ESP - Portrait & Figure Fundamentals - Lesson 3: Measuring

[DAK723]

Portraits – Lesson 3: Measuring and Laying Out

For those visiting the classroom for the first time – Welcome! My name is Don and this is lesson 3 of our Portrait and Figure Fundamentals class!

Lesson 1 started with eyes and noses and can be found here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=532971

Lesson 2 covered mouths, ears and hair, and can be found here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=538364

In our first two classes we concentrated on painting the features of the face by concentrating on value shapes – the shapes of the shadows and the lights. We will continue to work with value shapes, but now as we progress to the entire head and face, we will be working with the larger value shapes of the head. We need a way to place the features, and the value shapes, in relation to one another, and to the face and head as a whole. To do so, some method of measuring is recommended. And by measuring early in the proceedings, one reduces the major revisions that are often necessary when no measurements are made, or if they are made at the end!

Now, I will include lots of techniques, but that does not mean you have to use all of them when you measure. The amount you measure and how you measure is up to you. There is no “correct” amount or method. And, needless to say, there may be other measuring techniques that I am unaware of and may work just as well.

As far as this lesson is concerned, I will be dividing the term “measuring” into two types – visual measuring and actual measuring. In describing visual measuring, I will use two terms repeatedly, so I will define them here:

Eyeballing – Which describes making distance estimates, comparisons, and angle judgments with the eye only.

Sighting – Describes measurements made by using a pencil, pastel, or “stick-like” object in your hand, held out at arm’s length, lining up one end of your “stick” with the distant object in your “sight,” and using your thumb to mark the measurement. This method is sometimes referred to as measuring by “pencil and thumb.” You can also “sight” to help you judge angles.

If you are working from a live model, visual measurements are your only measuring option.

Actual measurements will include any measurements made with a ruler, pencil, pastel stick, etc., placed directly on your subject, or, more likely, a reference photo. Obviously, using a ruler will give you the most precise actual measurements.

Personal opinion: Generally speaking (with a few exceptions), I do think it is good practice to try using visual measurements whenever possible – and then checking your visual measurements with actual measurements. If you are a beginning artist especially, the skill of making visual distance comparisons and judging angles is extraordinarily valuable. And as mentioned, when painting or drawing from life, it is usually your only option. For these reasons, I will be concentrating primarily on visual measurements. Also, for the most part, actual measuring is fairly self explanatory!

Guidelines

Most portrait books, or books on drawing the head, discuss measuring with some “generic” or “idealized” proportion diagrams. So will I!

Generic proportions are useful when you are drawing or painting heads or faces without a model. Even with a model, knowing the generic proportions will usually guarantee reasonable accuracy. Perhaps the best reason for knowing these generic proportions is recognizing when your subject varies from the average. Compare your actual observations with these guidelines. If your subject has a longer chin than average, or eyes wider apart than the norm, then accurately representing that “unique” feature will be especially important.

Here is “Mr. Generic” - a typical diagram of the generic or average adult human head:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-00-ideal_man.jpg

This diagram includes some of the most important guidelines that will help you visually measure. They are:

The “eye line” is at the ½ height measurement. Finding the “eye line” will be one of the first things we try to establish when we measure.

Measurement “A” – The length of the forehead (hairline to eyebrows), eyebrows to bottom of nose, and nose to bottom of chin are important measurements and are approximately equal.

The width of the eye, and the comparative width from eye to edge of face, and between the eyes (numbers 1,2,3,4,5) are all equal on Mr. Generic. The head is approximately 5 eye-widths across. Placing the eyes is important because the placement of the eyes will help us locate the width of the nose and mouth.

The mouth is approximately 1/3 of the distance between bottom of nose and bottom of chin.

We will use the above generic measurements on almost every portrait we paint. The guidelines we draw will start with the generic and be refined to the specific.

The purple lines coming straight down from the middle of the eyes are vertical “plumb lines.” Plumb lines (both vertical and horizontal) are one of the most useful measuring tools at an artist’s disposal. In this case, those lines represent the width of the mouth. Notice also, the vertical plumb lines in red that line up the inside corners of the eyes with the width of the nose.

Many times, these important locations – corners or center of the eyes, edges of the nose or corners of the mouth, are referred to as landmarks. Our guidelines and other measuring techniques focus on establishing the location of the important landmarks in your painting.

Guidelines can be straight (as the plumb lines are) or they can follow the curve of the head and face. When the head is seen straight on, plumb lines as shown on the idealized face may be all you need. But when the head is tilted, guidelines that follow the curvature can be very helpful, too.

I have highlighted important guidelines on the following reference photos. Keep in mind that these guidelines can be sketched in lightly, or just visualized, on your actual painting.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-basic-russ.JPG

In this example, notice the centerline and eye-line guidelines establish both the rotation of the head and the tilt of the head. On the left, notice that the same curve of the eye-line is drawn for the nose and mouth to make sure they are lined up correctly. Now, since eyes are not always lined up exactly with one another, and mouths may be crooked, the features may deviate slightly from your guidelines, but the differences will be small. Notice the mouth is about 1/3rd distance from nose to chin.

On the right, I’ve drawn in those guidelines from the center of the eyes and the inside corner of the eyes. Since this fellow’s head is tilted, the plumb lines (straight down) won’t work here. I need the guidelines to follow the curve of the centerline. And they work fairly well in locating the width of the nose and mouth.

Another two examples of the use of guidelines:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-02-sue-blue.JPG


(1) Remember Mr. Generic’s “A” measurement – the three equal divisions for forehead, brows to nose, nose to chin? Well, her forehead has too much hair to find the hairline, but these guidelines will help me compare the distance from eyebrows to bottom of nose and nose to chin. Looks about equal! Also my guidelines will help me compare that 1/3rd distance to locate the mouth in relation to nose and chin. The mouth guideline will help me keep the mouth at the correct angle, too. (2) The same guidelines are drawn for “Blue Hat” on the right. Again, establishing curved guidelines that run parallel to the eye-line will help keep the nose and mouth on the correct line. (3) The plumb lines help me locate nose and mouth width. The yellow lines confirm that the eyebrow-nose and nose-chin measurements are about equal once again.

All of these guidelines – both plumb and curved, can be used in every situation to help determine visual measurements, whether you are working from a photo or live model. And plumb lines especially, can be used anywhere on the painting to help measure and locate ANY landmark.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-03-francie-kid.JPG


1) Locates the 3rd smile crease with the eye corner. 2) Eyebrow edge compared to nostril wing. 3) Smile crease and eye. 4) Base of neck and mouth. 5) Top of neck and nostril. 6) The curl of hair and mouth. 7) Top of shirt lines up with chin. 8) The center of the mouth and bridge of nose. 9) Tip of nose and eye. 10) Shoulder edge and hair.

NOTE: Notice the guidelines for the eyes and the mouth (blue lines). Usually, I will refer to the horizontal guidelines as being drawn parallel to one another, although they are subject to the rules of perspective, and when the head is rotated, will converge at a vanishing point. Normally, the convergence is slight, and can often be ignored. In this case, the photographer is quite close to the model, and the convergence is quite noticeable. If you are taking your own reference photos, watch out for this effect. Don’t get too close to your models!


You can use plumb lines to locate value shapes as well.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-04-russ.JPG


1) Light/Shadow edge on nose lines up with top of ear. 2) Eye shadow on left lines up with top of light shape on right. 3) Edge of light shape lines up with eye. 4) Light shape on neck lines up with mouth. 5) Light shape on chin lines up with center of mouth and nose.

So far, we’ve discussed plumb lines and curved guidelines, but there is another important guideline we need to discuss and that is angles. There are lots of angles in a portrait as well, from large shapes such as the angle of the neck or jaw, to smaller angles of the nose, eyes, creases and dimples. Here are a couple tips that may help you eyeball, sight, or sketch in angles on your painting.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-08-angles.JPG


On the left, I have highlighted a few important angles on her face: the angle of the neck, the nose, and the crease from nose to mouth corner. If you have trouble judging them, it might help to compare the angle to a plumb line (right photo – neck angle), or to extend the angle and see where it points to (right photo). Extending the line also makes it longer, making it easier to judge the angle.



Let’s take a look at some guidelines for the model in profile. Here is Mr. Generic once again:


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-05-ideal_man2.jpg

Some guidelines to look for in profile are:

The width of the head from tip of the nose to the back of the skull is approximately equal to the height of the head (dimension B). The distance from the back corner of the eye to the back of the ear is roughly equal to the distance from the back corner of the eye to the chin (dimension C).

Some real profiles:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-06-basic_profiles.jpg

(Left) Sketched in guidelines to measure and compare the eyebrow to nose, nose to chin measurements and the 1/3rd mouth measurement. (Right) We see that the back of eye to back of ear measurement is approximately equal to the back of eye to chin measurement. The front of the eye also comes very close to lining up with the edge of mouth with a guideline that is lined up with the tilt of the head.

Note: Two measurements that cause problems for many artists are the eye-line (approx. ½ of height), and the distance to the ear. Apparently our brains like action! They tend to diminish areas and distances where there is little happening. So, foreheads and the height of the hair are often underestimated. Beginners often place the eyes as much as 2/3rds of the way up the face rather than half-way. The same is true for the side of the face. That distance to the ear is often underestimated.

In our last lesson, Charlie (Colorix) brought to our attention some important guidelines for the angles of the lips and nose in profile, and she put together the following examples and descriptions.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-07-charlienoselip.jpg


In the top left cluster of pics, the lines indicate that either the lower edge of the upper lip, or the upper edge of the same lip very often has the same angle as the septum. This correspondence changes over the years, as the cartilage of the nose continues to grow all our lives. But, as gravity takes its toll on the upper lip too, it doesn't change as much as one might think -- not in all individuals.

This correspondence of angle is easiest seen in a neutral, fairly relaxed face. Even a hint of a smile offsets it.

The girl in the lower right corner illustrates that if the nostril has a high curve, so does the upper lip (black arrows). If the nostrils are flat, then the mouth has a very flattened M-shape (or Cupid's Bow, as we say in Sweden.)

The man in the lower left belongs to a very common variation of the 'rule' -- his septum corresponds to the angle of the lower lip, when the mouth is relaxed and slightly open. The more pronounced the beak is, the steeper the angle of the lower lip. Yassir Arafat is an excellent example. But when the mouth is closed, it looks straight, or slanted as the first examples.

I learned about this some 20-30 years ago, and have spent many hours on the subway staring at people, confirming that these parallel angles are highly common -- I'd call it "normal", in fact.

Look at people around you, when they are neutral or relaxed, and see if this is indeed true. Eventually you'll detect it in faces seen from straight on, too.


Thank you, Charlie!

Using a Base Unit

Another measuring technique that can be used, alone, or in conjunction with the others already mentioned, is establishing a “base unit.” Personally, I find that using a base unit is easier when doing an entire figure – where the length of the head is the usual base unit, but it can be done in portraits as well. Keep in mind that when we are measuring we are comparing distances and proportions. In order that the proportions are consistent to one another, a base unit is a useful tool. The base unit must be large enough so that you can make a “sighting” measurement if you are painting from a live model, but still be small enough to compare it to most of the features in your painting. The length of the nose is often chosen for the “base unit” in a portrait, but it can be something else.

Here is an example:


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-base.JPG


(Top Left) The blue line represents the distance from eyebrows to bottom of nose. We will use this as the Base Unit. (Top Right) We compare that distance to the nose-chin distance and see that it is very close to the same.

(BL) Using the same Base Unit, you measure from the tip of the nose. You estimate that the distance from the tip of the nose to the end of the nostril wing is about ½ of the Base Unit. (BR) The Base Unit measurement of the forehead.

Again, please remember that these measurements can be made before you have made marks on your paper, or they can be used to check the placement of features or landmarks that you may have already placed.

[DAK723]

Laying out the head shape:

The size and shape of the head is one of the most important aspects of portraiture. In the demonstrations that follow, in order to lay out the basic size and shape of the head, I will measure height and width and establish a centerline and an eye-line. Then I begin locating landmarks and it is not until they are located that I draw in the entire head shape. And I do that as part of making my value map of the entire head. So, making a value map of the entire head would be one way of laying out the head shape.

Another way would be to take sight measurements, or actual measurements of height and width, and sketch in the head shape. If your painting is the same size as your reference, then it’s easy to measure the same distances and make marks on your paper. If you are making your painting larger, decide on a scale factor. If the head height on your photo measures 5 inches, but you want the height to be 10 inches in your painting, you will multiply everything by 2.

If you have a fairly simple frontal view, you might not have any problem sketching in the shape. But sometimes there might be a tilt or rotation to the head that is hard to judge, or there may be shapes to the hair that make it hard to see the head shape accurately.

Here are a few other techniques that might help.

Reference frames, simple grids and negative space:

One idea is to draw a square or rectangle around the head. You can decide whether or not to include the ears, or how much hair. It is purely for reference based on the idea that it is easier to judge the shape of a square or rectangle, than a more complex and less geometric shape.

Here are some examples:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-00-ms-1.jpg

Clearly, there is a lot of variety in head shapes. Just looking at – and, of course, measuring – the rectangles will help you judge the head shapes.

Children often have head shapes that are different from the adult proportions. In the section on guidelines, we learned that the average adult head has the eye-line at the ½ height distance. How about these children? Without measuring, can you tell if their eye-line is above, below, or at the ½ height distance?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-ms-2.jpg

Placing a reference frame around the head might help one visualize where the center or the eye-line falls. With a reference frame, it is easy to construct the simplest of grids to help determine the proportions. As is often the case with small children and infants, the eye-line is below the center ½ dividing line. Judging distances is also easier along the frame or the grid lines.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-02-ms-2b.jpg

When laying out this man’s head, the tilt is important. The reference frame gives you the height and width proportions as well as a simple way to measure that tilt along the edges of the frame.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-03-ms3.jpg

You can take the simple grid idea one step further to help you get the head shape as correct as possible. You can use the grid on your reference to help you visually locate various reference points, or you can actually sketch in a duplicate grid on your paper, being careful to duplicate the proportions as exactly as possible.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-04-ms-rod.jpg

The reference frame is helpful because it creates both positive and negative space. The negative spaces may be helpful in visualizing and drawing in your head shape. They may be smaller and easier to visually measure and replicate (see red shapes). To replicate your frame on your actual painting, you need to measure it on your reference and then make a similar square or rectangle on your paper of exactly the same proportions. Here is an example of how sketching in the negative spaces reveals the head shape.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-05-mss.jpg

In both of these examples, I have just loosely sketched in my reference frame and my grid. For more precision, you can use a ruler and straight edge. With a precise reference frame, one can also get actual measurements to the features or any other landmark you want to locate, as illustrated below.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-06-ms-actual.jpg

I can locate, with measurements from two directions, either the edges of value shapes such as the eye socket shadow (left), or the features, such as the corner of the mouth, corner of the nostril wing, and corner of the eye (right).

As mentioned in the opening paragraphs, one of the major reasons for measuring is to establish landmarks and points of reference for our value shapes. So let us conclude our measuring discussion with the same topic that has been the focus of our lessons so far...

Value shapes!

In lesson 1, we started with the value shapes for the individual features, but now we will expand our “value map” to the entire head. Blocking in the big value shapes and comparing their sizes, shapes, and angles is a method of measuring.

Let’s start with our friend “Rod”.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-values-only-01.jpg

I really recommend doing this type of basic light and shadow value map as an exercise. Keep it simple and look for the big shapes. If you correctly judge the size and shape of the shadow and light areas, your value map will lay the foundation for all that follows.

What might you be looking for as you try to interpret the light and shadow shapes? Let’s look at Rod again.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-values-only-02.jpg

While looking at the shadow and light values, check for comparative distances and look for distinctive shapes. What is the distance of the light forehead compared to the shadow eye socket area below it? How does the other eye socket shadow area compare? How wide is the light area on the cheek? How wide is the light across the bridge of the nose? How does that compare to the light area at the tip of the nose?

Don’t worry if you need to simplify the shapes in order to define them more easily. Compare the shapes with your painting. Are they the same size? Are they the same shape?

Here’s another example:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-values-only-03.jpg

On the left, I have traced the basic shadow shapes on the computer. Now in this example, the contrast between light and shadow is very stark, making it easier to identify the shapes for my value map. It is very basic – again, just two values. But the likeness is already taking shape!

As you sketch in the shadow and light values in this case, distances that you might concentrate on might be: The eye shadows, the distance from the eye shadow to the ear, the light area on the nose that defines the length of the nose. Unique light shapes that you would try to replicate, such as the small light area on the far cheek.

As in all of the examples in our first two lessons, the basic stage would be followed by subsequent stages that add additional values and begin to refine the big shapes into smaller shapes and ultimately, detailed small shapes.

You could start with making a value map of the entire head first, and then adding measurements using some of the techniques we have discussed. Or you can measure, note the location of various landmarks, and then do your value mapping. That is the method I will now demonstrate!

