!

- Really nice job on the hands. . . the one on the dog especially. You might want to check the light across his knuckles and index finger on the hand on his knee... should it come around towards us a little more?

- On his face...there's a light patch on his chin and his upper lip that reads a bit too brightly?

- The perspective on the steps, especially at the top, seems off. I think we are looking at him from just about the level of that top step/porch? maybe a smidge higher? So we shouldn't be seeing so much of that upper surface there.

- shadow below his arm on the steps is confusing.

- I agree with Alex that the planter on the right is confusing (there's a perspective skew there too. . .) -- like the idea of extending the foliage and including window/reflection. . .

Janet Kimantas · 09-22-2005, 10:41 AM

Thanks for all this input. I wish I could see this stuff better on my own.

Luca: Thanks for taking the time. I looked at your website - it is a thing of beauty. The eyes I did paint more open than the photo because Derek has really light sensitive eyes. He is the one who wears sunglasses in the grocery store and the restaurant and you wonder who he's trying to impress. No one-it's just his eyes. Nobody would like to be portrayed like a squinty little mole, so I did open them up. Details follow. The shirt appears to be a problem, you are right and though I did paint the jeans greyer than the shirt on purpose, I have modified them a bit.

Alex: I hope all your virtual students aren't taking time away from your real work! I like how you referred to the shirt as agitated. Perfect. I'm calming it down now. You were right about the corner of the mouth, too, it was sneaking off east (how did that happen?). I fixed it- see below. I have now painted out the background and have to let it dry at little before working on it some more. Yes it's a Japanese Maple - good eyes. One of two that I wrap up painstakingly in miles of burlap every fall.

Terri: I think this is the first time we have met - I liked your painting of the boy and the Corgi, but didn't have anything constructive to add. Your comments are all bang on and I have revisited the highlight on his upper lip already. And the perspective issues, too. I can't seem to sneak anything by any of you! All of these will be addressed over the next couple of days.

Thanks again. I love this place!

Lisa Ober · 09-23-2005, 04:22 AM

Janet, you are really doing a great job. I am going to learn from this post. I don't feel comfortable very often with critique at this point and I wouldn't have anything to add to the expert opinion you have received, but I am going to follow this with interest. I will say you have a handsome built-in subject, you are doing great on the dog, the color is very nice, and I agree you have a great composition. Keep up the great work!

Janet Kimantas · 09-23-2005, 08:06 AM

Thanks Lisa,

Your encouragement means a lot to me. Hey you nutty little insomniac, I think we were online at the same time in the wee hours this morning. Or maybe there's a time difference and I'm the only nutty insomniac.

Anyway, I've knocked back the shirt a lot and softened the edge of Smoky's (the dog's) bib where it makes a distracting line in combination with that forward knee and the blaze on his face. This weekend: the background. Can't wait. Thanks again.

Janet

Janet Kimantas · 09-25-2005, 02:07 PM

Hhhmmmm. I see an anomaly with the mullions in the forward window already. And the dog doesn't seem to be smiling his little smile. Got to fix those things. I do like this background better, thanks to all. If anyone would care to help me finish up with this through their comments, I would be grateful.

To the wonderful person who kindly PMed me about the lopsided eyes: I used Linda Brandon's kind suggestion of an acetate tracing of a same-size print to check throughout the painting process. I also same-sized the photo of the painting over top of the ref shot and slid the transparancy back and forth, and I am just not seeing what you see. And you are not seeing what I see in that this man is more crooked than you know. This pose doesn't even hint at the sins of his nose. He has 12 point vanishing perspective on his face!

Thanks for all your help, Janet

Alexandra Tyng · 09-25-2005, 05:27 PM

Hi again, Janet,

I do like this background a lot more. It's less fussy and complicated, and the rectangles of the windows go nicely with the steps.

Here are some new things to look at:

1) In the reference photo there is a distinct difference between light and shadow on the house. I don't get the same feeling in your painting. The planes of the stone in light look too cool. As a result, there is too much blue, and a slight feeling of monotony in the color. A little more warmth in the light might help the blue work more to your advantage.

2) The perspective in the window muntins is off. I think you already mentioned seeing a problem in one of the windows. In your reference photo, one muntin is exactly at eye level and goes straight across. The top step slants very slightly up from left to right because it is very slightly below eye level. If you follow that line across the canvas, it should correspond to any muntins that happen to be at that level. Below that, the angle of the muntins would go up at even more of an angle toward the right; yours slant down.

3) I would suggest making the value of the window frames inside the glass more like the value in the reference photo. The windows in your painting have a curiously blank look because you have not established this value change. BTW, I like the way you have not articulated every line in the blinds!

4) Since we don't have a reference photo of your husband's face, I'm still left wondering whether the inner corners (tear ducts) of his eyes line up in real life. Most people's do, even when the rest of their face is very asymmetrical. Maybe you've already checked that with the acetate, and if so I won't say another word!

All in all, it's coming along beautifully.

Alex

Janet Kimantas · 09-25-2005, 07:28 PM

Hi Alex,

I feel like apologizing or something. I should know this stuff already. You're giving all this amazing, world-class advice and I'm the dumb kid holding up everyone else. Phooey. It doesn't help that summer is well and truly over. That's depressing enough on its own. However, life and painting go on. The architecture will be addressed tomorrow and in the meantime, those eyes. Following are shots of the ref pic, the painting and another pic in which my squinty honey tried his best to keep his eyes open. I started by drawing one straight line (on the ref pic) from outer corner to outer corner; duplicated it twice, once for the tear duct thing you mentioned, once for an approximation of the upper eyelid. Then I duplicated these three lines without changing them (except for rotating all of them the same for the last pic). What am I missing? If it helps, Derek pointed out over my shoulder that he has one high beam and one low beam.

Thanks for all your valuable time. I owe you. Janet