Portrait Artist Forum

Portrait Artist Forum (http://portraitartistforum.com/index.php)
-   Pastel Critiques (http://portraitartistforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=54)
-   -   Claudia's portrait sadly neglected (http://portraitartistforum.com/showthread.php?t=3344)

Rachel Mauger 10-05-2003 09:08 PM

Claudia's portrait sadly neglected
 
1 Attachment(s)
I put this portrait of my daughter aside two+ years ago. I have never been able to finish it. I suppose without a client breathing down my neck there has been little motivation to see my way clear through the problems.

I don't know where to start, but I do want to finish it. The colour is a little more diffused in the original, but that is the least of its problems.

I am convinvced it is redeemable but would like some direction as to how and where.

Thanks

(Pastel on watercolour paper,
approx. 900 x 1200 cm)

Cynthia Daniel 10-06-2003 02:15 PM

As well as the overview of the painting, a closeup would help other members to evaluate the situation. It also appears from the image you posted that your jpg compression is too high, which renders less clarity.

Michele Rushworth 10-06-2003 10:34 PM

Rachel, could you also post your reference photo?

I'm not sure I understand your dimensions. Could you let us know in centimeters or inches what the size is? Thanks!

Rachel Mauger 10-07-2003 03:33 AM

I had meant to post a while ago but since then have moved and had a baby. All my detail and reference photos are missing. I will print out fresh versions and post the requested images.

I suddenly got the nerve to post and went ahead before I chickened out like I had so many times before. I didn't stop to think about the fact that without all the right info no one was going to be able to suggest much.

To answer the question about dimensions:
1.2m x 90cm.

I guess one improves with each post.

Rachel Mauger 10-07-2003 04:21 AM

Reference photo
 
1 Attachment(s)
This is the reference photo. I took hundreds and just kept clicking away 'til the right ones came along. I didn't choose the pose or the clothes. I put the chair next to the window for light and Claudia grabbed a book and sat up on the chair to 'read'. I photographed as she 'read'.

She was very used to being photographed so was quite relaxed and natural in front of the camera.

Rachel Mauger 10-07-2003 05:17 AM

Detail
 
This is not the best quality but the best I could muster on short notice.
As I said next time I post I will be ready with everything the first time round. Thankyou for your patience.

Michele Rushworth 10-07-2003 11:44 AM

My first thought is it's too bad her face is so obscured by the pacifier, book, hand etc.

The book seems out of perspective. It looks as if the upper right corner is out too far.

Can you post detail photos of her face (reference and photo) or were those among the things that got misplaced?

Steven Sweeney 10-08-2003 08:35 AM

G

Steven Sweeney 10-08-2003 09:52 AM

Quote:

I had meant to post a while ago but since then have moved and had a baby.
Those are, incidentally, much better excuses -- at least one of them -- than I can muster for not getting work done.

Linda Brandon 10-08-2003 10:57 AM

Hi Rachel,

As always, Steven has made several excellent and perceptive comments. I also like the triangular composition very much. Just wanted to add that your daughter's foot looks distorted by the photograph, i.e. too large compared to what is happening in "real life". You were probably too close to the chair when you took the photo. If you physically measure her foot against, say, her hand, you'll get a better idea about correcting the size of the foot. Even though she's older now she should still have the same porportions. (I think so; okay, so I'm not sure about this.)

I also wanted to add that an Aussie friend brought me a bag of Darrell Lea Soft Licorice over the weekend. I see I've just eaten 500g of a product containing "treacle", just what is that, really?

Linda Brandon 10-08-2003 04:00 PM

Note to Mike McCarty: I didn't eat the WHOLE bag, I may have shared. A little. NO ill effects.

Treacle and molasses are listed as seperate ingredients. On second thought, I don't really want to know what treacle is.

