Morgan: Child's Portrait - Page 2

Jeff Fuchs · 08-07-2003, 11:23 AM

Wow, Mike. Now I'm even more impressed.

Mike Dodson · 08-09-2003, 02:41 PM

This is the drawing updated with suggestions I've received so far. The highlights on the face aren't showing up as distinctively as the drawing but it does show up enough to indicate strengthening of the focal point. I also added a bit of a highlight on our left side of her dress underneath her arm to address the focal point issue also. I also moved the horizon line which had more of a positive impact on the composition than I thought it would. The mouth was also softened along the lower lip and at the corners. I also faded the branch a bit more also. The reflected water on our right appears lighter than the first drawing but was actually unchanged. There is a bit of glare showing up in that area.

Thanks for all your suggestions. I'd like to hear what you think of the results and if you have any other recommendations.

Scott Bartner · 08-09-2003, 04:22 PM

Dear Mike:

Let me first say that the composition is much stronger.

I printed off your drawing on my old Epson printer to study the overall light-dark pattern. The image that came out of the printer was as usual, faded and washed-out. Mike, it's amazing how stronger the face is when you further soften or even lose some of the (lighted side) shadows.

Let me suggest this: Is it possible for you to make 5 or 10 Xerox copies of this drawing and play around with them? See what you can lose with a light colored pencil or the like, without losing the likeness. I would start with the shadow that runs from her nose to the corner of her mouth on the light side of her face. Lighten that so that it's merely a suggestion. Try getting rid of the lower lip division (on the lighted side) entirely letting the value of the lip blend into the skin around the mouth. Lower the value of the exposed cheek on the shadow side just slightly. It shouldn't be as strong as the other cheek. Nail the forehead with a strong highlight showing there's solid bone there. And let that highlight make some kind of interesting shape perhaps meeting up with the brow. Lose the lighted-side bridge shadow. (Have you ever seen those police artist sketches of suspects. They all have that shadow evenly shaded on either side of the nose. Avoid this.)

When working on a portrait one often has the tendency to think: Oh, here is the face--let's tighten up and show every little detail. Do you have a Sargent book? Take a look at his portrait of the Edward D. Boit Daughters, especially the little girl seated on the rug. Look how little detail he needed to make a masterful portrait.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I don't want you to to screw up a good drawing on my account. I still feel though the face could be re-studied, pushed foreward, losing that "copied from a photo" look. The difference between mediocre and exceptional is very slight here, but when these things are all worked out, the oil portrait itself will be a walk in the park. Well, not really--but at least you'll have a good map.

Mike Dodson · 08-10-2003, 05:32 PM

Scott,

This drawing shows changes to the facial areas per your last post. The shadow under her left eye is showing up a bit darker than the original, also the lighter area on her forehead is brighter on the original. I certainly think the simplicity of the lighted side of the face has been an improvement. The photo here certainly isn't doing justice to the original. I've been battling that "graphite glare" all day.

Michele Rushworth · 08-10-2003, 06:19 PM

I really like the sculptural depth you've been able to capture in the hands and feet. Very nice.

I see two other areas that need some work, though. The first is the top part of her right arm as it goes into the sleeve. It should be angled more steeply to the left instead of being so vertical. The way it is now it looks as if her right shoulder is too far out to the right. If you just change the angle of that tiny triangle of upper arm that is visible above the forearm, it will read as it should (ie arm going up and off to the left, and shoulder in its correct position.)

The second thing is in the likeness. I don't see a reference photo in the photo critiques thread that shows her with a closed mouth as you've portrayed her here, but it seems as if the area between her mouth and chin is too big, making her seem much older.

Mike Dodson · 08-11-2003, 09:50 AM

Michele,

I reduced the value under her lower lip which is giving the impression that there is a greater distance between mouth/chin.I will go back with a darker value while also re-checking that distance (thanks for pointing that out).I think once I make a few more changes I'll take the drawing to some place, like a gymnasium, for photographing. I can't seem to overcome the glare off of the graphite.I'm just losing too much value on the photo's to give a true representation. I'll also re-check the shoulder location you have mentioned.

Michele Rushworth · 08-11-2003, 11:38 AM

Mike, are you now working from reference with her mouth closed? Otherwise I think it would be too hard to make that change from one's imagination, based on the photo you started with. (By the way, I liked phtoto with her mouth open. It's a cute baby expression. Did the client want it closed?)

Mike Dodson · 08-11-2003, 12:19 PM

Actually, Michele, it's not closed. I haven't touched that area since beginning the changes.The only thing changed in that area would be the shadow undeneath and I lightened the lower lip attempting to have it blend in to the flesh, both of which I think needs to go back closer to the way it was. I think the reason it may appear closed is my poor photography. When I re-shoot (after changes) I'll post a close-up.

Mary Pedini · 11-04-2003, 11:02 AM

Hi Mike,

I am very taken with your meticulous rendering of the little girl in this post, and I have been waiting anxiously to see your progress with it. I hope that you plan on posting your progress. This is such an excellent piece, and I feel that so much can be learned by all. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Mary

Mike Dodson · 11-04-2003, 12:33 PM

Thanks Mary for inquiring.

The delivery date for this piece (oil painting) has been pushed back to February so I have shifted my emphasis to two paintings that are due to be delivered in December. I plan to post the first one in the oil critiques section soon.

As for this drawing, the original plan was to create a compositional study , however, I ended up with much more detail than I had originally planned. I believe that the extra effort will certainly help make for a stronger painting though.

I'll post my progress once I begin the painting as I'll certainly appreciate everyone's input.