Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Janet Kimantas
Thanks for your support, all. I do wonder, Linda, about the whole "photorealism" aspect. I'm not sure that that's even what I'm after. Certainly realism, but isn't that different from photorealism? I'm probably just revealing my ignorance here, but I thought they were two different approaches.
Janet
|
I should rewrite that paragraph in my last post; I don't think you're a "photorealist", you're more like a painterly romantic realist who works from photos, at least in this painting. (Or something like that.) I think a lot of the realism styles overlap, depending on the artist.
I think it takes years and years of practise to catch one's own drawing mistakes. You can see this when you attend a workshop: the person next to you is way off, and why can't he spot that? Meanwhile that person is looking over at your own painting and thnking the same thing about you.
(By the way, I know some painters who get "close enough" but never actually nail a likeness, and they get away with it.) Also, you can be off, and know you're off, but not know exactly where you're off. Another set of eyes really helps sometimes. The template can be a simple checking device when you don't have anybody else to ask at the moment.
If you're not trying for an exact likeness I suppose there is more wiggle room, but it takes very little error to distort facial features.
Your painting is beautiful however it's labelled.
Sorry for rambling. I'm working on a painting right now and it took me three days to figure out I had the nose septum too narrow.
Brenda, I really lke that Dickens painting! Thanks for posting.
Threaded Mode
