|
Hi Piety,
Nice to see your work again--the composition is so dynamic! The diagonal division of the picture plane between Joanna and the flowers, giving them equal space, is a very striking idea that works well because you have managed to keep the focus on Joanna's very expressive face.
To add to the good critique you have already received, there are two things that bother me. One is the lumpiness of her face. Though I am sure you have been faithful in describing the essential forms and features, I get the feeling that the "ins" and "outs" of the facial landscape have been slightly exaggerated. I think her face would read better and seem more unified and believable if you toned down the value changes on either side of the mouth and on the (our) right cheek. Mischa has mentioned other places. Once you do that, other places might pop out at you. I would also eliminate the bump on the (our) right edge of her cheek.
The second thing is the roses. The only one that is convincingly rose-like (in my opinion) is the one on the middle right. In general, I would expect to see the petals looking thin and waxy, with some crisp edges, but they look very thick and not delineated well. The top right flower has a very thick-looking outer petal. I am not suggesting you paint these roses with meticulous detail, because of course that would take away from the focal point of Joanna's face. (Her nose now has a very effective light on it that does the job.) I am suggesting that you re-paint the flowers. First spend a long time staring at and analyzing roses, then figure out how you can translate that essence into paint, suggesting detail with an economy of strokes. Looking very closely at how other artists do this right before you try it would be helpful. This might tie in with what Kimber is saying about the whole bouquet.
|
Threaded Mode