[DAK723]

Demonstrations:

Visual Measuring techniques:

I wanted to do a demo that replicates what it might be like working from a live model rather than a photo. Your measuring options are obviously more limited. I didn’t actually use a live model – I used a photo of Rod taped to a chair!

Just as when we map out the value shapes, when measuring, it is best to start with the larger measurements and work toward the smaller. When doing a head, for example, establishing the largest measurements of head height and width, need to be done before measuring and placing the features. You don’t want to spend a lot of time on the eyes, for example, and then find out the head width is incorrect resulting in the eyes needing to be redone because they were in the wrong position! Make sure the larger measurements are accurate first before making the smaller measurements.

So let’s start with height and width. These measurements are perhaps the most important, not only because they determine the general shape of the head, but because we will be using these measurements to do other measurements.

Helen Van Wyk, in her book Portraits in Oil the Van Wyk Way, actually recommends holding a ruler directly up to your model’s head and taking actual measurements. Needless to say, height and width are important!

We will sight measure them with our ruler method! When you sight measure, you keep your measuring stick at full arm’s length so that your measuring stick is always the same distance from your eye.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-00-rodstep00.jpg

The width measures approx. 65 mm. The height is approx. 100 mm. This tells me that the height is almost exactly 1 ½ times the width. Now if you aren’t using a ruler, you can sight with any old stick (my red line represents a stick!), measuring the width first, then placing that measurement horizontally for the height. You note the spot where “one width measurement” falls, then place your measuring stick again. You have to approximate, but it looks like you get 1 ½ measuring sticks for the height.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01A_-_no_ruler.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-rodstep01.jpg

(Right) On my paper*, I make two marks for the width (it can be whatever width I want). I will measure the width on the paper, then make the height 1 1/2 times that.

* (Well, to be honest, this demonstration is done on the computer using the program Corel Painter. Painter has “brushes” that replicate various artist mediums, including soft pastel. I am using a pen style mouse, so I am making all the strokes by hand onto the digital paper).

(Left) I sketch in my eye-line and centerline. From my sight measurements, I noticed that the eye-line was at ½ of the height (go ahead...check the photo!). The vertical centerline is offset a little to the right, as the head is rotated slightly.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-02-rodstep02.jpg

I eyeball the forehead – nose – chin measurements. The nose distance looks to be shorter than the other two.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-04-rodstep03.jpg

Since I have the nose distance now, I will sketch in (orange) an equal nose distance to the right and left to help locate the eyes. My nose measurement will be my Base Unit.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-03-base-unit_photos.JPG

So far, however, I am just “guessing” that nose measurement! It is important to check my eyeballed estimates. I will sight measure my Base Unit and then measure right and left. The sight distances left and right seem close to the marks on my paper.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-03a-base-unit_photos2.JPG

I will also check my forehead and “chin” measurements compared to my nose measurement.

They confirm that the nose length is smaller than the forehead and chin measurements. Whew, that’s a relief!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-05-rodstep04.jpg

Using my Base Unit measurements, along with visual estimates, I place the eye measurements on my painting. I judge that the distance from edge of face (on the left) is slightly more than “one eye width.” This also helps me place the first eye. I approximate one eye width between the eyes, then the next eye. Since the head is rotated slightly, I have less than one eye width on the right side. Obviously, the “eye width” distance is an important one for making distance comparisons.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-06-rodstep05.jpg

With my eyes in place, I can now use my plumb lines to place the nostril wings and the corners of the mouth. I estimate the placement of the mouth with a visual 1/3rd estimate from nose to chin. I sketch in an outline of the head and place the ears comparing them to plumb lines of the eyes and mouth. My landmarks are in place! I have emphasized them with a red dot. They are: Top and bottom of ears, width of eyes, nose and mouth.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-07-rodstep06-7.jpg

(L) I now start my value map of the head and face with a medium value pastel. The landmarks will help me locate and define the shadow shapes.

(R) I’ve added the light value shapes and have begun with some darker values.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-08-rodstep08-9.jpg

As I sketch in the value shapes, I am not happy with the location of the mouth corner and crease from the nose. My analysis of the value shape tells me that the measurement of the mouth was not that good! The value shapes will often help with the measuring, too. It works both ways!

It is not unusual to have to re-measure or double-check measurements as you progress. I look at my plumb lines again as I try to relocate the mouth. I continue adding and refining the value shapes. I’m pretty happy with the measurements, so this is as far as I will take this painting for our lesson.

Here are some other sightings I took for this demo:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-09-other_sightings.jpg

I use my pastel to judge vertical and horizontal plumb lines. And I do an angle sighting, trying to estimate the angle of the crease running down from his cheek.

[DAK723]

Actual Measuring techniques:

When working from photo reference, you can use all the techniques already discussed. If you have a digital reference and a printer, you can print your reference as large as possible. You can draw guidelines and do your measurements with a ruler, or pastel, pencil, etc, directly on the photo. Needless to say, actual measurements can be more precise and more numerous!

As I mentioned at the beginning, I would recommend using your visual measurements as much as possible to develop your skill. Actual measurements can be used to check. Of course, you can do all the actual measurements first, if you like!

Let’s go right to the demo! I’m working on velour paper and using Girault soft pastels.

Once again, I do recommend getting actual measurements for the height and width to start. In this case, width is approx. 90 mm, height is approx. 180 mm.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-suedemo.JPG

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-02-suedemo.JPG

This pose has a tilt that is important to draw in correctly. All my horizontal guidelines will relate to this angle. I can place a straight edge on the photo and make a line on my paper that represents the eye-line angle.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-03-suedemo.JPG

Now that I have the angle, I can place the height and width. I am doing this painting using the same measurements as my reference photo, so I can compare measurements without converting them (that makes it much easier!). I also make a mark at the ½ height distance on my paper. It gives me another point of reference.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-04-suedemo.JPG

(Left) I eyeball the approximate location of the centerline and the location of the eye-line (which coincidentally lines up with my angle line). Notice that the centerline and the eye-line are curved to match the curve of the head. Also notice that the eye-line and the centerline are perpendicular to one another. (Center) I measure to check the distance between the eye-line and the ½ mark. (Right) I measure to check the distance between the edge of her face and the center of the bridge of her nose for the centerline.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-05-suedemo.JPG

I make the adjustment of the centerline based on my measurement. I was a couple millimeters off! The eye-line checks out OK!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-06-suedemo.JPG

I eyeball in the eye locations. To check my last eye location, I take a “thumb and pastel” measurement to the side of the face...And check it against the photo. It’s the same. If it wasn’t, I would have to redo my eye estimates.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-09-suedemo.JPG

I put some guidelines on my reference: Eye-line, nose, mouth, chin. They are all parallel. I replicate them on my drawing. I estimate the 1/3rd distance between nose and chin to locate the mouth.

I have also drawn in my vertical plumb lines down from the eyes. I could have used curved guidelines instead of the plumb lines, but I notice the plumb lines mark important locations.

I also make an estimate of the forehead distances.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-10-suedemo.JPG

(Left) With my plumb lines in place, I can locate my landmarks! A plumb line down from the inside corner of her right eye (our left) marks the corner of the mouth and the edge of the nose. From the center of her left eye straight down marks the other edge of the nose. From the outside corner of her left eye marks the other corner of her mouth. (Right) I add two horizontal plumb lines to locate the ear. The bottom of the ear lines up with her left eye, the top lines up where the forehead and hair meet over her right eye.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-11-suedemo.JPG

With the ear located, I have enough landmarks to start my value map! The landmarks help me locate the value shapes. I start with a medium dark value to establish the shadow shapes. I keep it fairly loose. It could be even looser!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-12-suedemo.JPG

(Left) I add the light value shapes and the darks. As I added the value shapes with increasing precision, I made a couple small adjustments, but nothing is more than a fraction of an inch out of place.

(Right) The finished portrait.

[DAK723]

OK, that was a lot to digest! But remember, even though I showed a lot of techniques, you can pick and choose those that work best for you and your particular painting. As you noticed in my demonstrations, I did not come anywhere close to using them all!


Exercises:

You know by now, that I consider the value shapes to be extremely important. Here are some quotes that I came across as I prepared for this lesson, to let you know that I am not alone!

From Helen van Wyk, famous TV artist and author, from her book, Portraits in Oil the van Wyk Way:

“Painters must always see people in patterns of light and dark.”

“You will be more successful beginning your portrait if you reduce your observations of the model to patterns of light and dark.”

From Joy Thomas’s book, The Art of Portrait Drawing: “Massing is the blocking in of large shapes of value (light and dark)....I start most of my portraits by looking for these values and massing in a shape map.”

Paul Levielle, author of Painting Expressive Pastel Portraits, says the following in his instructional DVD: “I start with the big shapes first, including the basic overall shape of the head. Then I look for the next largest shapes that are visible, in the form of light and shadow.”

This is why I recommend, as one of the exercises for this lesson, to do basic value maps of the entire head.

You can:

1) Do value maps without measuring first, then measure to see how close you visualized the basic proportions. These can be small – even thumbnails size, if you wish.

2) Do some thumbnails, or fairly small drawings trying out the reference frame idea to establish the overall shape of the head.

3) If you want, you can continue the sketch by adding in the value map.

4) Do the measuring first, locating landmarks, then do the value map of the entire head. You can stop at that point. It’s just an exercise. Do as many of these as you can. See how it works before you take the time to do entire portraits.

Or, of course, you can do entire portraits, trying out as many (or as few) of these measurement techniques as you want!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-ex.jpg

For the reference photos we have been using from lessons 1 and 2, here is a link...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=538364

...and scroll down to post #3.

Here are a few new pics to try:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-01-peggy.jpg
Photo by cmwynn

For a larger version, click here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/RefLib/showphoto.php?photo=78777&size=big&cat=

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-mike_from_sundiver.jpg
Photo by sundiver

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-bethany_by_babybrush.jpg
Photo by babybrush

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-00-jocelynsart.jpg
Photo by jocelynsart

For a larger version, click here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/RefLib/showphoto.php?photo=64056&size=big&cat=

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-CLEMENTINE-terence_p.JPG
Photo by terence p

For a larger version, click here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/RefLib/showphoto.php?photo=60730&size=big&cat=

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-jen_by_nonamac.jpg
Photo by nonamac

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Feb-2009/82335-s-profile.JPG
Photo by me

Please post your exercises, practice pieces, and portraits here in this thread. Also ask questions, make comments, share measuring techniques that you know and love! Whether you have experience with portraits, or if these are the first ones you’ve ever attempted, please join us!

If you are still working on lessons 1 or 2, that’s fine! Work at your own pace. Feel free to post lesson 1 or 2 exercises in this thread if you want. I will continue to check the previous lesson threads, as well.

Thank you to all the photographers whose works I have been using from the reference library.

Next month – Hopefully the last portrait class, where we will discuss backgrounds, composition, edges, depth and anything else I can think of!

[Colorix]

Don, only had time to speed-read it for now -- it is wonderful. Thank you so much for doing all this enormous amount of work.

I'll definitely continue participating -- hopefully this week already.

Charlie

[DAK723]

Don, only had time to speed-read it for now -- it is wonderful. Thank you so much for doing all this enormous amount of work.

I'll definitely continue participating -- hopefully this week already.

Charlie
Thanks, Charlie, for your contribution and your participation!

Don

[winecountry]

Don, a wealth of info, that will take some time to digest...thanks so much, this will be an interesting month:eek: just what I need!

[grekslay]

Hi All :wave: :wave: :wave:

Don! this look great, well explained and well put together, thank you for putting in the time to do this for us all, now we have no excueses but to get a good likness now it all just us :lol:

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[christinemlr]

Don, what terrific work you have done here for us. It is very much appreciated. I haven't got to finishing what I want to do in lesson 2 yet, but as i have just finished Charlie's class (today) I will now be putting more work in here, and I hope to be joining in this lesson 3 SOON.
Xina

[kadon]

Boy Don! This is so comprehensive....my mind boggles! Are we lucky or not to have such a dedicated teacher! I bet Colleen is over the moon.
Much studying to be done...not to mention the experimenting with a new medium! Kathy

[DAK723]

Thanks, Colleen, Graham, Xina & Kathy for the kind words. I look forward to your participation in the class!

Don

[*Violet*]

omg ... the information !! ... you are fabulous for going to the lengths you did to pull this together !! ... i'd love to participate but haven't been able to yet as much as i'd like to ... you can be sure to know, though, that this thread has been labeled as a *favourite* ... kudos to you and all that you've done and are doing for this portrait project !! ...

[Deborah Secor]

Amazing! Thank you for all this information and help! I can't wait to have the time to give all of this a good digesting, but right now it has to wait. I'm putting this in my favorites and will keep an eye on the thread as you go along. Don, this is MOST helpful. Thank you so much.

Deborah

PS Are you still working flat on the floor? Maybe that's part of the secret! :lol:

[DAK723]

Thanks Violet and Deborah for your kind words!


PS Are you still working flat on the floor? Maybe that's part of the secret! :lol:
Hmmm, maybe it is!

For those who didn't see my "studio" in Deb's recent thread about lighting, I am indeed working on the floor. Although I do have an easel and studio set up (in my parent's old house), my computer is here at my house and the best window for natural light and taking in-progress photos is here also.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/02-Feb-2009/82335-mystudiodak.JPG

You can see some of my pieces from Lesson 2. The demo from this lesson was painted here, too! Note also my fancy pastel boxes!

Don

[terri66]

Hi Don,

As an exercise, I got a bit carried away with things. I eyeballed the darks and lights first, then I started mapping using physical measurements with a ruler. The reference (from the Feb portrait challenge) was the same size as my drawing. Then I decided I needed to push the colour towards Charlie's scheme of things to further complicate things. I have decided that drawing spectacles isn't on my favorite things to do list. I haven't decided if I am going to cross post this into the portrait challenge, the Baron seems to want some longer more developed treatments this month. This took about 2 hours and is about as developed as I want to take.

Great job on the information you gathered for us. In your research, did you find some references as to using triangles in a rather mask like fashion for mapping purposes? My sister-in-law mentioned it but can't remember where she saw it.

Thanks again, Terri

[DAK723]

Terri,

Thanks for starting off the exercises! This is wonderful! The likeness is great! I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to post your painting alongside the reference.

I don't have any knowledge of any "triangle" techniques for measuring, but I am sure there are many techniques that work equally well.

Don

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/04-Feb-2009/82335-P1010007dakrev.JPG

Hi Don,

As an exercise, I got a bit carried away with things. I eyeballed the darks and lights first, then I started mapping using physical measurements with a ruler. The reference (from the Feb portrait challenge) was the same size as my drawing. Then I decided I needed to push the colour towards Charlie's scheme of things to further complicate things. I have decided that drawing spectacles isn't on my favorite things to do list. I haven't decided if I am going to cross post this into the portrait challenge, the Baron seems to want some longer more developed treatments this month. This took about 2 hours and is about as developed as I want to take.

Great job on the information you gathered for us. In your research, did you find some references as to using triangles in a rather mask like fashion for mapping purposes? My sister-in-law mentioned it but can't remember where she saw it.

Thanks again, Terri

[Colorix]

Terri, it is looking fab, and a great likeness too. If you want to 'knock down' the reds in his face, scumble a wee bit of yellow-Green over them. You got a *very* nice sense of light!

Btw, it is the Arch Bishop of Cantebury, Rowan something, so don't sell it or give it away, somebody for sure has the copyright to the photo.

Charlie

[terri66]

Thx, Charlie. This was the first time using the brights for a portrait as well as gessoed watercolour paper. I'm thinking it was 140 Lb rough arches from my watercolour days. I used conte and rembrandts for it too and kept my fingers away from the really soft pastels. Thanks for the colour suggestion.

[Mette Rörström]

Hi!
Some exersice and a portrait.....


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0771.JPG

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0770-1.JPG



http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0770-2.JPG





http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy.JPG

[*Violet*]

well done !! ... :thumbsup:

[DAK723]

Mette, Thank you for contributing once again! If you don't mind, I'd like to ask you what you thought about the exercises using the reference frame. Did you find that it made it easier to judge the shape of the head?

Everyone else, too, please feel free to leave feedback on the measuring techniques. I am curious to see if you all think they are very effective, or make it easier and quicker to do the actual portrait, or if you find it slows you down too much...whatever comments you have will be appreciated. Also which techniques you like best or find the most effective. Let me know!

The portrait is nice! I have a little comment on the measuring...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/82335-130835-Peggydak.JPG

I have rotated the reference so it is more in line with your portrait. I have drawn in the guidelines for eyebrows, bottom of nose, bottom of chin, and the mouth. They are very close to being the same. Perhaps you have a little extra space between the nose and the mouth. This is very minor.

