|
Well, Mara, to tell you the truth I don't think I would have agreed to paint this unless my arm were twisted by a VERY good friend or perhaps a high sum of money and a lot of begging. I can see it is a problematic situation. There are some artists who love painting this kind of flat light. (You could study Jeremy Lipking's figures in landscapes.) The trick is not to vary the values or exaggerate the contrast too much. You are right to keep the colors warm.
The question of whether this is a portrait or a landscape is purely academic. It's more a question of where the focal point lies. Without the figures, your eye would follow the water into the distance, but the figures introduce a conflict. There is also the problem of scale. The figures, as small as they are, look too big for where they are standing. You might be able to get away with it, though.
Are you aiming for a likeness? This is important, even in small scale figures. The shapes have to be correct. I would pay more attention especially to the man's face, around his mouth area.
I've tweaked the photo in Photoshop because it looks too washed out and purple to me. The level of detail in the distance could be lowered a lot. There are a lot of hard edges in the rocks and distant tree trunks that need to be toned down. I suggest reworking the landscape in terms of color, value, and edges. Working with a larger brush makes a big difference.
|