By the way, I much prefer this Australian "liquorice" to its Dutch counterpart (sorry, Peter J. and Scott B.).

http://www.dlea.com.au/liquorice.asp

Mike McCarty 10-08-2003 06:36 PM

Quote:

I also wanted to add that an Aussie friend brought me a bag of Darrell Lea Soft Licorice over the weekend. I see I've just eaten 500g of a product containing "treacle", just what is that, really?
Linda,

Your curiosity is well placed, those clever Aussies have been dumping their "licorice" on unsuspecting Americans for years. The word "licorice" in Australian of course means "small rodent." The prefix "lico" from the Latin "licum" and the suffix "rice" from the Chinese "mice."

The "treacle" is a small appendage from the licorice.

I hope this sheds some light.

Steven Sweeney 10-08-2003 07:14 PM

Quote:

The "treacle" is a small appendage from the licorice.
If you ever get the chance to enjoy a formal 12-course Chinese dinner, Mike, you'll discover that the appendage isn't nearly as small as you'd hoped. (And they don't give you a knife.)

Mike McCarty 10-08-2003 08:49 PM

Right you are Steven.

This gives further evidence that we now live in a global economy. Once the treacle was reviled by all but a few societies, but now it can be enjoyed by people all over the world.

Even laced with molasses, I for one will be slow to come to this treacle.

Michele Rushworth 10-10-2003 10:44 AM

Especially in January.

Steven Sweeney 10-12-2003 06:02 PM

Hi Rachel,

Tried to email, but we must not have the current address. I hope our chattiness in the course of discussing your pastel didn

Mike McCarty 10-13-2003 10:47 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Rachel,

I too apologize for getting too silly in the middle of your serious work (which I like). Rarely does Linda open the door sooo wide, I just couldn't help myself. When things roll off the table around here you can often find me at the core.

I too have been to your beautiful city.

Rachel Mauger 10-13-2003 10:07 PM

Try again
 
My computer is doing what all computers do and playing up!

I did post a response but something obviously happened. Unfortunately there are lot of places for bytes to go missing in cyberspace.

First of all, thank you everyone and please feel free to chat, I love this kind of informal banter.
I was in Sydney when I joined up, but as I mentioned moved, the move was to Melbourne and the baby came 8 weeks later. Needless to say it has been a busy couple of years!

I have felt rather isolated so enjoy this Forum on both levels.

Thank you for your insightful comments and I definitely intend to put your well thought out advice to work. I have just signed up for a class and we get free choice every third week so I think I will use the time to attack this piece.

I have cast aside all commitments of late to work on a birthday present for my husband's grandmother of her late husband. Stay tuned, I should be posting it shortly.

I worked out that it is the first full portrait painting I have attempted in over two years. Boy am I rusty!

There are a few trouble spots but I will reveal all in due time!

Re: the licorice. Tell your friend that next time to forget the licore and bring you some real Australian delicacies such as Tim Tams, and anything that is Cadbury chocolate! No Treacle but better than any licore you will ever taste. If you are keen on the licore though, there are 'Bullets' - 2cm of licore dipped in chocolate.

Thanks all.

Steven Sweeney 10-14-2003 06:48 AM

I can confirm the desirability of Tim Tams. Fellow employees of my wife know to always bring her two packages of Tim Tams whenever they come to the U.S. There were in fact some in our freezer until perhaps a few days ago. Alas, I've just checked, and I was too slow.

I confess to having forgotten all about the word "licore". In my defense, we always had U.S. visitors coming to Australia bring us packages of red Twizzlers. (Though it changed in the late '90s, U.S. brands weren't very popularly marketed in Oz when we arrived earlier.)

Lon Haverly 10-17-2003 01:19 AM

Rachel,

I would have approached this a little differently colorwise. You went brighter in the blues. I would have kept them lower in intensity, allowing the face to exist without having to compete.

The viewer's right eye might be too close to the bridge of the nose, causing the nose to look too long. This is a very critical measurement in a child this age. The shadow there could cause you to be distracted from the positions. The slightest variance here can really create problems.

Perhaps your instincts are correct to leave this off. It is a worthy subject, however. If it were me, I would start over and go cooler temperatures, gleaning from my mistakes on the first worthy effort.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.