Notice the line at the mouth on the reference. Both of her mouth corners are slightly higher than the mouth at the center (and above the blue line). You have correctly noticed that the right corner (her left) is angled slightly higher, but in your painting, the left corner tilts down a bit too much. This is very minor, but I know you want me to be picky!

All in all, nicely done!

Don

Hi!
Some exersice and a portrait.....


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0771.JPG

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0770-1.JPG



http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-DSCN0770-2.JPG





http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy.JPG

[kadon]

Thank you Don for your invitation re our efforts. I have printed up all your stuff which I consider is excellent....(it's almost a book). It sure gives great guidelines about how to correct errors in one's own work. I'm struggling a great deal (still) with the thick pastels. I can manage the block measuring in the first example to get placements of forehead, nose, chin...mouth and width of eyes etc. And I can understand the curves etc. that go with the tilt of the face, and I understand about measuring one thing against another....but after that I simply cannot draw anything into the blocked areas whether dark or light.

I've had to put it away for the time being out of frustration with myself....I have really tried but I just end up with a mess.

Kathy

[DAK723]

Thank you Don for your invitation re our efforts. I have printed up all your stuff which I consider is excellent....(it's almost a book). It sure gives great guidelines about how to correct errors in one's own work. I'm struggling a great deal (still) with the thick pastels. I can manage the block measuring in the first example to get placements of forehead, nose, chin...mouth and width of eyes etc. And I can understand the curves etc. that go with the tilt of the face, and I understand about measuring one thing against another....but after that I simply cannot draw anything into the blocked areas whether dark or light.

I've had to put it away for the time being out of frustration with myself....I have really tried but I just end up with a mess.

Kathy

Try not to get frustrated! There is a lot of information - far more than one would probably use in any one portrait. You can experiment with when you measure, if you are having trouble measuring first and then drawing. You can always start with a very loose sketch of the head and the placement of some of the value shapes - perhaps the eye sockets. Then do a bit of measuring to locate the eyes within the sockets. Then perhaps a bit more sketching - then measuring. Each person will probably develop their own "rhythm" of painting and measuring.

Don

[kadon]

I appreciate what you're saying Don. I think I can do most of what you say here, it's the sketching bit I have trouble with...I just don't know how to use the thick pastels for that part of the painting.

Sorry to be so thick (like my pastels:D ).

Kathy

[DAK723]

I appreciate what you're saying Don. I think I can do most of what you say here, it's the sketching bit I have trouble with...I just don't know how to use the thick pastels for that part of the painting.

Sorry to be so thick (like my pastels:D ).

Kathy
Not sure if this will help or not, but here are a couple examples from lessons 1 and 2 of the early stage value mapping. The one on the left is on velour. I am using the pointy end of the pastel and just lightly sketching in the shape with a back and forth motion. You can see the individual strokes. The painting is large - about the size of a real head. In the other example on a Canson-like paper, again I use a very light touch to sketch in the shape. With this type of paper, since the pastel is sort of sitting on the top of the paper since I used that light touch, I then lightly blend the pastel so that it covers the grain of the paper better. As you can see, there is no detail - the pastels is used rather thickly! I am using some middle hardness pastels - not the real softies like Schminke or Sennelier. With those real softies, your lines will be thicker and harder to manage.

I hope this helps.

Don

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/82335-new_value-step1.JPG

[kadon]

Thank you Don...I think my problem is that I need some hard pastels. Have been waiting for some hard pastel pencils. But I notice in many examples from other participants there is a lot of fine detail eventually to be added...perhaps the sketch on the left is as much detail as I can hope to get.
Again, my thanks Don.

Kathy

[DAK723]

I have done almost all of my demos (the one's not on the computer, anyway) with Giraults - a medium soft pastel, roughly similar to Rembrandts (perhaps a bit softer). Most of the detail is suggested. It is hard to explain, but most of my "thin lines" on my final portrait are not really drawn thin, but rather, drawn thick and then covered with another pastel so that only 50% or 25% of that line remains visible. I think most people hold the pastel at an angle, so that with use, you get a sharper edge somewhere on the pastel (yes, sometimes you have to look closely and visually line up that sharper edge with your intended spot on the paper).

All that being said, a few harder pastels are always useful!

And also, different papers make a difference, too. Just keep experimenting!

Don

[Mette Rörström]

Mette, Thank you for contributing once again! If you don't mind, I'd like to ask you what you thought about the exercises using the reference frame. Did you find that it made it easier to judge the shape of the head?

Everyone else, too, please feel free to leave feedback on the measuring techniques. I am curious to see if you all think they are very effective, or make it easier and quicker to do the actual portrait, or if you find it slows you down too much...whatever comments you have will be appreciated. Also which techniques you like best or find the most effective. Let me know!

The portrait is nice! I have a little comment on the measuring...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/82335-130835-Peggydak.JPG

I have rotated the reference so it is more in line with your portrait. I have drawn in the guidelines for eyebrows, bottom of nose, bottom of chin, and the mouth. They are very close to being the same. Perhaps you have a little extra space between the nose and the mouth. This is very minor.

Notice the line at the mouth on the reference. Both of her mouth corners are slightly higher than the mouth at the center (and above the blue line). You have correctly noticed that the right corner (her left) is angled slightly higher, but in your painting, the left corner tilts down a bit too much. This is very minor, but I know you want me to be picky!

All in all, nicely done!

Don
Hi, Don!:)
Thank you! Yes it is easy to use reference frame. But the method I think it easyer is to use the pencil or stick , and hold it up,and use my thumb to mark where the point/ lines is. and sketch in things.My problem is to get my eyes to see it as it is.I have a tendence to move the angel of the head (if it tilts I paint it more upright),and when I put the colors on, I cange the distance of things. Like the space between the nose and mouth.
I will try to fix the things you pointed out and see if I can get it right.
Thank you for doing this,Don!
Mette:) .

[kadon]

AAAAh! Now that I can relate to Don. I guess that applies to doing the eyes/irises and fine lines outlining the eyes. I really want to succeed with these Rembrandt soft pastels.....after all....everyone else is managing somehow....just needed this sort of advice. :wave:
Kathy

[Mette Rörström]

Hi! me again...
I have done the changes... and worked more on her hear and skinn. I saw that her right ear was to high,I moved it a bit down.


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy.JPG

(why is the color in my portrait changed in your post:confused: Is it the computers? )

[kadon]

You're a real inspiration Mette. Kathy

[Mette Rörström]

thank you; Kathy! :)

[DAK723]

Hi! me again...
I have done the changes... and worked more on her hear and skinn. I saw that her right ear was to high,I moved it a bit down.


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy.JPG

(why is the color in my portrait changed in your post:confused: Is it the computers? )

Mette,

Nicely done! I'm glad you noticed the ear, too. Guidelines make it much easier to see things in relation to one another.

I like the way you have repeated the blue colors in her blouse, necklace and in the hair, too. It gives the painting a nice harmony!

I guess that when I saved your painting onto my computer and then posted it back onto WC, the colors did change a bit. I didn't manipulate it at all!

Don

[Colorix]

Nice, Mette.

I've heard that every single time one saves a jpg, it changes and some info is lost.

Don, will not get to class until after the weekend (had already saved two of the portraits long before, so yes, I'm preparing, and GMTA too!), when I've recovered from it, the weekend that is... no, not partying, going to an event that will be fun but tiring.

Charlie

[Mette Rörström]

Hi Don!
Thank you For your nice words, and help.
I did not think you manipulate the painitng:), I was just wondering why it canges.I was thinking that maybe I did something wrong here on my comp. when I save the photo. :)
Charlie....thank you! Have a nice weekend!

[kadon]

Yes Charlie...see you later. Kathy

[DAK723]

Nice, Mette.

I've heard that every single time one saves a jpg, it changes and some info is lost.

Don, will not get to class until after the weekend (had already saved two of the portraits long before, so yes, I'm preparing, and GMTA too!), when I've recovered from it, the weekend that is... no, not partying, going to an event that will be fun but tiring.

Charlie
Yes, JPGs are nice and small and easy to upload and download, but they do lose information with each save. I can't say I've ever noticed any deterioration, but I do save all photos of my own artwork in TIF format. When preparing my own work for making prints, for example, I do a lot of color correcting, cropping, contrast manipulation, etc, so I might save the file many times. So I would recommend to others that they save their own work in a format other than JPG.

Have a nice weekend, Charlie. We look forward to your upcoming posts!

Don

[Mette Rörström]

Hi, me again...
I was not saticefied with my painting. She was a bit "pale". so I have done more work on her.
Now it is done I think..:)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/06-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy1.JPG

[*Violet*]

she's lovely ... full of character .. her eyes are really alive ....

the only nit i have is the halo effect on the left of her head ...

[Mette Rörström]

Thank´s *Violet*!:)
The halo effect....in real life it does not have this halo effect.the color is the same in the all area on the left on her head. I think it is the resault of my camera-light .The photo was taken indoors with a lamp over the painting...I could not get it to light up al the painting at once. So in real life it is lighter on topp of the left side.( the same color everywhere on the background).
Mette.:)

[DAK723]

Mette,

Yes, I think it is better now! Very nice!

Don

Hi, me again...
I was not saticefied with my painting. She was a bit "pale". so I have done more work on her.
Now it is done I think..:)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/06-Feb-2009/130835-Peggy1.JPG

[Mette Rörström]

Thank you,Don! :)

[terri66]

Mette, Your change of colour warms up the portrait immensely and infuses it with a strong sense of life. Well drawn.

[kadon]

Well Don...I was determined to come up with SOMETHING. I began to get the feel of using the pastels and had a go at this:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Feb-2009/118422-project_pastel.jpg

I already can see the nose needs work especially on her left side....the face looks a bit out of kilter. I measured with my thumb/brush method the thirds etc. and eye measurements across.

Leaving the main areas for correction up to you Don. But I have probably overworked this one.

Kathy

[DAK723]

Kathy,

This is much more than SOMETHING...this is very nice!

It is a tough one to critiques, because there are some measurement issues, but I wouldn't have noticed them without looking at the ref. Without looking at the ref, I see a couple very minor things; her nostrils (and bottom of the nose) is not at the same angle as the eyes and mouth, and it looks like the bridge of the nose is just a very slight touch too close to her right eye. Very minor things. The positives however, are many! The values are excellent and the sense of light and shadow very well done. The entire right side of her face (arrow) has wonderful depth. The strong contrast of the light and shadow where it is closest (to the viewer) makes it come forward, and then the nice reflected light as the plane of the face recedes, is very well done.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Feb-2009/82335-118422-project_pasteldak1.jpg

I did put your painting and the ref side by side and was a bit surprised. Because the proportions on your painting look quite good. But they are closer to the "ideal" proportions! Our reference (Bethany) has some definite modifications from the ideal.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Feb-2009/82335-118422-project_pasteldak.jpg

By looking at some proportional divisions, we see that Bethany has a shorter nose and a longer chin than the ideal. We also see that she has a very large amount of hair on top, wider than her forehead division!

So all in all, your painting is very well done, but the proportions (from top to bottom) don't quite match Bethany's.

Still, the positives far outweigh the negatives. I like this painting a lot!

Don


Well Don...I was determined to come up with SOMETHING. I began to get the feel of using the pastels and had a go at this:

I already can see the nose needs work especially on her left side....the face looks a bit out of kilter. I measured with my thumb/brush method the thirds etc. and eye measurements across.

Leaving the main areas for correction up to you Don. But I have probably overworked this one.

Kathy

[kadon]

OOOOh thank you for that Don. I can see what you mean re bridge of nose, length of same...also longer chin and higher head etc. I've learned a lot doing this and with your critiques things become clearer still. Thank you very much...never thought I'd get even this far. Kathy

[maw-t]

WOw.. it will take me a few days to absorb all this great info! Don, thank you SO much for all the effort & time you have put into this.. it is invaluble info that people will use & benefit from for years to come. I have been away & it feels good to back painting:D I couldnt resist the photo of the lady with glasses... infact, I was away so long, it took coming here to get inspired to get me going again!
Already some great efforts here! Way to go everyone!!

This is a quicky on wallis paper.. 1 1/2 hrs from first mark to uploading .. I measured using shapes mostly..(eyeballing comparisons as I went)I should have took more time and measured more pricisely.. I know that, but it is so tedious & I wanted to get back into the swing of things quickly ...It needs more work for sure... I will be looking forward to your help & suggestions as what should I do now.. not only in likeness, but also in style... should I blend it more ...keep on working it to a more realistic look? If so when does one know http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/09-Feb-2009/76639-oldlady.jpg to stop before it looks overworked??

[DAK723]

T,

Glad that this reference got you inspired! Your painting is great! I felt obligated to do a few measurements to compare. I drew a few guidelines, and quite frankly, there is just a bit more space between her nose and mouth in your painting than the ref. And you know what, if it were me, I would say close enough!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/09-Feb-2009/82335-maw-dakrev.jpg

Some of your other questions are not so easy to answer. If you said that this was done, I would have no problem with that! In fact, I would consider it done if it were mine - unless I wanted a different look. I have always liked your loose, painterly style (perhaps because I have never been able to do it myself!) I guess the only way to answer your style question, would be do do some portraits in a more blended style, some looser, some more finished, some more "sketchy", and then see what you like best. You are the artist - the painting is your artistic statement and your artistic vision - so no one else should decide that for you. I think, in very general terms, that many artists start with work that is tighter, more finished, and over time, move towards a looser style, allowing the viewer to fill in some of the blanks. You are already there, in my opinion!

Don

WOw.. it will take me a few days to absorb all this great info! Don, thank you SO much for all the effort & time you have put into this.. it is invaluble info that people will use & benefit from for years to come. I have been away & it feels good to back painting:D I couldnt resist the photo of the lady with glasses... infact, I was away so long, it took coming here to get inspired to get me going again!
Already some great efforts here! Way to go everyone!!

This is a quicky on wallis paper.. 1 1/2 hrs from first mark to uploading .. I measured using shapes mostly..(eyeballing comparisons as I went)I should have took more time and measured more pricisely.. I know that, but it is so tedious & I wanted to get back into the swing of things quickly ...It needs more work for sure... I will be looking forward to your help & suggestions as what should I do now.. not only in likeness, but also in style... should I blend it more ...keep on working it to a more realistic look? If so when does one know http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/09-Feb-2009/76639-oldlady.jpg to stop before it looks overworked??

[terri66]

T, I love the energy and expressiveness of your painting. If you start blending, you lose the excitement of your mark-making. But if your goal is realism, then some blending might be required. For me, the issue becomes about how you like to work rather that what is "right", personal expectations rather than "accepted"expectations. Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now.
Big picture, I'm glad to see you getting back into the swing of things. I really enjoy your work I've seen on WC.

[terri66]

Hi Don, I'm having so much fun with this class. Great motivation for me to practice. I took this photo with natural north light which definitely cooled the left hand side of his face. I found I had 3 basic value/temperature groupings. The left shadow, med value and quite cool, the centre bright and warmer, and the right hand side of his face warm and dark. I think the cool shadow measurements are a bit off. Feedback as to what I missed is always appreciated. HMMM, his left ear is having issues about trying to move forward in space.

[maw-t]

Don, Thanks for the guidance & kind words of wisdom.. and yes just those few lines help so much to "see". I knew the questions were difficult...I have asked them before & never really got an answer until now... I love loose paintings that look effortless..(my goal) Alicia, Jim jimmy, Aldo.. and so many others...and I guess I _started *trying* to achieve that effect because it appeals to me most.. however I am blown away by someone that can paint so realistic that one feels they could reach out & touch that person! I think I am in too big of hurry to go through all the stages... I might have another go with her in a bit more realistic attempt.. this time employing more measuring &blending & see how it goes!.. thanks again!

Terri, thanks so much for your encouraging words! I tottaly agree with you & Don that it is up to the artist.. I just feel I am stuck somewhere in the middle of where I wanna be...I like painting fast & furious.. so realism probably isnt for me! Your painting is wonderful.. very expressive & a great likeness... I love it... so much more ALIVE than the photo!

Mette, I also think you did a great job "our lady" :) Your finish is wonderful!

Kathy, lemme tell you, your painting is really great! I LOVE IT! You certainly have a good eye for values & a lovely touch with the sticks.. keep them coming!

[DAK723]

Terri,

First let me say that this is nicely done. While there are a couple measurement issues - they are pretty minor. I have a couple value comments, too, but I want you know that overall this is well done!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/09-Feb-2009/82335-feb_Davedak.JPG

First, I increased the contrast of the photo, which was very low contrast and hard (for me, anyway) to see the division between light and shadow. A couple value things that pretty minor, but make a good lesson! The area under his right eyebrow - it is getting some reflected light, but is noticeably darker than any of the areas in the light. I think you have it a bit too light, same as the two areas on the left side, by the ear. Within shadow areas, areas of reflected light, or areas that are just slightly lighter, are very often painted too light because we see them in comparison to the darker shadows. It is so easy to exaggerate the difference in value, which is minor. It also seems like there is a bigger difference in value because the reflected light is usually a different color, again exaggerating the difference. I hope this is making sense.

