Bracken

Leopoldo Benavidez · 03-03-2002, 11:50 PM

I promised a portrait of my son Bracken. Please jump in and critique. Thanks.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/leo97017/brackfini.jpg
A oil portrait of my son Bracken on a 14x18 panel.

Steven Sweeney · 03-04-2002, 02:07 AM

I find the drawing aspects to be very nicely rendered -- things look proportional, in right relation. Surely anyone familiar with your son would see the piece and instantly recognize it as an accurate depiction.

As with the portrait of Ryan, I would again suggest more enrichment of the flesh tones, both in hue and temperature. If you squint down (go ahead, no one's watching) and look at this piece, you'll see that only one relatively small, roughly ovoid shape on the face, on the viewer's right, has any colour. The entire remainder of the face is a flat (albeit bright), somewhat chalky, quite uniform white, which retains its uniformity even as the planes of the face turn away from the light. That not only bleeds the life out of the human subject and complicates the illusion of modeling, but it fights against the exciting possibility of a temperature contrast between the flesh tones and the cool garment and background.

A couple more bits on light -- I'm not sure where all that bright light on the underside of the jawline (aft the goatee) is coming from, and I would increase (that is, lighten) the value of that dark circular shape in the middle of the ear (or else darken the value of the rest of the ear, which after all, is arguably on the "shadow" side of the figure.) Finally, the catchlights in the eyes are well-placed but too large, I think. Those, coupled with the very light iris segments opposite, are creating a kind of "dazed" look.

As you already know, I'm impressed with your work. I commend you your diligence in capturing your sons' likenesses in these forms -- the pieces will doubtless be heirlooms.

Best wishes,
Steven

Leopoldo Benavidez · 03-04-2002, 09:47 AM

Thanks Steven for jumping in! All good points. I believe the problems you point out come from following a photo too closely. I'll look at the washed out chauky areas again and especially the catch lights in the eyes. I had one other critique that pointed out the same bright high lights in the eyes! Hummmmmmmmmmm........ I value your comments and others! One problem is, I noticed that the digital image washes out and accentuates color adversely when I photograph under indoor lighting(full spectrum flourescents). Outdoor lighting next time. Thanks......L

http://www.webspawner.com/users/leo97017/brackeyes.jpg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Dowbyhuz · 03-04-2002, 12:38 PM

What a fresh, arresting treatment, Leopoldo!

I like the catch-lights, they add to the luminosity. I would tint the "white" areas to a more natural color as Steven pointed out, but even without, I like this A LOT!

Lon Haverly · 03-04-2002, 02:43 PM

I like the great sketchy technique and the detail where necessary. My only criticism is not in the flesh tones. I think they are great. It is the shirt. There seems to be a lack of shadow on the right side, as there is on the face. It is a bit flat. The folds have shadow, but would a bit of shadow in the lighter blue on the right side give it more dimension?

Great job on a difficult task of painting someone you love.

Leopoldo Benavidez · 03-04-2002, 07:32 PM

Thanks David and Lon!

I am posting the original picture. After looking again, the shirt is indeed darker on the shadow side. Good point! What do you guys think about the background? I like it. My wife doesn't....L
Dark Shirt

http://www.webspawner.com/users/leo97017/brackred.jpg

Steven Sweeney · 03-04-2002, 08:17 PM

I hadn't seen the close-up and reference photo when I first waded in, but they confirm a feeling that I had earlier, that the pupils weren't the same size or in quite the same orientation, and I think that's in part what was creating what I referred to as the "dazed" look. (In my own experience, I get that look when the shot of tequila is about halfway down and just before I bite the lime wedge.) I think what's happened is that the bright, large catchlight in the eye on our left is [in the reference photo] "hiding" part of that pupil and making it look smaller than it really is. Likely, in fact, the bright light has constricted both pupils way down. You might play with enlarging them a tad and see if it's still "Bracken". (I like to hold up a being a acetate or other clear plastic to the image and use a Sharpie to "test" such notions. In this case, I really do see quite a difference with the pupils enlarged a bit and the catchlights a bit smaller (retaining the portion that's higher in the eye) and slightly reduced in intensity and containing just a touch of the color complementary to the yellow-green irises.)

I can see in the photo where the reflected light under the chin is coming from, but I think it's keyed up a little too high in the painting. (Harley Brown calls this "reflected-light-itis".)

Background. I have competing demons working in me (fussbudget and free spirit) on this, especially as I work through some of Richard Schmid's presentations. I thought the background here was notable but not objectionable when I first saw the piece. In a way, its informality and looseness mirrored the "attitude" I saw in the subject, a casually-clothed, goateed fellow, hair swept straight back. In another context I might not have been as comfortable with it. I'd only add that you want to be sure that the background is driven by the design of the overall piece, and not just by what happened to show up in the reference photograph.

By the way, since you've successfully lured me into my 100th post on SOG, an appropriate tribute is being prepared for you by the Committee on Standards to Preserve Bandwidth and Disk Space.

Cheers,
Steven

Chris Saper · 03-04-2002, 09:29 PM

Dear Leopoldo,

I actually love the background, and wouldn't think of changing it. It adds a sense of freshness and energy that I think works as a foil to the stillness of the pose.

After having benefit of the source photo, I see how very cool your light source is, and I feel that you have captured the warmth of shadows in a strong fashion. If you were to go back into this painting and add color to the light areas, you will be on the right track to keep whatever hues you use cooler in temperature than those in shadow. In the areas of shaved beard, the skin is usually cooled with blues or greens...here you have employed greens, to differentiate the beard, while still maintaining the temperature differential between light and shadow. The only change I might make is the color and temperature of the dark shadow in the corner of the near eye...it seems devoid of color, and as it is in shadow, it should likely read as warm, relative to the light areas. Because photos will be showing values darker than they would be in life, it's something to remember...and you can let the far edges of this shadow within a shadow also support this.

I think this is fresh and painterly...and a successful piece. I have enjoyed seeing all the work you have posted.

Best wishes, Chris

Leopoldo Benavidez · 03-04-2002, 11:13 PM

Steven and Chris all of your crits have helped tremendously. I will certainly keep these in mind when I go back and tickle the portrait some more. Again I really value the lending of your eyes.

Chris I revisisted your web site again and you have really refined your skills with your wonderful portraits. I value all critiques, but even more so when the person critiquing is as accomplished as yourself. Thanks all. L