What about the hand

Jan Verhulst · 12-27-2006, 11:00 AM

I like to know what you think of the hand. This is from a photo, and the hand had a strange position. I should appreciate any comment on this.

Steven Sweeney · 12-27-2006, 01:01 PM

It is indeed an awkward position, the form not sharply articulated in the original. The dark body shadow and the very dark background in the original permit the edges of that form to be "lost," but you have very substantially lightened those darks and, so, placed upon yourself the difficult task of trying to paint something other than as it appears in the original.

Still, this hand will be a form more suggested by value shapes than by detailed drawing. You should try to accurately copy the value shapes -- not "pretty close" or loosely, but in the same contours, shapes, and value as you see in the original (which is admittedly hard to see in such a small format). Forget that you're painting a "hand." Get the value shapes accurately depicted, and a hand will appear.

Again, don't get "pretty close." Depict this subject as she is, not a generic one. For example, in another area you have let the shadow shape on the neck angle down pretty much straight from the center of the chin, with a sharp edge, all the way to the sternum. In fact, in the original, the contour barely drops below the chin, if at all, before moving markedly to our left, under her jaw line, before descending in a relatively softer edge. That distinction makes all the difference in the world in depicting the form. It is the only reason to be painting light at all.

Such attention needs to also be brought to bear on the hand. You don't need to be thinking, "Now I will place the knuckle." You need to be thinking, "This is exactly the way the light plays out over this part of the form." Get that right, and the knuckle will "miraculously" place itself right where it belongs.

Be careful of the length of the fingers that you can't see very well in the original, and be mindful of their usual tapering in thickness as you extend them.

This seems an apt opportunity to refer you to another recent post on careful observation (Click here.)

Jan Verhulst · 12-29-2006, 04:29 AM

Thanks for your feedback Steven.

Allan Rahbek · 12-29-2006, 08:05 AM

Hi Jan,
At a first glance I think that the hand works fine in the picture. It is there and is finished to a degree that balances with the head. I also like the color and value scheme, it's nice and sun filled.
But, for critic, I think that your drawing is a bit loose. Since the brushwork is so broad and freely applied I should like to have the feeling that the drawing is solid. I don't say that you should draw all details, but that the few, that are chosen, must be in the right places.
Especially the placement of the nose and the shape of the neck. Maybe, if you work on the drawing, you will find that you could take the hand further too.

Jan Verhulst · 12-29-2006, 08:33 AM

Alan,
I understand that the hand is not disturbing you in the whole of the picture (style, degree of elaboration and finishing), but that the relationships between the shapes is not correct, in other words the underlying drawing is not correct. Is this after comparing to the photo, or is it also obvious without seeing the ref pic?
Thanks for your feedback

Allan Rahbek · 12-29-2006, 10:05 AM

Jan,
Yes, I think that the shape of the hand is fine, it don't bother me that the shape of the fingers, in the shadow , is only suggested and not fully drawn. In that way you add to the light effect ( "you can't see what is in the shadow because the light is to bright, effect").

I did not notice your link to the reference at first, but felt that the ridge of the nose looks too wide, the shadow should be more to the right. After reading Stevens comments I found the link and got verification that the placement was off. Then, of cause

I began scrutinizing the whole thing.
I do not want to pick on you but think that you would want to know how it affects me. I feel insecure on how the shape is when the main key's to the understanding is not in the right place.
What I don't see won't confuse me, only what I do see!

Jan Verhulst · 12-29-2006, 10:11 AM

Thanks Allan!

Alexandra Tyng · 12-29-2006, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan Rahbek

What I don't see won't confuse me, only what I do see!

Jan, I think all the advice you've been getting is excellent, so I don't have much to add, but Allan's comment here really sums it up. I would go over the entire portrait, including the hand, correcting all drawing problems. The areas of hands and face are, as you know, simply areas of smaller-scale shapes and edges that need smaller-scale attention, as described above. The first and third fingers of the hand read incorrectly to me, but I think when you reaccess the forms, edges, values, etc., you will correct the way they read. It's a lovely painting and I can't wait to see what you do with it.

Jan Verhulst · 12-29-2006, 01:28 PM

Thanks Alexandra. I let it rest for a while and start again with a fresh eye.

Chris Saper · 02-06-2007, 06:39 PM

Dear Jan,

I do agree with all that has been said regarding drawing and accuracy - and for a commission piece, very critical. I would not choose this hand position for a portrait.

However, I have to say also that I love this little painting the way it is - as a painting. I love the color harmony, your unmistakable style, the composition, and even the weird hand position. I even love those quirky little dark hard- edged strands of hair - they remind me of calligraphy.