The blue area on the forehead and just to the left and below his lip, look like they also might be a bit too light. Sometimes it is hard to find a pastel that is both the color you are looking for (in this case, the cooler blue) and also the right value. Either a darker value blue, or perhaps a blend of the blue with the darker shadow color might help darken that value a bit. As far as the ear goes, perhaps darkening those two little areas might move the ear back a bit. Or it might be a case where you need to add a touch of the blue shadow color to the ear, even though in the photo, the ear is slightly redder (and warmer).

As far as measurements go, there is a slight difference in the level of the eyes and eyebrows, your painting having his right eye and brow slightly higher than the left. In all honesty, the difference is small and I can't tell if the right eye is too high or the left eye too low. You might need to do an actual measurement with a ruler to see which one is right!

Again, I drew a lot of lines and arrows, but this is well done!

Don


Hi Don, I'm having so much fun with this class. Great motivation for me to practice. I took this photo with natural north light which definitely cooled the left hand side of his face. I found I had 3 basic value/temperature groupings. The left shadow, med value and quite cool, the centre bright and warmer, and the right hand side of his face warm and dark. I think the cool shadow measurements are a bit off. Feedback as to what I missed is always appreciated. HMMM, his left ear is having issues about trying to move forward in space.

[maw-t]

Well, when I started painted again I just couldnt stop:) .. did another one today from over in the portrait class in portratiure...

I also did a lil more to the lady with glasses & posted it in the gallery here for the heck of it.. its good to be back:D ... any way this one was also senns on wallis..not a great likeness & a bit askew & & &.. but thot I would post anyway.. i sort of like viewers right side:p http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/09-Feb-2009/76639-baronpaint.jpg

[kadon]

Kathy, lemme tell you, your painting is really great! I LOVE IT! You certainly have a good eye for values & a lovely touch with the sticks.. keep them coming!

You are too kind Maw. Kathy

[Mette Rörström]

T.....Thank you for your nice words! :)

[DAK723]

T,

Another nice portrait - an instantly recognizable likeness!

The only thing I see is that his nose has gotten crooked! He also seems to have a lot more beard on one side than the other - perhaps I am misreading some flesh tones due to the size, but that's what it looks like.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/10-Feb-2009/82335-76639-baronpaintdak.jpg

Otherwise, it's very well done, with some great flesh tones, and I love the highlight on the eyeglasses. I might add a bit more pastel to his clothing to make them a bit more solid.

Great work!

Don

Well, when I started painted again I just couldnt stop:) .. did another one today from over in the portrait class in portratiure...

I also did a lil more to the lady with glasses & posted it in the gallery here for the heck of it.. its good to be back:D ... any way this one was also senns on wallis..not a great likeness & a bit askew & & &.. but thot I would post anyway.. i sort of like viewers right side:p

[terri66]

Thanks for the input, Don. I played with the colour in those locations you pointed out and the ear seems to be staying put. Thanks, Terri

[maw-t]

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/10-Feb-2009/76639-baronman.jpg Thanks Don, you r so helpful I really appreciate it! I gave him a shave & dressed him up a little.. also did some blending... Not sure the nose is fixed...I see stuff that needs fixing... I think his eyes are too far apart & out of line... but yikes I am not gonna go there.. on to the next, & next time I will measure for sure! I feel I am really learning here!

[winecountry]

OMG this likeness thing is just so dang hard. I'm following along as best I can, and watching all the work, seems like most people get it, so I have to just keep trying.

here is a child, my grandniece, I have an oil started, but it's not going well so I'm going to try pastel, which is a bit easier, for me anyway.

I did the line thing here
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/11-Feb-2009/103030-child_measure_2336.jpg

and then the value thing here, but you can see already I'm way off
and I really tried hard:mad:

Help! Maybe Don can do a demo for me to show how it should look:heart:

[kadon]

This is shaping beautifully Colleen...but how could it be anything else coming from you? :) And thanks for showing us how you do it.

Kathy

[kadon]

Had another go Don...I didn't worry about the hair or extras...just concentrated on the face. Even though a run-of-the-mill oil painter and using pencil - I can usually capture likenesses pretty well, but not here.

However, still trying to manipulate the pastels and have to keep trying.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/11-Feb-2009/118422-Girl_to_post.jpg


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/11-Feb-2009/118422-P1010500.JPG
Kathy

[winecountry]

thanks Kathy, but I have no idea how to do this yet, and I hope Don has some wise words as to where I'm off and why:lol:

[DAK723]

Hi Colleen, I hate to disagree with anyone in my class, but this is looking really good so far. Your head shape is very good, the mouth is already a likeness! I had to go to extremely detailed analysis to find anything at all that wasn't right on. Please be aware that I saw nothing wrong using my normal measuring techniques!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/82335-Child_value_2337dak.jpg

I had to use the computer to actually overlay guidelines form the ref onto your painting. I found two minor things. Putting a reference frame around each, your painting is slightly narrower (the difference between the red line and yellow line). The nose and mouth are perfectly located, so that means the child's right side of the face (our left) is just slightly wider. Keep in mind that my drawing these reference frames on the computer is not an exact science, and your head width may be just as correct as my speculations!

The second point is the location of the eye socket and value shape of the child's left eye. The red line equals the line from your reference. You can see that your eye socket gets too close to that line and could shift slightly to the right (our right!).

The other eye looks like you have started it in the right spot! These very slight modifications are definitely part of the process as you measure and refine the value shapes.

Even without the eyes drawn in, this is already recognizable. As I said, without using the computer to overlay the ref information onto your painting, I would say you have the shapes almost exactly correct!

Keep in mind that children are much more difficult than adults as far as portraiture goes, as they have so much less information (in terms of wrinkles, creases, etc.) to offer us!

Don

OMG this likeness thing is just so dang hard. I'm following along as best I can, and watching all the work, seems like most people get it, so I have to just keep trying.

here is a child, my grandniece, I have an oil started, but it's not going well so I'm going to try pastel, which is a bit easier, for me anyway.

I did the line thing here


and then the value thing here, but you can see already I'm way off
and I really tried hard:mad:

Help! Maybe Don can do a demo for me to show how it should look:heart:

[winecountry]

thank you Don! maybe you could go through how to do the computer thing, I can't seem to figure out how to draw a straight lines or a square:lol: I have Photoshop

I'm trying to figure out why it looks so off to me? as your reply shows it's not that off, but to me, really I mean this without being a nutcase, it looks so far off.

I'll continue on this one as I have to gain some insight in to this likeness thing, and to keep me motivated it helps having a personal connection to my subject.

I will trust your judgement, as you are more experienced than me, and I'm really learning a lot here, more than any other place I've tried. And I can see with more experience putting in the value shapes is a real key, and I'll get better with practice. Thanks.:heart:

[maw-t]

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/76639-prettgrl1.jpg I meant to take pics a I went from the start & forgot until more into it:crying: SO two pics... The second is where I am now.... & i did measure..(with the pastel stick from the monitor... BUT.. as I painted I lost my marks.. now I think eyes are too close, once again.. & probably much more... I have the worse time with noses!
I also would love to know how you do the boxes & reference lines.. I have gimp but no photohop..TIA!
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/76639-prettygirl.jpg

[winecountry]

lovely maw you really caught her expression

Have decided to really put my shoulder to the grindstone, and go for the most absolute exactness I can get, that way I'll get it out of my system, and submitting to that discipline will make me slow down, then I can loosen up after.

I'm doing just a grisaille, with pastel pencils, a dark and light grey and a white and black. I'm just trying to see shapes and values, and measuring away, using the eye as my standard, this is really helping get things in place. Also drew plum lines on the photo printout, and some eye widths, for instance there is one ew from the corner of the eye to the bottom of the nostril...

Is this right Don? by doing that I found the head too narrow just as you pointed out.

[maw-t]

Thanks colleen.. I am loving that baby!!
This one is closer to real color.. & I worked on the nose & eyes a little...
I inherited some new supplies.. this is on black suede.. I have lots of it, so will be using it alot... it is hard to cover!http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/76639-prettygirl3.jpg

[DAK723]

Kathy,

This is looking good! Before I get to the critique, I want to say that you have done a nice job modeling the face and giving it really nice form and depth. When I post these measuring critiques, it always looks worse than it is because all the lines and arrows!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/82335-118422-Girl_to_postdak.jpg

First thing I did was to put my reference frame around each (it is the narrower one on your painting, my first one was a little too wide). You will probably notice that the ref is a bit longer and narrower, I think mainly because of some added height in the amount of hair, and maybe the chin could be a touch longer (not sure - it's close). The chin may look a little short, not because it is too short, but because the shadow on the side of her face angles slightly more toward the chin, making it a little pointier (red lines). You have made that shadow shape more curved.

That top of head to hairline dimension is easily painted to short - very common - in fact, that is one area I always double-check. The only other thing I really notice is that the eyes may be a bit too close together. Other than that, really nice! Again, the shadows on the side of her face are very nicely done!

P.S. Don't tell anyone, but most of my portrait experience was with pencils and I thought I would never be able to do one with those clumsy pastels. I won't tell you how long it took me to get the hang of them. You are doing great!

Don



Had another go Don...I didn't worry about the hair or extras...just concentrated on the face. Even though a run-of-the-mill oil painter and using pencil - I can usually capture likenesses pretty well, but not here.

However, still trying to manipulate the pastels and have to keep trying.




http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/11-Feb-2009/118422-P1010500.JPG
Kathy

[DAK723]

T, Another very nice painting! There are some very small angles and measurements around the eyes that I would look a little closer at, but otherwise, very nicely done!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/82335-76639-prettygirldak.jpg

I rotated the ref so that it is more in line with your painting - rotating the ref is perfectly fine, by the way. The things I noticed were extremely subtle, but I drew a few lines to indicate possible differences with the ref. The angle of the top of her eyelid is a little flatter (red line) and the angle of the shadow shape is a little different (blue line). If you move that shadow over slightly, you might indeed be right, and that eye (her right) may be a bit too close to the nose. Her nose is a bit wider, so that may throw off your measurements slightly, if you were using the nose width to compare with the eyes. I think there is also a slightly more downward curve toward the inside of that eye (arrow shows where the pit of the eye may be).

These things are all pretty tiny - all in all, this is very nicely done!

Don

I meant to take pics a I went from the start & forgot until more into it:crying: SO two pics... The second is where I am now.... & i did measure..(with the pastel stick from the monitor... BUT.. as I painted I lost my marks.. now I think eyes are too close, once again.. & probably much more... I have the worse time with noses!
I also would love to know how you do the boxes & reference lines.. I have gimp but no photohop..TIA!
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/76639-prettygirl.jpg

[DAK723]

This is looking great Colleen! I wish I could find a way to let you know that you are doing great at getting a likeness! I think it should be pointed out, that when you put the photo and the painting side by side, the painting always has differences. (Well, mine do - that's for sure!) In my demo, when I was done with the painting, I thought I had caught the likeness fairly well. I recognized the person (she's someone I know). Yet, when compared side-by-side, I see tons of things that aren't right. At a certain point, you have to minimize your comparisons with the photo and let the painting stand on its own!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/82335-child_wip_3_2338dak.jpg

The only area that I would look at closely, is the eye socket that's in shadow. In fact, I lightened the photo to see that area better. It is possible that that eye is just a fraction of an inch too close to the nose - although at the moment one can not really distinguish between the shadow and the eye itself. I would distinguish between the slightly lighter shadow that comes down from the nose, and the darker shadow of the eye socket itself (red arrow), just to make sure the corner of that eye is in the right spot.

Aside from that, I see nothing out of place - and even what I see may not be out of place! This is really looking good!

Don

lovely maw you really caught her expression

Have decided to really put my shoulder to the grindstone, and go for the most absolute exactness I can get, that way I'll get it out of my system, and submitting to that discipline will make me slow down, then I can loosen up after.

I'm doing just a grisaille, with pastel pencils, a dark and light grey and a white and black. I'm just trying to see shapes and values, and measuring away, using the eye as my standard, this is really helping get things in place. Also drew plum lines on the photo printout, and some eye widths, for instance there is one ew from the corner of the eye to the bottom of the nostril...

Is this right Don? by doing that I found the head too narrow just as you pointed out.

[DAK723]

I'm trying to figure out why it looks so off to me? as your reply shows it's not that off, but to me, really I mean this without being a nutcase, it looks so far off.
I do not know why! While I had to use a computer to find the small differences, I would never recommend going to that detail to compare. A ruler, and your eye, should be exact enough!



And I can see with more experience putting in the value shapes is a real key, and I'll get better with practice. Thanks.:heart:
Yes, the value shapes are the key! And you are doing excellent!

Don

[winecountry]

thank you Don, that helps, and I did notice that eye and moved it, I did that by using the eye width measure...Here it is now I really struggled with the nose:eek:

And now I find what Don means, it still does not look just like the expression in the photo, but there is something that is there, so is it enough?

I'm going to start the color now so I can still change things
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/103030-child_wip_5_2340.jpg

[winecountry]

this is not a measure thing, but thought you might like to see how the grisaille
works before its all covered up, this is just by the seat of my pants stuff, cause I've not done it before, but it looks like the eyes can stand as is, the grisaille is working as a nice green tone under the skin so places it just functions as the areas of veins, or shadow, pretty neat! I'm sort of in a scramble to find skin tones in my pastels as I dont use them for this purpose usually.

I've given up on anymore likeness on this one, I'll finish and try again. practice makes perfect I hope
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/12-Feb-2009/103030-IMG_2341.jpg

[NancyS.]

I've been enjoying following along with this thread, seeing all the great artwork and learning a lot about portraits. I'm new to pastels -- really new, I just ordered my first set of pastels and they should be here next week. I wanted to jump in here with you guys and didn't want to wait for the pastels, so I did a charcoal drawing. Hope that's OK. Feedback welcome. I can already see some problems, it looks like the right eye is slightly larger or droopier than the left, and I'm sure there are other things I'm not noticing. I found the measuring very helpful in trying to get everything where it's supposed to be. Thanks!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/29707-100_0437_1.JPG

Nancy

[DAK723]

Colleen,

This is very nice! I do have a couple comments. The first is on measuring, and I know I am being very picky - but I have a feeling that you would prefer that I am! If not, let me know!

I think that the child's left eye could still move over a touch. Either that, or a lessening of the value shape that starts just off the nose.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/82335-col-dak1.jpg

My red line corresponds with a guideline from the corner of mouth and edge of nostril wing, which lines up with the pit of the eye. Your pit is closer to the yellow line. I think what makes it look more off, however, is not so much the eye location, but the deep shadow that starts on the edge of the nose. Since children's eyes are much less recessed. that value shape looks a bit too close to the nose and a touch too dark at the edge of the nose. This brings me to my second critique. This one is much more of an opinion (well, they're all opinions, I guess!) rather than pointing out something more concrete. I like your grasaille method - I use it myself, especially in oil painting. But I think there are some warm/cool - forward/back things happening. See if you agree with me. I could certainly be wrong.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/82335-col-dak2.jpg

My photoshop manipulation is on the left (forgive me for manipulating - it was easier than trying to explain verbally). It seemed to me that many of your greenish areas were receding too much. Especially on the tip of the nose, and the area just to the right of the nose and mouth (light brown arrow). The contrast between the warm flesh and those cooler greenish colors was creating some depth issues - again, in my opinion. I also thought the warmer reddish tones of the far cheek were bringing that area forward. So I sort of flip-flopped some of your warm/cool tones, making the greenish tones in those areas warmer and making the cheek as it turns away, greener and cooler (green arrow).

I also smoothed out the value shape at the eye socket (yellow arrow). I did not move the eye at all.

Let me know what you think. Again, much of this is very subtle and not clear-cut.

We will, by the way, discuss creating depth and warm/cool contrasts in lesson 4!

Despite all my manipulating - this is a nice painting!

Don


this is not a measure thing, but thought you might like to see how the grisaille
works before its all covered up, this is just by the seat of my pants stuff, cause I've not done it before, but it looks like the eyes can stand as is, the grisaille is working as a nice green tone under the skin so places it just functions as the areas of veins, or shadow, pretty neat! I'm sort of in a scramble to find skin tones in my pastels as I dont use them for this purpose usually.

I've given up on anymore likeness on this one, I'll finish and try again. practice makes perfect I hope

[Colorix]

Colleen, the child is so precious! One of yours? The likeness is very close indeed. If I look at the vertical lines of Don's in the ref photo, I see that if I extend the one going from the inner corner of the eye to our right, it meets the corner of the mouth. And if you consider that the head is tilted, where is the curve of the right (our) cheek? (where it goes from 'vertical' and turns towards chin.) Eyballing it, it seems to me that those two areas need to be looked over. And then we just need to convince you that the likeness is great! (Edit: Don's previous post, not the one right over this one.)

