PDA

View Full Version : Supermarine Spitfire MH434


lstrvr
03-23-2013, 07:08 PM
Here is one that I have been working on, off and on for a few weeks, but I think it is done now. A simple composition, I wanted to capture the Spitfire in a calm state using colours that are not typically used with WWII aviation paintings.

All C&C is welcome and greatly appreciated. 18"x30" Acrylic on canvas.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Mar-2013/215139-Final_Finished_Copy.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Mar-2013/215139-Final_Finished_Crop_Copy.jpg

Chas McHugh
03-24-2013, 03:11 AM
The application of paint: First Class.
The choice of reference photo: big mistake.

If you draw a line from wingtip to wingtip and continue that line to infinity. ...and then do a similar line from tailplane (elevator hinge) to the equivelent on the other side and continue onto infinity, those two line should converge like a massive arrow head. Yours will diverge. The reason; is because you have used a reference photograph that was taken with a telephoto lens. The lesson to take away is that an awesome photo may not translate to a good painting.

Which is a shame, because background and aircraft have been painted incredibly well. Observers taking it at face value, will love it.

MIG17
03-24-2013, 11:55 AM
The application of paint: First Class.
The choice of reference photo: big mistake.

If you draw a line from wingtip to wingtip and continue that line to infinity. ...and then do a similar line from tailplane (elevator hinge) to the equivelent on the other side and continue onto infinity, those two line should converge like a massive arrow head. Yours will diverge. The reason; is because you have used a reference photograph that was taken with a telephoto lens. The lesson to take away is that an awesome photo may not translate to a good painting.

Which is a shame, because background and aircraft have been painted incredibly well. Observers taking it at face value, will love it.


This is exactly the point I was making with your Seafire painting, (without all the math), the zoom lens flattens out far away objects and is very noticeable in aircraft photos. Another great painting, but it really needs some draftsmanship to really make it pop.

Steve

Gray539
03-24-2013, 12:57 PM
The painting is very well done, Neil. To get away from those lens problems you could use a simple 3D model to correct your drawing. I think more than a few of the guys use 3D in some way or another now to save time.

lstrvr
03-24-2013, 01:06 PM
I see exactly what you are saying, and appreciate you pointing it out! This painting has sat on my studio wall for a few weeks and has not been varnished as there was something wrong with it that I couldn't put my finger on. Now I see the issue so plainly its embarrassing!

We'll see what can be done with fixing versus just starting over, but this painting went relatively fast compared to my Marine and Automotive paintings so it's not the end of the world to scrap it.

Thank you again guys!

Chas McHugh
03-24-2013, 01:54 PM
One of the reasons that I do not have a Spitfire in my portfolio is because giving the beauty of its wing fair representation is no easy task. A quality model in 1 /48 scale is another way of getting a workable reference image. Other gotchas out there include warbirds modified with none standard equipment; for example, the UKs BBMF Lancaster is equiped with Avro Lincoln landing gear and I believe tailfins. Fine, except when using it for reference in a WWII painting. I always draw the lines described in my last post when considering reference photos, and aspire to get approx parallel lines. I have discounted a great many good photos due to photographic distortion, and therefore the camera can and does lie on occasion. My Dakota thread shows 7 cabin windows, but the WWII RAF examples only had 6; thankfully by continued cross referencing, I have spotted it at a manageable stage.

The breath of fresh air here is that you have accepted the criticism in the good grace in which it was delivered, and every reader will learn from it. This gives the forum collective strength, and is something we should see more of IMHO.

vegaskip
03-24-2013, 03:08 PM
I agree with all the above, and thank Chas, for a very clear explanation of the problem.
I think the canopy is wrong as well, the rail seems to be sloping up wards, I feel it should be the same as the exhaust opening.
Certainly can't falt the painting
Thanks for posting
Jim

NeilF92
03-24-2013, 06:16 PM
Have to agree with Jim - the bottom rail of the canopy struck me straight away as being out of line - as Jim says I feel it should run parallel to the top of the engine - at the momemt it looks as though the cockpit is tilted forward . It's a shame because you have made an excellent job of the painting and the letters.