Nancy, your charcoal looks very alive, it is gorgeous! With pastels, you may find you like a smoother grain, like the reverse side of that paper, if it indeed is smoother. Or, you may prefer the textured look.

T, love to see how you start a portrait! Thanks, and yes please, remember to take pics of progress, I'd really love to see how you work. You're sooooo good at catching the essence of people.

Kathy, beautiful modelling, she's 3D! Good light and skintones!

Don, I hope to start (finally!) tomorrow. I've learned so much just by looking and reading, and studying your advice to people. Thank you all!

Charlie

[DAK723]

Hi Nancy and Welcome!

Charcoal is fine! As you have no doubt noticed, we are concentrating on value shapes as the basis of most of what we are doing, so charcoal works well for that.

This is excellent! The likeness is well done! Immediately recognizable! If you hadn't mentioned the eyes, I wouldn't have put it under my microscope (so to speak).

I've drawn a lot of lines that basically tell me you did a good job! I looked at the eyes and think that the right eye (his right) is a little small. The outer corner seems to be fine, but the inner corner (which I have begun calling "the pit" for some reason) is a little too far from center. You will notice that the pit doesn't line up with the outer edge of his right nostril wing as it does in the ref, and your value shape from the pit to the nose is wider on your drawing.

A couple really small things that you might want to check. I'm just eyeballing now, but it looks like he might need a little more hair on top, and his jaw (on his left) angles a little more steeply (right near where it passes over his collar). These are minor things!

Otherwise, the proportions look great! Looking forward to seeing more of your work!

Don

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/82335-29707-100_0437_1-dakrev.JPG

I've been enjoying following along with this thread, seeing all the great artwork and learning a lot about portraits. I'm new to pastels -- really new, I just ordered my first set of pastels and they should be here next week. I wanted to jump in here with you guys and didn't want to wait for the pastels, so I did a charcoal drawing. Hope that's OK. Feedback welcome. I can already see some problems, it looks like the right eye is slightly larger or droopier than the left, and I'm sure there are other things I'm not noticing. I found the measuring very helpful in trying to get everything where it's supposed to be. Thanks!

Nancy

[kadon]

Thank you Don....you would have to be one of the kindest and nicest critics a person could have. You spare us nothing, and it generates a trust and confidence in how to go about improving our work. I certainly speak for myself here....but I think the others would agree.

I kept trying to work out why the face I painted looked shorter. The illusion of length evaded me...even though I kept measuring, and had worked out a rough graph. I found variations in proportions when working from the monitor and referring to my printed up ref. They did not agree and I became very confused. I see from your rectangle where the mistake occurred. Will now go back and reassess a few other things. I just realised as I write these words that when working from the monitor I had magnified the image somewhat....and that would throw things out of kilter would it not?

Toning has to be spot on doesn't it...and the shapes of the tones....like the curve e.g. where a straight stroke is required. I appreciate deeply your integrity to perfection.

Kathy

[DAK723]

Thank you Don....you would have to be one of the kindest and nicest critics a person could have. You spare us nothing, and it generates a trust and confidence in how to go about improving our work. I certainly speak for myself here....but I think the others would agree.

I kept trying to work out why the face I painted looked shorter. The illusion of length evaded me...even though I kept measuring, and had worked out a rough graph. I found variations in proportions when working from the monitor and referring to my printed up ref. They did not agree and I became very confused. I see from your rectangle where the mistake occurred. Will now go back and reassess a few other things. I just realised as I write these words that when working from the monitor I had magnified the image somewhat....and that would throw things out of kilter would it not?

Toning has to be spot on doesn't it...and the shapes of the tones....like the curve e.g. where a straight stroke is required. I appreciate deeply your integrity to perfection.

Kathy
Thank you Kathy for all your kind words.

It is possible for the monitor to be distorting things. Make sure your monitor settings (Display Properties/Settings/screen resolution) is set to the same proportions as your monitor. If you are not sure, scan an exact square and see what it look like on your monitor. Some monitors come with ways to calibrate and check.

While the colors may be better on your monitor, a printout is easier to draw guidelines on, or measure things with a ruler, so I would recommend that anyway!

Don

[kadon]

Well, I drew a square 3" x 3" and to my amazement when I sent it to the desktop it was a rectangle, one side measured 6"...so that explains a lot. Kathy

[kadon]

I would like to have a go at Geoff's portrait. I posted two of them (I think) when doing just noses and mouths. Now that we are into the full face I thought I would look further into the darker areas and with my almost nil knowledge of photoshop I fiddled with the light and could see a bit more.
I have posted the lighter images here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/118422-Geoff_1.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/118422-Geoff_2.jpg

Now I am wondering, before I take the plunge whether to paint the whole thing in these lighter tones, or just go ahead with the original darker renditions. Any advice on this please Don?

Kathy

[winecountry]

Don I bow to your great well trained eye balls:lol: thanks I'll re measure and see what I can do.

I've made changes on that eye and will post again. About the greenish tones on the right, I had not worked that area yet, just the left side, I posted so people could see the grisaille before I covered it all up. The piece is close to finished, and tho there is some likeness it's not quite right and for now I give up, going for close is ok as the kid( my grandniece) will change in two months and who will know:evil:

I do like the looks of it as a painting, it has a Flemish, Renaissance feel, and it's the most realistic thing I've ever done, I wonder if that is the grisaille doing that?

Thanks to all who post, like Charile, I learn from everyone

Kathy in Photoshop under Image, then Adjustments, go down that menu to "Shadow/Highlight" it will pop open a lovely set of sliders to fine tune the photo in almost any way you want. I just discovered this after 8 years of using photoshop, I keep meaning to take a class someday:lol:

[kadon]

P.S. Don't tell anyone, but most of my portrait experience was with pencils and I thought I would never be able to do one with those clumsy pastels. I won't tell you how long it took me to get the hang of them. You are doing great!

Don

And by the way Don....Your secret is safe with me.;)

Kathy

[DAK723]

If anyone else is wondering if there screen resolution is distorting things, here is an image with circles and squares. If you see rectangles and ellipses, then you might want to check your screen resolution.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/82335-circles.jpg

Don

P.S. Folks who are quickly browsing through this thread will think we have suddenly turned to modern art!! Wow, far out! :D

[DAK723]

I would like to have a go at Geoff's portrait. I posted two of them (I think) when doing just noses and mouths. Now that we are into the full face I thought I would look further into the darker areas and with my almost nil knowledge of photoshop I fiddled with the light and could see a bit more.
I have posted the lighter images here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/118422-Geoff_1.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/13-Feb-2009/118422-Geoff_2.jpg

Now I am wondering, before I take the plunge whether to paint the whole thing in these lighter tones, or just go ahead with the original darker renditions. Any advice on this please Don?

Kathy
Colleen mentioned this: Kathy in Photoshop under Image, then Adjustments, go down that menu to "Shadow/Highlight" it will pop open a lovely set of sliders to fine tune the photo in almost any way you want. I just discovered this after 8 years of using photoshop, I keep meaning to take a class someday:lol:
It is hard to say what is the best way to go about this. If you can manipulate the photo as Colleen has suggested, and get both the lights and the darks fairly close to what you would like, that would be great. There is also no reason to use just one ref. Before the computer age, if would be common to take multiple photos at different exposures, so that you had some photos where the light areas looked correct and other photos where the darks were properly exposed. And then you used both. The photos are just a guide after all. The values you choose in your painting should look good in comparison with the other values in your painting - not necessarily good in comparison to the values in the photo.

Personally, and it may be just me, I think it is easier to paint portraits where there is a majority of light compared to shadow, so I would pick photo #1. Of course, there is no reason that others are like me at all, so you could do either (or both!)

Don

[DAK723]

Don I bow to your great well trained eye balls:lol: thanks I'll re measure and see what I can do.
Please, no bowing necessary!

I've made changes on that eye and will post again. About the greenish tones on the right, I had not worked that area yet, just the left side, I posted so people could see the grisaille before I covered it all up. The piece is close to finished, and tho there is some likeness it's not quite right and for now I give up, going for close is ok as the kid( my grandniece) will change in two months and who will know:evil:

I do like the looks of it as a painting, it has a Flemish, Renaissance feel, and it's the most realistic thing I've ever done, I wonder if that is the grisaille doing that?
Oops, I didn't realize that your hadn't finished the right side yet - sorry about all my manipulations there :o.

By the way, you might have noticed that the jawline on that right side had become much more square as you added more pastel. I noticed it after I posted. I think that rounding out that jaw will help. The likeness by the way is very good. There will be no mistaking who the sitter is when you show this to your family members! I, too, like the style and the grisaille probably is playing a part, along with your color palette, I think!

Don

[DAK723]

Toning has to be spot on doesn't it...and the shapes of the tones....

Kathy
First I should remember that WetCanvas is available all over the world, and not everyone uses the term "values" to describe the degree of light and dark:eek:. So when I say value, feel free to substitute the word "tone." And as I have mentioned in the lessons, I believe the shapes of the tones is the most important thing in portraiture. It is basically how I start any painting, regardless of subject.

Speaking of tones (or values), today's Blog from James Gurney has some painting notes from the great oil painter and portraitist, John Singer Sargent. Many of the notes are more specific to oil painting, but not all. Here is what he has to say about values (or tones):

Simplify, omit all but the most essential elements—values, especially the values. You must clarify the values.
Here's a link to the blog:

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2009/02/sargents-painting-notes.html

There is always a lot of good information on Gurney's blog and I visit it daily!

Don

[winecountry]

This is getting close, read the Sargent quote on gurney blog and saw one of his..boy I'm galaxys away from that, I did try to simply but I keep seeing so much more than I can put down. Nevertheless I think this is just about as good as I can get it, and tho it seems miles away in some ways, it has a quality of the child that works, so that's enough for now. Had no idea kids would be so hard, less of them to capture, no wrinkles and stuff:lol:

I notice one eye seems bigger than the other, but the ref looks that way too
I'm still trying just to do shapes of values, not really paying attention to color, I did go by 3 more today, but everything is too bright, so I keep toning it down with greens.
any help appreciated

[kadon]

Absolutely beautiful Colleen! Kathy

[DAK723]

Colleen,

Yes, Absolutely beautiful! Top-notch professional work!

Don

[NancyS.]

Don, Thanks for your comments and observations on my portrait. You are so right about everything! Seeing the lines superimposed over the drawing and the original photo really make the differences pop out.

Charlie, Thanks for your kind remarks on my portrait and for the information about the paper. I ordered a few different kinds of paper to try out when I get the pastels, a couple sheets of sanded papers and one other, La Carte, I think. I'll also try working on the smooth side of the Canson paper that I've been using.

Colleen, the portrait of the baby is beautiful. You really nailed down the likeness.

Nancy

[winecountry]

How kind of everyone to comment in such nice ways.:heart: I've made a few tweaks, to the mouth, the nose is wrong but it's staying, (lucky I got it this good:lol:) I'm going to let it sit now. I see dozens of things to change, but noticed last night that I was in a danger zone of over work, so one more small pass and it will be done.

The help here made it possible, and for my second portrait and first one in pastel I'm pretty happy with it. Have to say doing portraits is amazingly frustrating, and yet satisfying somehow too. I have a nice orginal title for it "Child in a Red Hat.":D

Going to go back over the thread now and try to do some exercises only instead of a full on, now that I got some of this out of my system, and I'd like to try a looser style too, just for the learning.

Some of the experienced painters, could you comment on the likeness issue, not just here but in general. This has some likeness, but it still looks way different than the photo to my eye, and I missed a lot of the expression, and seemed to have given it a new one, it works I know, but why didn't it come out closer I wonder, I sure tried hard, but after a while the painting took on a life of it's own, and it went it's own way, no matter what I did.

[Colorix]

Colleen, this it first class, the child! As he/she looks straight at us, some people will find it disturbing, and that is because of a feeling that he/she is looking straight into our souls. Don't interpret that reaction as if there is something wrong with the picture. I spent a fun 20-30 minutes in a museum looking at people looking at one of Rembrandt's self portraits, and some just couldn't stand to meet 'his' eyes. In fact, your child-portrait reminds me very much of the old masters.

Top notch, masterful, excellent. (I say that extremely rarely.)

Why one looses likeness? (Not that *you* did!) Because portraits are darn hard, really difficult. There are way too many small shifts of shape, colour, value, temperature and whatnot. And because skin is translucent, allowing light to travel a bit under the surface. A little bit less difficult if one works large, at least as large as one's palm (heel to fingertips, between chin and hairline).

Sargent said: " A portrait is a picture of a person with something wrong about the mouth", (nearly a quote, anyway).

I've just remeasured three times, mapped, and will change a lot of stuff -- again! Grrrrr!

Charlie

[winecountry]

Thank you Charlie, that makes me feel rather grand, I'm sure the next portrait will bring me down to earth again:lol:

here is the final, to keep from fiddling I put it in the frame and mailed it, I used a dark heavy frame and now it really does look like one of those minor flemish artist's work you see in the back rooms of the

Again many thanks to all who commented, esp Don who's unfailing patience showed me how to get this far. tried a better photo, but the tones are very subtle ( I blended a lot) and so the camera is overdoing the whole thing.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/103030-Eden_final_sm.jpg museum:D

[DAK723]

Some of the experienced painters, could you comment on the likeness issue, not just here but in general. This has some likeness, but it still looks way different than the photo to my eye, and I missed a lot of the expression, and seemed to have given it a new one, it works I know, but why didn't it come out closer I wonder, I sure tried hard, but after a while the painting took on a life of it's own, and it went it's own way, no matter what I did.
Paintings do take on a life of their own - and that's not a bad thing. In the end, the photo is not part of the painting, so the painting will be judged on its own merits. One can have a good likeness and a lousy painting, if one forgets about composition, color harmony, lighting, depth, and all the other things that make a painting successful.

Personally, I hesitate to discuss likeness, because I bet every artist has their own opinion about what the key elements are to getting a good likeness, and those opinions may be valid, but there is no way to definitively say "this is more important than this..."

In lesson, I posted a link to another portrait class, I think it was in the watercolor forum. That artist did a very thorough job, but right at the start stated, "Eyes are the most important feature to get right when painting a portrait. If the eyes are right, the rest of the face can be distorted and yet be recognizable: if the eyes are not right, the face is wrong no matter if the rest of the face is perfect."

I almost decided not to use the link, because of those two sentences, even though there was a lot of good information in the entire lesson. I just don't know how someone can make such a definitive statement. Needless to say, I don't agree with it at all, but even if I did, I would recognize that there may be something more important than the eyes in some portraits. Perhaps each face has there own "most important" aspects. We will actually discuss this a bit in Lesson 4.

Any and all thoughts welcome on the subject of likeness!

Don

[maw-t]

Colleen.. this is just fabulous! Great job on the features.. & well everything... excellent likeness too! You should be very proud.. I bet the family will love iit!

Likeness, to me, is very important if you are doing commission work.. other than that, I think it takes a back seat to mood, atmosphere, expression, form, modleing, light, comp & well almost everything else, because of course if one doesnt know the person, there is really no need for likeness. I like portraits that stand on their own as a work of art, no matter the person painted. Getting porportions & features lined up correctly is important in most cases, (Picasso would dissagree with me on that I am sure).. I personally enjoy the artist leaving something for me to imagine, or fill in....of course everyone has different tastes... & thank goodness or what a humdrum world this would be!

[Colorix]

:mad:

I'm stopping painting now, before I go truly :mad: :eek: And post in the spirit of the class :angel: .

*Tried* to paint Bethany, such a sweet girl. I guess I'm a city-gal, as I gave her a more "knowing" look... she got to be a club girl, not girl-next-door.

(sigh)

I think the only thing I got right in the first sketch was the slanted line through the eyes. I mean, that was easy, right? Just take the straightedge and aim, and then -- swish -- draw a line on the paper, aligning edges of the two papers. Yes, but I forgot to position it in a good place, so I had to redraw it 2 cm higher... Then I measured, measured, and re-measured, applying great care to get it right, and then I was finished! Yay!!!

So I remembered to take a step back, and, well, wasn't there something off? Indeed there was. I had no idea what had happened, but it was *way* off! So I wiped it out, and re-did it. Thrice.

Finally, I mapped her darks and lights...

....and then I realized I'd started too small -- again! A face should be a minimum of the length of my hand from fingertip to heel, to give me a fair chance. I'd made her a hand long from chin to crown, *and* I'd made the crown too tall.... Most people make head-above-eyes too low, but I try to make Homo Sapiens, and not Neandertahls, so I got the brainiest most high-browed girl in the world... In fact, I'd made a whole new species, Homo Compensatus.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/117343-D-Redhead-1--mf2.jpg

So I shaved of at least 200 IQ points, corrected the neck, and ear and some other stuff. Continuing making a mess. I've never tried red hair before, so that fascinated me, and she got a punky dye.


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/117343-D-Redhead-3-mmf2.jpg

Somewhere here I try to get the mouth right, give up, mess wildly, throwing on pastels, and then I give up, and here's the finish, where everything is off -- again.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/117343-D-Redhead-4-mmf3.jpg

Painting is a series of corrections, "they" say. Well, the all-knowing "them" didn't say that it is corrections *of* corrections...

One of these wonderful learning experiences I love to hate!

Charlie

[DAK723]

Charlie, thanks for posting your steps and giving us a first person account of your trials and tribulations! Needless to say, despite your frustrations and unhappiness:mad:, this is looking great!:)

I realize, and this is true for everyone, that my putting your work under the microscope - and drawing guidelines on the computer to compare - is a bit extreme. I'm sure my portrait demo would not hold up too well under that type of scrutiny, either. Normally, if I don't have a suspicion that something is off, measurement wise, using just the eye, I would consider it close enough. So how does this painting measure up, so to speak...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/82335-117343-D-Redhead-4-mmf3dak.jpg

The guidelines from your painting, Charlie, are overlayed onto the ref so that they are in exactly the same spots. Pretty darn close, I would say! I guess your top of the head reductions were very accurate. What I do notice is the angle of her nostril and nostril wing is essentially straight across. Before I covered it with my red line, I think yours has a slight upward angle. The width of her mouth on the near side is just a touch too narrow. All these things are very close and certainly within the margin of error of me placing the guidelines in the right spot! I also rotated the ref to be more in line with your painting, so the small difference I see in the nose angle, for example, may or may not be an actual issue.

I put a violet line and arrow on the shadow shape that comes off her left nostril wing. Strange as it may seem, in terms of likeness, I would consider this shape to be very important to define her expression and the roundness and depth of her cheek. I would check the shape and value of that shadow shape!

Beyond these picky comments, I love the hair - you've given it body and depth like it doesn't have in the photo. The overall sense of sunshine and the luminosity you've created in the shadows is fantastic! The background has a great sense of light as well. If you don't mind, maybe you could just quickly take us through your process for the background - it looks like you started with a red or violet color and then overlayed the blue. It also has has great energy and luminosity - perhaps the class (and the teacher, too) would like to know how you did it!

Don

:mad:

I'm stopping painting now, before I go truly :mad: :eek: And post in the spirit of the class :angel: .

*Tried* to paint Bethany, such a sweet girl. I guess I'm a city-gal, as I gave her a more "knowing" look... she got to be a club girl, not girl-next-door.

(sigh)

I think the only thing I got right in the first sketch was the slanted line through the eyes. I mean, that was easy, right? Just take the straightedge and aim, and then -- swish -- draw a line on the paper, aligning edges of the two papers. Yes, but I forgot to position it in a good place, so I had to redraw it 2 cm higher... Then I measured, measured, and re-measured, applying great care to get it right, and then I was finished! Yay!!!

So I remembered to take a step back, and, well, wasn't there something off? Indeed there was. I had no idea what had happened, but it was *way* off! So I wiped it out, and re-did it. Thrice.

Finally, I mapped her darks and lights...

....and then I realized I'd started too small -- again! A face should be a minimum of the length of my hand from fingertip to heel, to give me a fair chance. I'd made her a hand long from chin to crown, *and* I'd made the crown too tall.... Most people make head-above-eyes too low, but I try to make Homo Sapiens, and not Neandertahls, so I got the brainiest most high-browed girl in the world... In fact, I'd made a whole new species, Homo Compensatus.

So I shaved of at least 200 IQ points, corrected the neck, and ear and some other stuff. Continuing making a mess. I've never tried red hair before, so that fascinated me, and she got a punky dye.

Somewhere here I try to get the mouth right, give up, mess wildly, throwing on pastels, and then I give up, and here's the finish, where everything is off -- again.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/117343-D-Redhead-4-mmf3.jpg

Painting is a series of corrections, "they" say. Well, the all-knowing "them" didn't say that it is corrections *of* corrections...

One of these wonderful learning experiences I love to hate!

Charlie

[DAK723]

:mad:

Painting is a series of corrections, "they" say. Well, the all-knowing "them" didn't say that it is corrections *of* corrections...

Charlie
Here is what Helen van Wyk, famous TV painter and author of at least a couple books on painting technique says about correcting:

Even if each stage of development is a simple one, it will need correction....This makes correcting fifty percent of the painting experience. Each stage of a picture's development has to be painted, judged and corrected. So I look-paint-correct, look-paint-correct as I work on each stage. I paint because I want to; I correct because I have to.
Now she had tons of experience and had painted hundreds (I'm sure) of portraits. And it was still 50% correcting for her! I am sure I am closer to the 75% correcting percentage, myself!

Don

[winecountry]

thanks for showing the process Charlie, wonder if I'll ever get as free with color as you are

and thanks Don for the posts, I just thought I was not cut out for portrait work, as I spent 80% of my time correcting.:lol: I know for me at least, I want to be as picky as possible in the class, knowing I can always lighten up on my own, by being as exact as possible, I am training my eye to see, and my hand to make the right marks....this reminds me of figure skating, all the school figures traced exactly, behind the scenes, so we can see the wildly creative "free" skate.

the exercises and high likeness bar are good for the class, at least that's MHO

[kadon]

Very reluctant to post this effort, but....

First of all I tried to do the lighter version Don as you suggested, but I could hardly see anything at all, and in the meantime I had lost the original. So I attempted the dark lightened one. It was a real learning curve 'cos, I didn't have a dark paper which would have helped a bit, at least. Having said that, the original is still better than the photo...all the holes show through like neon signs in the photo:eek: And some of the tones are not quite correct.

Anyway I mustn't let pride stand in the way, and I do want to improve, so I truly welcome your critique Don....again expressing my appreciation of your dedicated efforts on my behalf.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/118422-latest_Geoff.jpg

Kathy

[BANfear]

Aaaah, I have not posted in so long. :( Every day, I think about it but I'm just so busy with school during the week and then on the weekend I'm so exhausted that I have no motivation left.

I will try to get myself back on the right path. I just don't quite know where to go from here. It has been weeks since the last time I picked up a pastel stick. :crying:

Anyway, Don, thank you so much for doing this! :) I feel more... encouraged, somehow. I will try to become more active from now on. I just need to keep my focus.

[Colorix]

Hi Don, thanks!

Hopefully, my struggles were a bit amusing. It *is* funny that I do the same kind of mistakes over and over. One would think one would learn...

Thank you for the measurments. Btw, how do you do them? Can it be done in PS Elements 6?

I knew her corner of mouth was right under the highlight in the pupil... lost it somewhere... And I'd given up before I got to nose and shadowed fold, so they were just eyeballed, if even that... I get what you mean, and these surprisingly small corrections would enhance the likeness a great deal. I have to quit working on scraps, they are too small, and go for proper size, I won't learn if I continue on this path of huge frustration. Teacher, I'll do better, I'll mend my ways, I'll repent.

And, it seems I gave up just a little bit too early, as the corrections are very small indeed! I'm surprised, really surprised, as it all felt so off! All that measuring *did* work, after all. Changes happened as I lost the marks under heaps of dust.

Hair: My nemesis (as is close foliage). I focused on placing the darks and mid-lights, making a "puzzle" of shapes, and then I went over it with directional strokes, not really trying to make strands. Don, it is thanks to you if it looks decent! Then I learned something from the previous month's lesson.

How to turn on the light in the bg:
Actually, there is a whole class on it... with over a 1000 posts to wade through... :D
The basic idea is to make an underpainting where you map out lights and darks. Anything that is going to be in light is underpainted with a "warm" colour (i.e. Y, O, R, and pink). Even if the "local colour" is a cool blue, it gets a warm underpainting. Depending on what bias and intensity I want the final blue to have, I choose different underpaintings. In this case, I wanted a cool slightly violet blue that was rather dark. Reasons was that blue looks good behind a person, blue recedes, and I wanted to avoid a greenish blue. Therefore, I chose a coolish red, similar to Permanent Rose, that is still within the "warm" family, but one of the coolest of it. When the blue (several blues) are scumbled over it, the underpainting peeks through and give the indication of light. There are violet-blues, blues, and a phthalo blue too, scumbled, cross-"hatched" in side-of-the-stick strokes.

If I had wanted a blue more true to the sky in the photo, I'd started it with a warmer red, maybe even an orange, and then I'd put a bit of pink over that, before the blue. For a lighter look, I'd have used sticks with more white in them, that is peaches and pinks. But not too much white, not if I want to have a sunny look.

Try it out, on scraps of paper, and see what happens with different underpaintings. Best way to get it is to do it.

Btw, Don, agree with you on that comment about eyes being the most important, or, rather, not being most important. It is the overall shape that is important. How else do we recognize a person walking on a street 200 yards away? Do we see their eyes? Think not, unless we're eagles. We recognize the shape of the person, and the walk, perhaps. The manner of moving. Also, It is quite possible to really see who it is just from the mapping out of lights and darks in a painting. I've clearly seen which ref people have started on, in this class.

And please do nit-pick my efforts, microscope them, it is invaluable to me, as I learn so much! And you're the greatest teacher!

Charlie


Charlie,
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2009/82335-117343-D-Redhead-4-mmf3dak.jpg


Don

[DAK723]

Kathy, You shouldn't be reluctant - because this is great! You have the likeness for sure! And as I mentioned, the lighting on this one is very difficult, but you handled it very well. Usually, with so much shadow, and some significant reflected light, it is a real challenge. Reflected light can be so difficult to get to look correct - and you have done it beautifully.

Of course, as the teacher, I have to give some critique! The only area that seems a little bit unresolved is the chin. To keep it from blending into the neck, I think a bit more of the darker value is needed.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/15-Feb-2009/82335-118422-latest_Geoffdak.jpg

I put a yellow line around the shadow shape that goes down to the chin. You have already started that shape, but yours lightens as it gets to the chin. It does have some variety of value, but I think that darker shape will help define the chin better. Usually, before I give advice, I actually try it out. In this case my effort is in the lower right corner, so that you can see what I mean and also to decide if you agree. As you can see, the darker value of that shape on the chin is not at the bottom of the chin, but rather, a bit higher up. I also slightly darkened the value shapes between the nose and top lip - just to reinforce the dark (red arrow). Not really necessary, probably! I also shaved off a bit of that light shape on the nostril wing, which I don't really see on my version of the ref (yellow arrow).

These are all very minor value things - the chin values being a bit more important, to my eye, than the others, just to give the chin a bit more definition, and to create more depth between the china and neck.

I am currently working on "creating depth" for Lesson 4, so this is something we haven't talked about yet.

If you were to frame it as is - it would be a successful portrait, so take my critiques with that in mind. You've got the likeness and handled a difficult lighting situation. And by the way, the hair is great -captured perfectly!

Don

Very reluctant to post this effort, but....

First of all I tried to do the lighter version Don as you suggested, but I could hardly see anything at all, and in the meantime I had lost the original. So I attempted the dark lightened one. It was a real learning curve 'cos, I didn't have a dark paper which would have helped a bit, at least. Having said that, the original is still better than the photo...all the holes show through like neon signs in the photo:eek: And some of the tones are not quite correct.

Anyway I mustn't let pride stand in the way, and I do want to improve, so I truly welcome your critique Don....again expressing my appreciation of your dedicated efforts on my behalf.

Kathy

[DAK723]

Aaaah, I have not posted in so long. :( Every day, I think about it but I'm just so busy with school during the week and then on the weekend I'm so exhausted that I have no motivation left.

I will try to get myself back on the right path. I just don't quite know where to go from here. It has been weeks since the last time I picked up a pastel stick. :crying:

Anyway, Don, thank you so much for doing this! :) I feel more... encouraged, somehow. I will try to become more active from now on. I just need to keep my focus.
Joelle, I'm glad to hear from you! Don't worry about not being able to post or do any pastel work. School can take up a lot of time and energy! This class will be on the internet for a long time! Even if you have no time for pastels or more finished pieces, I hope you still have a little time for some quick sketching - even if it is just doodling while watching TV or while on the phone!

Your post reminded me of my school days. I should have been paying more attention to my studies! Just for fun - and a few laughs - here a couple typical pages from my college notebooks!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/15-Feb-2009/82335-notebooks1.jpg

Actually, the page on the left is not that typical - I actually was taking notes! The page on the right is more typical. Even though there are words on the page, they seem to have nothing to do with the class material!

Notice, that many of the doodles have some interesting value shapes!:D

Don

[DAK723]

Hi Don, thanks!

Thank you for the measurements. Btw, how do you do them? Can it be done in PS Elements 6?

I am using Paint Shop Pro, but you should be able to do the same in photoshop. When I remember to do so, I create a new layer and then just draw lines, using the line tool. When they are on a separate layer from the painting, they can be moved, rotated separately and copied and pasted onto the ref (or visa versa).


And, it seems I gave up just a little bit too early, as the corrections are very small indeed! I'm surprised, really surprised, as it all felt so off! All that measuring *did* work, after all. Changes happened as I lost the marks under heaps of dust.

Everyone posting seems to think they are off with the measurements when the measurements have been really close. Don't know why! Am I the only one who's philosophy is "eh, close enough!"


Btw, Don, agree with you on that comment about eyes being the most important, or, rather, not being most important. It is the overall shape that is important. How else do we recognize a person walking on a street 200 yards away?
Charlie
It is interesting that you should make this observation, because I agree completely and, in fact, have made almost the same analogy in my first draft of lesson 4, which should be ready by March 1st. Lesson 4 should be the final one on portraits!

Don

[BANfear]

Don,

Aw, thank you for your encouragement and advice. :)
Last night I decided to drink an insane amount of coffee and I painted with pastels until about 3 in the morning, like I used to do, and I feel like I accomplished a lot. I hope to continue tonight, if time permits. I wish I could post a picture of what I've done but my parents are gone to Cuba with the camera at the moment. But as soon as they get back, I will share my portrait with you. So far I have the eyes and the nose done, and I'm trying to be careful with my measurements.

hahaha and thanks for sharing those pages! It's really nice to see a part of your process as an artist. :)

[kadon]

Very much appreciated Don....thank you. I tried to delete the image but had left it too late to edit. Now, Im really glad I failed to do so.

I agree entirely with the shadowing areas you have pointed out that need darkening/shaving etc. Most of all thank you for your demo on how to go about it. The lower part of the face was really difficult....with his head at that angle...it pushed out a kind of double chin effect. The toning you added give it greater definition.

I tried to get this done by today as this son is visiting me today! I notice that when using some colours, they seem to flatten out when photographed and give a strange appearance. I might try and get a better photo of him.

Am getting really and truly hooked on this pastel thing...heaven help me.:rolleyes:

[NancyS.]

Here's one more attempt from me. I did a lot of measuring but I still think I'm off here and there. The nose especially gave me grief. C & C welcome.

The pastels I ordered should be here in the next day or two, so I promise my next one will be in color. This one is charcoal on newsprint.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/15-Feb-2009/29707-100_0442.JPG

Nancy

[winecountry]

Kathy with Don's tweak this is a fabulous work:clap: , really captures him and in a very unusual light


Oh no Don! only one more lesson:eek: feel like I'll be lost without you, and there is so much to learn!

[kadon]

Well thank you Colleen....coming from you that is most encouraging. I know I wouldn't have persevered if it wasn't for Don's encouragement and dedicated attention to getting the best out of each of us.

Kathy

[Colorix]

Kathy, it is gorgeous! It was a very difficult ref, with light from below, and you made a wonderful sensitive portrait filled with love! So glad you couldn't delete it!

Don, love your doodles. They're seriously "arty". (Mine weren't, and I had way more text, too....) You wouldn't be a visual learner, by any chance? And, what on earth did you study? Looks like some social science, or possibly applied/practical philosophy.

Nancy, it's looking great! Very good likeness. Can't wait for you to get those colours. You've gone "under the surface", and I'm defenitely looking at a person, not a drawing (if that makes sense).

Colleen, I'm hoping class will continue, after all it is called Portrait *and* Figure, and I aint seen no figures yet. :-D (No pressure at all, Don!)

Charlie

[maw-t]

Kathy, WOnderful effort! So glad you didnt chicken out on posting it!
NaNcy that drawing is AWSOME! I feel what CHarlie said... it has LIFE!
Charlie, I giggled _with you_ in your struggles.. boy, so familiar.. it is good to know that we all have them.. lately, my frustrations have gotten the best of me more than a few times.. it is posts such as yours that help us know we are not alone in that area... anyway she looks GREAT & lines up perfectly with Dons measuring!
& Yes DOn.. cool doodles! Thanks for sharing! Cant wait for th next class on debth...& Figures? Looks like the pressures ON :D .. Your work on this class has been outstanding.. amazing .. again THANK YOU!
I am wanting to try some of this in oils or maybe acrylics... IF I do, can it be posted here Don? Or is this pastels & charcoal only?

[DAK723]

Nancy,

This is a beautiful drawing! I like your style a lot!

Noses are hard! Your measurements, by my eye, are pretty good. The only things that I see are the angle of the nostrils has gotten a bit out of line compared to the eyes and mouth. The septum might be coming down just a bit too much and I would check the space between the septum/nostrils and the top lip. It might be a little to narrow. If it is, that means the nose is either just a touch too long or the lips and chin need to come down a hair.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/16-Feb-2009/82335-29707-100_0442dak_copy.jpg

Frankly, I could not tell - and the proportion lines I have drawn are inconclusive - because it is so close! If it is just that the septum is a bit too long, than I wouldn't worry about the rest!

Again, if the measurements are this close, then you've done great!

Don

Here's one more attempt from me. I did a lot of measuring but I still think I'm off here and there. The nose especially gave me grief. C & C welcome.

The pastels I ordered should be here in the next day or two, so I promise my next one will be in color. This one is charcoal on newsprint.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/15-Feb-2009/29707-100_0442.JPG

Nancy

[DAK723]

Oh no Don! only one more lesson:eek: feel like I'll be lost without you, and there is so much to learn!

Both the next lesson and I will be around for quite some time, I hope!

The next lesson is only the last "portrait" lesson, not the last lesson for our classroom. Still to come is the "Figure" part of our portrait and figure fundamentals!

Don

[DAK723]

Don, love your doodles. They're seriously "arty". (Mine weren't, and I had way more text, too....) You wouldn't be a visual learner, by any chance? And, what on earth did you study? Looks like some social science, or possibly applied/practical philosophy.


Thanks Charlie! There are some that would say that my doodles are the highlight of my art career! No, I am not a visual learner - I don't think. I was a fine arts major in college, which probably explains why I didn't pay much attention in these particular classes! The class with the notes was an ethics class - and since I am a renowned deep thinker, I was at least paying some attention. The other page of notes is from an Aesthetics class! Apperently, I knew it all already, and didn't need to write anything down!

Don

P.S. As mentioned in my last post, the Figure lessons are still to come! There may be a little break of a couple months between the last portrait lesson and the figure lessons. We'll see!

[maw-t]

Good to hear the lessons will continue:)
I find them motivating & inspiring!
This one I did tonight or started.. about the 2 hr mark... I took pics along the way..

I measured by eyeballing it & started with the darkest darks.. 1st the pic as it stands now
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejack0.jpg

Next my first pic a bit sketchy for sure & pretty ugly.. going from darks to highlights then midtones & following shapes as best I couldhttp://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejack1.jpg

Next I just kept going trying to correct as I went
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejack2.jpg

Then I blended with finger OUCH.. that wallis paper is rough! This looks reall bad, ... So I just started SQUINTING again at shapes & quickly applying strokes to this now under=painting of sorts.. To get to where I am on the first pic
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejack3.jpg

Next is the ref, a blk & wht.. so that made things a little more difficult.. I certaintly am not posting this to show HOW it should be done, only to get suggestions on if I am doing things at all in the right direction?? http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejackoriginal.jpg

[kadon]

This is fantastic T. Kathy

[DAK723]

Hi T,

Very nice job on this and thanks for the WIP pics! Your stages look good! One thing that you might consider - even if you like to eyeball in the shapes - is to try to check your measurements after each stage (or so) with guidelines of some sort.

As I mentioned in the lesson - guidelines (whether plumb lines going straight vertical or horizontal) or lines at an angle, are probably the most useful. You can do a lot of measurements early on if you want (but don't have to), but as you apply pastel, those measurements are going to disappear under the dust! Visually using guidelines can be done anytime at any stage to keep things in line!

The one line that I see that is off a bit is the eyeline. I've drawn one on the ref and transferred it to your painting. I think you will see that the small part of the eye that shows, is painted a bit too high. The brim of the hat also a bit too high, as well as the ear.

Other than that, it looks real good to me - an excellent likeness!

You might find that drawing just that small part of the eye is difficult. If it is, you might consider putting it entirely under the hat, or letting more of the eye show. On the other hand, you might have no problem with the partial eye!

Don

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/82335-76639-olejackdakrev.jpg



Good to hear the lessons will continue:)
I find them motivating & inspiring!
This one I did tonight or started.. about the 2 hr mark... I took pics along the way..

I measured by eyeballing it & started with the darkest darks.. 1st the pic as it stands now
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/76639-olejack0.jpg

Next my first pic a bit sketchy for sure & pretty ugly.. going from darks to highlights then midtones & following shapes as best I could

Next I just kept going trying to correct as I went


Then I blended with finger OUCH.. that wallis paper is rough! This looks reall bad, ... So I just started SQUINTING again at shapes & quickly applying strokes to this now under=painting of sorts.. To get to where I am on the first pic


Next is the ref, a blk & wht.. so that made things a little more difficult.. I certaintly am not posting this to show HOW it should be done, only to get suggestions on if I am doing things at all in the right direction??

[maw-t]

Thank you Kathy!

Thanks Don...whoa I hadnt notice the ear yet.. That eye is now officially driving me mad ... Hope I get a chance to work on this later this evening... the measuring line really does help me see where it is off... I will try to slow down & measure beteewn stages... Thanks again!

[winecountry]

measure this Don!
would this be considered pastel, or only dust?:lol:

just had to share instead of writing "Wash Me" on a dirty car you can.....

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/103030-dirty_car.jpg

[maw-t]

measure this Don!
would this be considered pastel, or only dust?:lol:

just had to share instead of writing "Wash Me" on a dirty car you can.....

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2009/103030-dirty_car.jpg

Would this be considered plein air:wink2: Priceless !!!

[DAK723]

Wow! I'll keep this mind next time I have to scrape the snow and ice off my windshield!

Don

[Colorix]

Don, then just sign the masterpiece, put it in behind glass (greenhouse), and go buy a new car.

Colleen, thank you so much for showing this gem! Love it! Who's the artist?

Charlie

[DAK723]

In all seriousness, I find these artists that do "temporary" art, quite remarkable, whether it is ice sculpture, sidewalk painting, or this!

We do everything we can (usually) to prolong the lifespan of our art and fret and worry about lightfastness and archivable materials. To do something creative knowing that it will last a few moments, or days, or maybe a couple months, takes a different mindset, don't you think!

Don

[winecountry]

Hi class,
glad you are enjoying this, I finally read the email it came with
THIS is SCOTT WADE. Check out what he does with the dirty cars by
carefully and artfully removing portions of the dirt. According to his web site, he lives real close to a dirt road in San Marcos , Texas ....

Don, great point, The Buddhist monks who do those amazingly complex sand mandalas, spend a month making one and sweep it away at the end, say it is to remember how transitory life is and not to get attached. I find some non attachment is a big help in my art, once it's down and I'm done, I have far more interest in the next work that the last finished work, no matter how good it is,
here is another of Scott's unique art form.

[kadon]

Who's the artist?Charlie

Glad you asked this Charlie....wondered the same thing myself....thought Colleen had grown a beard!.

Kathy

[terri66]

Hi Don,

Last one for the month for me as I've a busy family commitment filled week ahead. I was experimenting with rembrandts only on a very dark blue suede board and mark making. Still using the cool north light for the photo references, I still probably need to push the contrast more. Take care and looking forward to the next lesson on the figure. Terri

[DAK723]

Hi Terri! Thanks for posting!

You have a lot of contrast in this one, so I don't think you need to push the contrast more! I like the dramatic lighting!

There are a few measuring issues that I notice - they are all pretty minor.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2009/82335-P1010003dak.JPG


Now, the first thing I did was rotate the ref a bit to make it more in line with your painting. So that may affect some of these guidelines, but I think I have the photo and painting lined up pretty well.

My first horizontal line shows that the closer eyebrow is up a bit too high. My line under the nose shows that the shadow shape depicting the near nostril wing extends down a bit further than the ref. My other horizontal line shows the bottom of the ear location is a bit off, though this may be due to the rotation of the pic as noted earlier. Again, these are all pretty small measurements.

If you compare the distances between my vertical lines at the eyes, you will notice that the eyes may be a bit too close together. I've also drawn a vertical line down from the eye center that shows the mouth may be a little too narrow. Again, these things are off by just a bit.

I think you have done a very nice job with the value shapes, creating a very dramatic depiction of light and shadow. I really like the way you have done the hair in the light - very nice!

Aside from the few little measurement issues - a very nice job on this one!

Don

P.S. We have one more portrait lesson to go before we move on to the figure!



Hi Don,

Last one for the month for me as I've a busy family commitment filled week ahead. I was experimenting with rembrandts only on a very dark blue suede board and mark making. Still using the cool north light for the photo references, I still probably need to push the contrast more. Take care and looking forward to the next lesson on the figure. Terri

[BANfear]

Don,

I hope you don't mind me asking some questions. I am in the process of completing a male portrait. I left some space above the eyebrows because I'm not sure what I should draw first: the hair (bangs) on the forehead, or the skin that's underneath the hair. What would you suggest?

Also, is there a way to make the lips less... pink/red? I am trying to paint them using similar colors to the ones in the picture: 428542 but I find that, in my painting, it makes the guy look somewhat girly.


-Joelle

[DAK723]

Don,

I hope you don't mind me asking some questions. I am in the process of completing a male portrait. I left some space above the eyebrows because I'm not sure what I should draw first: the hair (bangs) on the forehead, or the skin that's underneath the hair. What would you suggest?

Also, is there a way to make the lips less... pink/red? I am trying to paint them using similar colors to the ones in the picture: 428542 but I find that, in my painting, it makes the guy look somewhat girly.


-Joelle
Hi Joelle!

I don't mind your asking questions at all! To answer your first question, I would definitely put in the skin underneath first, then paint the bangs in over the top. If you put the hair in first, you would have to paint around the hair, which is almost impossible to do without either leaving a little gap, or smudging, or putting the skin color on top of the hair color. I always recommend trying to put the underneath colors down first, so that what is on top is painted "on top." Now, there will always be times that you have to go back in and touch up an area or fix something that is underneath. Even then, if possible, place a stroke or two of whatever is on top (hair, in this case) back on top.

Your second question isn't as easy to answer! I am definitely not a color expert. That is the reason I start with a monotone underpainting!

First, let's look at your lips - well, not your lips...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2009/82335-lips-referencedak.jpg

First, I reduced the red in the photo slightly. In know my camera always makes reds even redder. Then, using the eyedropper tool in photoshop, I sampled some of the colors, and yes, they are quite red and pink. Hopefully, among your pastels, you have some reddish, or brown colors that are less intense than these, as if they were already pre-mixed with a more grayed color. If not, you may have to do a little blending or mixing on the painting. One of the most preferred methods of graying down a color is to mix a little bit of a complementary color with it. The complementary (or opposite) color of red is green, although you don't have to use the exact opposite. Mixing a little green into red will give you a more grayish-red. Since you aiming for a less intense color - the greens (or blues) that you might blend with the red should be low intensity colors, if possible. This type of mixing, I find, is not that easy to do in pastel, because pastels are fairly opaque. To get a transparent type glaze, blending one color over another, takes a light touch, or often a fine hatching pattern. I would experiment a bit on some scrap paper with different color combinations!

Usually, when I paint lips, however, I find the less color the better. So I usually prefer to keep the lips closer to the flesh colors I am using. In my underpainting, the light part of the lips (in this case most of the lower lip) would start out with the same color as my light flesh color. The lips in shadow would be the shadow color I am using for flesh in shadow. Once I have the light and shadow patterns worked out, I might add a touch of reddish color to the lips. If they get too red, I might try to add some of the same shadow and light flesh colors back in over the top. In fact, I did that with your ref:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2009/82335-lips-referencedak2.jpg

In photoshop, I just lightly glazed a bit of the shadow flesh color (top) over the top lip, and darker areas of the lower lip, and glazed some of the lighter flesh color (bottom) over the bottom lip. It neutralized the red nicely, but I know it was easier to do in photoshop than on a real painting!

This is probably a longer, more confusing answer than you were looking for, but I will freely admit that the color of the lips always gives me trouble! Maybe someone else in the class will help both of us!

Don

[Colorix]

Colleen, love how you 'teased' him out of the dark paper!

Joelle, Don: Excellent answer from Don. I have and observation and a comment to add. Looking at the lips, I'd say that the only part that comes close to real red is the division line of the lips in the middle of the mouth, and it is probably still a warm brownish colour. Lips look red because then contrast with the yellower or pinker and more opaque skin around them. The swatches also show clearly the play of warm and cool. The patch from the upfacing plane of the lower lip is a peachy brown, while the patch taken from the right of the lower lip is definitely a cool grayed pink. I have just the right colour in a stick, and I think it was a madder of some kind, definitely on the cool side of red, that is, with a lot of blue in it (third patch on the right). This shift between cooler and warmer is what creates volume.


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2009/82335-lips-referencedak.jpg

I use fleshtones first, and then put some roses and browns on top of that, for the lips. As Don recommends, one can layer or blend in greens and blues (and purples) to push the red colour towards brown and grey. I've found that different pastels work more or less well. For example, Unisons have such an opaqueness and covering power that it is tricky to 'glaze' with them. But Rembrands and ArtSpectrums work great! They are also way more transparent, so the effect is more like actual glazing.

Don, trust yourself, you certainly have a good sense for colour!

Charlie

[BANfear]

Don and Charlie, thank you both so much for your help! :) You have both tremendously helped me, trust me.:heart:


I am promising myself that I WILL finish this painting by tonight. And I will be able to show pictures tomorrow since my parents are coming back with the camera tonight.

I will finish this painting!

[DAK723]

Charlie - so glad you have observed and commented as well!

For anyone wanting to learn more about color, check out Charlie's ESP Classroom - Still life, the Colourful Way, in the same forum as this one. It is no longer a sticky, but is usually still on the first page. I followed along (too afraid to post :eek:) for the first 20 pages or so - then started my own classroom and haven't had a chance to do more than browse occasionally since then. I feel very lucky that Charlie has been taking part in this class as her knowledge of color (and ability to teach the information) has enhanced this class beyond my fundamentally tonal approach!

Joelle, I'm glad my answers were of some help! Looking forward to seeing the painting!

Don

[BANfear]

I did it!!! :)

428698

The reference picture used: http://wetcanvas.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=428699&stc=1&d=1235322565

Once again, I drew this based on and inspired by the picture. However I did try to make it appear as close to the picture as possible, but there were some changes I purposely made.


I am not completely satisfied with it though, as always. There's something awkward about it... I can't figure out with it is. I love the left side of the face though. It's just the right side... the right eye, there's something wrong with it.

Anyway, any comments welcome! I want to make this painting as beautiful as possible.


-Joelle

[winecountry]

Charlie, did you get some names mixed up? maybe you meant Terri:D re the dark issue.

[DAK723]

Joelle, Very nicely done! Thank you for posting.

For some reason, the link you provided gives me an error message. I know that they have been having occasional problems with the reference library, so that may be it. If you could post the reference pic, that would be great!

Without comparing the painting to the reference, I can't say much, but the right eye (his left) is tilted downward (from inside corner to out) while the other eye seems tilted upward. I would say the majority of people have eyes that are pretty straight across, or tilt upward, so that would be the first thing I would look at.

I rotated that eye slightly in photoshop. I kept the outside corner location and lowered the inside corner. Does that help?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2009/82335-finished_portrait%21dak.jpg


By the way, the nose is very well done and the lips are fantastic! When seen at this type of angle, the far side of the lips can be very difficult to get right. You did, and the colors and values are great!

Don


I did it!!! :)

428698

The reference picture used: http://wetcanvas.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=428699&stc=1&d=1235322565

Once again, I drew this based on and inspired by the picture. However I did try to make it appear as close to the picture as possible, but there were some changes I purposely made.


I am not completely satisfied with it though, as always. There's something awkward about it... I can't figure out with it is. I love the left side of the face though. It's just the right side... the right eye, there's something wrong with it.

Anyway, any comments welcome! I want to make this painting as beautiful as possible.


-Joelle

[BANfear]

Thank you so much for your reply and your time! :) It is absolutely appreciated.

Aaah, yes! The eye looks much better that way. Hmm, there's no way to fix it without erasing the whole eye, is there?

Oh, photoshop, photoshop, if only you could permanently do the changes for us... :o


Also, is my background okay? This was my first complete portrait in pastels, so I'm not used to adding a background like that.

Looking at the reference picture, I just realized that my drawing is very.. pale. Almost lacking life... vibrancy. How could I fix this? (unless it looks fine the way it is)

but here is the reference picture:

[DAK723]

Thank you so much for your reply and your time! :) It is absolutely appreciated.

Aaah, yes! The eye looks much better that way. Hmm, there's no way to fix it without erasing the whole eye, is there?

Oh, photoshop, photoshop, if only you could permanently do the changes for us... :o


Yes, photoshop definitely spoils us! You will have to redo the eye, but depending on the paper, you may be able to paint over the eye and cover what is underneath without erasing. This way you can do it piece by piece, which might make it easier.

Also, is my background okay? This was my first complete portrait in pastels, so I'm not used to adding a background like that.

Looking at the reference picture, I just realized that my drawing is very.. pale. Almost lacking life... vibrancy. How could I fix this? (unless it looks fine the way it is)

The background is fine (the next lesson is on backgrounds, by the way). I think when you are zoomed in fairly close to the face (as opposed to a portrait from the waist up, for example) then any kind of objects in the background might be a distraction. A plain background with a gradation in value is one of the most popular to use.

I think the fact that you have lightened the background as it nears the face is very good also. It helps minimize the effect of the fairly pale skin. You could try to make the darker values a bit darker which would allow you to make the lighter areas a bit less pale - but since the entire portrait is consistent in its value scheme - I wouldn't change it on this one. It might be something you try to do on the next one!

Don

[Colorix]

Charlie, did you get some names mixed up? maybe you meant Terri:D re the dark issue.

Ack! Sorry, yes I meant Terri! :o (Typing quickly and confusing names... so sorry!)

Charlie

[ElsieH]

:wave:

OH, Don! What a treasure chest of learning! Thank you so much for all the work and effort to put this together!
The very clear way you have of explaining and illustrating the lessons is fantastic! I'm learning SO MUCH!
:thumbsup:

[terri66]

No worries,Charlie. I was working on dark blue suede board courtesy of the scrap pile of my local framer, she rocks.
Joelle, good job on the portrait. I am glad you are finding time to do something you enjoy.
T,His eye on your reference is big time challenging. Well done on taking it on.
Nancy, good job on the drawing. Are your new pastels in yet, so you get too play with colour too?
Great job, Don.

[rugman]

Hi Don. I've been following your thread and its great! This is the first time I've chimed in. I remember you asking what techniques people use for measuring- so I thought I would share what I do. Its great for beginners like myself.

I use the grid method, which I think you described earlier. I created a grid transparency by drawing grids on paper and then taking that to Kinkos to have a transparency made out of it. You can then lay this over a reference photo and move it around to a ideal place. I use a grid of squares of 1 inch which is easy to scale up or down depending on how large your painting will be. Drafting scale (ruler) works well for this.

I agree with you that you should use more visualizing and using plum lines and such to improve our skills. My first few portraits I tried this and I could never get anything to look right and would become very frustrated- taking all the fun out painting! The grid method is kinda cheating I guess but the more I use it, the less I need it. This is because my skills have improved and now I use it to just mark the main reference points that you talk about. Like you've stated, the lines get covered up and remeasuring and checking may be needed again. But as a beginner, it sure saves a lot of time and frustration.

Thanks for all the great info. The photo shows a painting I'm working on for the monthly challenge in the southwestern/western forum that may be helpful for some people.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2009/81164-101_2575.JPG

[DAK723]

:wave:

OH, Don! What a treasure chest of learning! Thank you so much for all the work and effort to put this together!
The very clear way you have of explaining and illustrating the lessons is fantastic! I'm learning SO MUCH!
:thumbsup:

Thank you so much for the nice comments!

Don

[DAK723]

Hi Don. I've been following your thread and its great! This is the first time I've chimed in. I remember you asking what techniques people use for measuring- so I thought I would share what I do. Its great for beginners like myself.

I use the grid method, which I think you described earlier. I created a grid transparency by drawing grids on paper and then taking that to Kinkos to have a transparency made out of it. You can then lay this over a reference photo and move it around to a ideal place. I use a grid of squares of 1 inch which is easy to scale up or down depending on how large your painting will be. Drafting scale (ruler) works well for this.

I agree with you that you should use more visualizing and using plum lines and such to improve our skills. My first few portraits I tried this and I could never get anything to look right and would become very frustrated- taking all the fun out painting! The grid method is kinda cheating I guess but the more I use it, the less I need it. This is because my skills have improved and now I use it to just mark the main reference points that you talk about. Like you've stated, the lines get covered up and remeasuring and checking may be needed again. But as a beginner, it sure saves a lot of time and frustration.

Thanks for all the great info. The photo shows a painting I'm working on for the monthly challenge in the southwestern/western forum that may be helpful for some people.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2009/81164-101_2575.JPG

A transparent grid is a great idea! (I wish I had thought of it myself!) Definitely a time-saver!

Especially useful if you are using a one-of-a-kind reference photo that you don't want to mark on.

Thanks for the idea and the visual!

Don

[gingersnap]

THIS IS 4 HOURS IN AND I FEEL I HAVE OVER WORKED IT. I HAVE 2 LITTLE ONES SO I PICK AT IT AT NIGHT. I HAD TO STOP.

I WAS TOLD I DIDN'T HAVE THE PATIENCE FOR PORTRAITS BY A TEACHER. I DROPPED PASTELS SOON AFTER. PEOPLE DRAWING IS MY INTEREST. 5 YEARS LATER I FIND THIS THREAD. I HAVE BEEN ON THIS SITE FOR A WHILE, NEVER POSTED UNTIL TODAY. THANK YOU FOR STARTING THESE LESSONS!!!!

I TRIED TO USE THE BLOCK IN A SQUARE. I FIND THE SHAPES THEN TRYING TO MATCH THE ANGLES A BIT EASIER. THOUGH YOU MAY DISAGREE AFTER SEEING THE IMAGE. IT WAS A CONTINUAL REWORK.
THIS WAS A HARD ONE. I DO LIKE THE GLASSES..... ANY INSIGHT IS HELPFUL. I WANT TO GET BETTER. THERE IS SOME LOVELY WORK IN THIS FORUM... INSPIRING!!!:) http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/26-Feb-2009/104994-DSC_0742.JPG

PS: I CAN'T GET AT MY ART SUPPLIES DUE TO A RENA SO THIS IS A FEW CONTE STICKS FROM A PENCIL SET!!

[DAK723]

Shelley,

This is very nicely done! It has a certain freshness which makes it hard to believe you worked on it for 4 hours! The values are nice and there is a real solid feel to the face and head. And yes, the glasses are great! This is very nicely done!

Thank you so much for the compliments and I am glad that you have enjoyed the class and that it has inspired you to start drawing portraits again! This teacher will not tell you (or anyone) that they can not do it!

We all look forward to more of your work! (and working in conte is fine - I used to love using conte, but haven't used it in a while. I may just get out a few conte sticks for my next painting!)

Don



THIS IS 4 HOURS IN AND I FEEL I HAVE OVER WORKED IT. I HAVE 2 LITTLE ONES SO I PICK AT IT AT NIGHT. I HAD TO STOP.

I WAS TOLD I DIDN'T HAVE THE PATIENCE FOR PORTRAITS BY A TEACHER. I DROPPED PASTELS SOON AFTER. PEOPLE DRAWING IS MY INTEREST. 5 YEARS LATER I FIND THIS THREAD. I HAVE BEEN ON THIS SITE FOR A WHILE, NEVER POSTED UNTIL TODAY. THANK YOU FOR STARTING THESE LESSONS!!!!

I TRIED TO USE THE BLOCK IN A SQUARE. I FIND THE SHAPES THEN TRYING TO MATCH THE ANGLES A BIT EASIER. THOUGH YOU MAY DISAGREE AFTER SEEING THE IMAGE. IT WAS A CONTINUAL REWORK.
THIS WAS A HARD ONE. I DO LIKE THE GLASSES..... ANY INSIGHT IS HELPFUL. I WANT TO GET BETTER. THERE IS SOME LOVELY WORK IN THIS FORUM... INSPIRING!!!:) http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/26-Feb-2009/104994-DSC_0742.JPG

PS: I CAN'T GET AT MY ART SUPPLIES DUE TO A RENA SO THIS IS A FEW CONTE STICKS FROM A PENCIL SET!!

[NancyS.]

Hi Don and everyone, I too have been enjoying this thread immensely and learning a lot.

Gingersnap, nice portrait! Whoever told you you shouldn't do portraits didn't know what he was talking about!

I got my new set of pastels and have been playing around with them. Now I know what you all mean when you talk about the dust! What a mess! But so worth it, I love them already.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/26-Feb-2009/29707-baby.JPG

Nancy

[NancyS.]

Woops! I forgot to say C & C welcome on the portrait of the baby. Have at it! I'm sure I'm off somewhere in the measuring. :)

Nancy

[DAK723]

Woops! I forgot to say C & C welcome on the portrait of the baby. Have at it! I'm sure I'm off somewhere in the measuring. :)

Nancy
Hi Nancy! Well, you mentioned the measuring, so I had to check!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/26-Feb-2009/82335-29707-babydak.JPG

It looks to me as if the distance between the eyes and bottom of the nose is a bit short. Also from mouth to chin, a bit big. So lowering the nose and mouth just a touch would put it in better proportion, measuring wise - but I think you can see it is pretty minor. The overall shape of the head looks good!

But quite frankly, I wouldn't touch a thing. This is beautiful! I love the softness and the colors. If anything - even though I don't see it in the photo, I might try to just give a little touch of lighter value in the inside corner of the left eye (our left), just to make the pupil rounder and the same size as the right eye. That corner of the eye is probably in shadow, so it is dark in the photo. In reality, if it doesn't bother you at all, then leave it. It is so minor!

Again, I love this! It reminds me of a Renoir, with the soft edges and the colors. I am very impressed!

Don

[gingersnap]

nancy!!

i am so jealous. i wish i had my pastels!! the colors are beautiful. i love the background too! great job!! what kind of pastels did you end up choosing?

[NancyS.]

nancy!!

i am so jealous. i wish i had my pastels!! the colors are beautiful. i love the background too! great job!! what kind of pastels did you end up choosing?

Gingersnap, I bought a set of 80 Sennelier half sticks. I'm not sure I would get those again, though. Some of the sticks I love, but some are so soft they crumbled into tiny pieces before they even arrived (ASW is replacing them because so many arrived broken), and others are much harder and I find I don't like the consistency of those as much. The colors are nice though! I also ordered a small sampler set from fineartstore.com. Of the ones that came in that set, I like the Girault the best and Great American next. I ordered some Girault portrait colors to try out. I think I am hopelessly addicted to pastels! :)

[NancyS.]

Don, thanks for your great comments! I see what you mean about the distance from nose to mouth, and mouth to chin, and especially about adding a little dot of lighter color to the inside corner of the left eye. I'll definitely fix the eye and see if I can minimize a few of the other things without having to erase and redo too much.

I love doing portraits and this class is a valuable learning experience. Thank you so much!

Nancy

[DAK723]

Tomorrow - March 1st - Lesson 4, Backgrounds and Depth will be posted!

It will be the final lesson that deals with portraits before we move on to the figure.

This lesson will feature many examples from some of the great artists of the past and we will study and observe how they dealt with backgrounds of all kinds, as well as creating depth in a portrait.

Feel free, of course, to continue with exercises and portraits from lessons 1 through 3! Work at your own pace!

Don

[BANfear]

Yay! I'm very excited for the new lesson!


I tried to fix the eye without erasing too much. Though it could look even nicer, I think it already looks better.

Instead of taking a picture this time, I scanned it. We can see much better this way.

[kadon]

Yes Don....looking forward to next lesson very much. Kathy

[gingersnap]

tried last night for over an hour to measure and try a new portrait. it just didn't work. scrapped everything. really seem to be struggling with the measuring. is anyone else finding this difficult??? i am sure with practice it will come. perhaps i need to be inspired by a new subject... i will reread the lesson tonight and go through some reference photos. very much looking forward to tomorrow's lesson. thanks again don for all your hard work!!

[DAK723]

I just said "very nice" in the gallery thread, so I will repeat myself here - Very nice!

Don

Yay! I'm very excited for the new lesson!


I tried to fix the eye without erasing too much. Though it could look even nicer, I think it already looks better.

Instead of taking a picture this time, I scanned it. We can see much better this way.

[DAK723]

tried last night for over an hour to measure and try a new portrait. it just didn't work. scrapped everything. really seem to be struggling with the measuring. is anyone else finding this difficult??? i am sure with practice it will come. perhaps i need to be inspired by a new subject... i will reread the lesson tonight and go through some reference photos. very much looking forward to tomorrow's lesson. thanks again don for all your hard work!!

There is a lot in the measuring lesson - lots of different ways to measure and one can measure at different times while working. Only use as much or as little of the information as you want! If I recall, you said you felt most comfortable in your last portrait just using the value shapes and judging angles. Do what's comfortable and maybe try some of the other ideas as you practice. It's not a necessity to measure - but there are times it will help keep you on the right track!

Don

[DAK723]

As we get ready to start lesson 4 - you may have noticed that the first three lessons are no longer "sticky". For newcomers, the "sticky" threads always stay at the top of page 1 in the forum. So, now that they are no longer sticky, you may have to search for them down further on the page, or go to page 2 (or beyond). But I will post links to the earlier lesson right at the start of the next lesson, so they will be easy to find!

Don

[gvmillett]

This is a terrific resource - excellent teacher and classmates! A question about the beautiful baby painting, Colleen... How did you make the fine baby hair? I have a lot of trouble making such fine, precise lines. I have some pastel pencils, but I think even they would be too thick. After I digest the measurement information, I may readjust the "smiling girl" painting I have been working on and post it.
Marilee

[winecountry]

Hi and welcome to the class,
to get the baby hair, I sharpened my pastel pencil on a sanding sponge,or use very fine sand paper, into a wedge shape, lightly dragged 3 different colors over the sanded surface, took a fine color shaper ad softened the edges in places so it wasn't too hard and even, then very lightly drew very thin highlights in a few places and softened those with the clay shaper( harder than the color shaper.)

[kadon]

LOVE your painting Nancy.

I've made a start on the same one that Maw T has done. Finished an attempted oil painting of it...now trying a pastel. Hope to post something tomorrow.

Kathy

[DAK723]

This is a terrific resource - excellent teacher and classmates! A question about the beautiful baby painting, Colleen... How did you make the fine baby hair? I have a lot of trouble making such fine, precise lines. I have some pastel pencils, but I think even they would be too thick. After I digest the measurement information, I may readjust the "smiling girl" painting I have been working on and post it.
Marilee

Hi Marilee, Welcome to the class! I'm glad you have found it informative. We look forward to seeing your work!

Don

[kadon]

Hi and welcome to the class,
to get the baby hair, I sharpened my pastel pencil on a sanding sponge,or use very fine sand paper, into a wedge shape, lightly dragged 3 different colors over the sanded surface, took a fine color shaper ad softened the edges in places so it wasn't too hard and even, then very lightly drew very thin highlights in a few places and softened those with the clay shaper( harder than the color shaper.)

Coleen...what is a colour shaper? Kathy

[winecountry]

re color shapers
they are paintbrush handle tools with hard to soft rubber tip in various shapes, great for manipulating pastel
Online you usually have to buy in lots of 6, try to find them one off. I prefer the firm and the hard ones used for clay. Do a search in Jerrysartarama.com for color shaper to see them.


On with Sargent, I now own one portrait book in the series (large format 3 vol.) I have the other 2 on order from my library. There is a lot to learn from his work, more than just one time reading can give.

He has so many ways to do his work, he didn't really use a "formula" approach, so there is quite a range in bg. Here's one that I found unusual. I normally try never to do this, ie let the strokes in the bg follow the subject shape. Notice he still does not create a "halo" with unbroken light all around the head, it's still broken into dark and light sides.

I'm posting his with a close up, hope you can see the color is off in the scan, and it shows up more in RL. also my pastels are not adequate to reproduce the colors. BTW Sargent considered pastels inadequate for portrait work, as they were insufficent in his opinion to the task. He occasionally did sketches with them but mostly did even those in oil or watercolor,

[gvmillett]

Dear Colleen:
Thanks for the information. I do have a couple of the softer tipped color shapers but it seems I often take off pastel unintentionally rather than push it where I want it. I'll try the harder tipped ones and get some sandpaper for my pencils. I think the baby picture is simply fabulous! As are many, many of the others I've seen in this class. Thanks Don for your patient explanations. I've have gone through the whole of the postings in about a week so I'll need to time to absorb the great instruction. Later, everyone.
Marilee

[kadon]

Thank you Colleen for info re colour shapers. Is it possible to give demo? Or give a link to one? Would much appreciate it. Kathy

[DAK723]

I know this is confusing, but we have 4 different threads for this class - this one is class 3 - measuring. Since Colleen's latest post is primarily about backgrounds, and is a continuation of her Sargent background studies that she has been posting in class 4 - backgrounds and depth, I am going to copy her post to that thread. So, to try to keep things organized, please reply to her post in the class 4 post, which is a "sticky" thread, and can be found here:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=549886

Thanks!

Don

[Dana Design]

Very useful info! Thank you very much, Don!