Child portrait
 

Hi everyone,

Hope you are enjoying the holidays. Here is the portrait of a child I have done in these holidays. What's more relieving for an artist than capturing the innocence and inquisitiveness of a 5 month old?

It's the most challenging (at least technically) subject I've ever drawn. I've already spent over 30 cumulative hours on this and it still needs some adjustments. I need your comments and critiques.

At the moment I don't have access to Photoshop to combine the scans to make it complete (scanner size is 9" x 15" only). The background in the scan is darker than it is in my drawing. Do I need to make it the darkest (because it's not very evenly blended now)?

Regards,
Seenu

Re: Child portrait
 

Any comments please ??

Seenu,

You might tell what type of materials went into making your drawing. Do I understand that the image above is a cropped image? If you cannot display the entire image could you describe how it is composed on the paper and how much of the total drawn image we are seeing.

Very stylistic, it might be a bit difficult to critique. Did you satisfy your own objectives?

Seenu,

There's a kind of stark, hard-edged quality to this drawing that seems in conflict with the subject's infancy and the very soft and undefined features we'd expect to see. I think there's too much influence here of a flash or a very strong light above the child (the reflection of which we can see in the eyes), which is bleaching out the lights, exaggerating the darks, and creating hard edges.

I recommend that you try to visualize what this subject would look like without the influence of that strong light. Some of the considerations might include:

-- Reduce the size and lighten the value of the dark shape between the lips. At least on the bottom lip, the transition from light to dark would be more gradual (but for that strong light).

-- Have a look at your resource photo to see if the corners of the mouth really are so prominent and turn down so dramatically. At the very least, almost eliminate the dark values in those areas.

-- Soften the edges of the lips, especially the top edge of the upper lip.

-- Very substantially lighten the values of the dark areas within the ears. What we're seeing there now is deep dark cast shadow, from that strong light source.

-- Lighten the value in the nostrils, and darken the form around the nostrils. Right now we're seeing reflected light on those forms that doesn't belong there. The values should be in closer harmony in that base triangle of the nose.

-- In the eyes: lighten and soften the dark thin "outlines" of the eyeball area, as well as the outlines around the irises. Darken the value of the irises -- the strong light passing through them is fooling your eye into believing their value is extremely light. Reduce by 3/4 the size of the catchlights in the eyes -- right now they're but reflections of the excessive light, rather than form-defining highlights.

-- I would greatly lighten -- even return to white -- the background. This delicate subject can't bear the burden of that dark, heavy background.

-- Greatly soften the upper contour of the skull, and allow the value to darken slightly as the skull rounds back away from us. Same with the edges of the jawline and chin.

-- Don't let the halftones below the cheeks get quite so dark. This too is a result of the strong lighting and has the effect of "aging" the infant.

I guess that's enough to make the point that you're being misled by the photograph and you need to "correct" for it. Have a look at this child in normal, ambient daylight and I think you'll see far softer edges and lighter values in the features. That's closer to the look you want in this subject.

I have an aversion to portraits of children that are larger than life. It is like looking at a giant parade balloon of the child. Just a personal preference, and one that I have stood by for many years.

Thanks for the critiques. I just imitated the reference for everything. I used graphite and charcoal in making this. It's basically a horizontal drawing with little view of shoulders and full view of ears. It's interesting how critics find it is completely acceptable to tell an amateur that his work or choice is bad without considering any positive aspects of his work.

Regards,
Seenu

Seenu--

I have to agree with the other critiques. The style of the drawing is very much at odds with the subject. I found the image very jarring.

Slavishly copying reference material without applying aesthetic judgment along the way isn't producing art -- it's an exercise in accuracy, nothing more.

Steven, especially, obviously spent a good deal of time crafting a thorough and helpful set of suggestions, for no compensation other than the satisfaction of aiding a fellow artist.

If you want suggestions for improving your work, this is the place. If all you want is a compliment and nothing more, you can get that most anywhere.

Seenu,

Please read this thread: http://forum.portraitartist.com/show...&threadid=2112

I thought everyone had seen it by now. Some of us are begging to be roughed up a bit. Please don't discourage honest critiques.

I am sure that Steven Sweeney considered your talent sufficiently worthy in order to invest his time and attention into a most thoughtful critique of your work. I think that if you make the effort to follow Steven's suggestions, this portrait would improve dramatically.

When you need a pat on the back there are many other good places (e.g., Wet Canvas) to post your work. I cringe when I see valuable time and effort wasted in an unwanted, unappreciated and ignored critique. This isn't about ego here, it is about trying to offer genuine help to those who reach out. I am sorry that you feel as if your toes were stepped on but you have probably posted in the wrong place.

Thanks everyone for your response. I appreciate your time and concern. I would like to thank Steven for spending lot of time in giving sincere critique. I always thought the word "critique" means discussing the good and bad aspects of a work but I realized my assumption was wrong. Anyway I'll use your comments for the improvement of my drawing.

Seenu,

You're not wrong about that use of the word "critique". Speaking only for myself, I was kind of working on the run, I saw your renewed request for comments, and I simply tapped out some suggestions for improving the piece. I suppose I've kind of developed that approach here over time, which was the way critiques were generally handled in the studio where I received most of mine and where it was simply assumed that there was room for improvement in every piece so "let's get down to work".

I usually do begin with some general appraisal, but there was something about this image that unsettled me, and I suppose at first blush it was both the size of the infant's head in relation to the frame of the piece, and the sense that I was viewing the face from only inches away. Rather than feeling that I was in intimate space, I felt crowded. I found myself uncomfortable with that, and I think it would have been a disservice to you for me to try to put a different spin on it. So I simply moved on to the drawing elements with which I'm more at ease.

I can see from your style the admiration you have for J.D. Hillberry, whose graphite drawings are indeed extraordinary. They bring to mind the work of a fellow Montanan, Don Greytak, whose drawings would I'm sure impress you. Check them out at www.dongreytak.com.

As for this thread, it's probably played out and I'd urge everyone to move on to the next. Seenu, I see that you have another drawing posted, and I'll try to get over to have a look at it.

Cheers

Steven,

Thanks for the message. I'm really sorry for the mess up. If you visit my website you will realize I'm just a hobbyist and doing things just for fun. Here seems to be people who are really committed to their profession.

What I want to give through my drawings is that WOW feeling to the viewer (I got that from 98% of the common people, some of whom cannot even differentiate a drawing from a painting -- they use the word "your painting" for my drawing).

I know only few elements of drawing. Some people ask me to change my subject selection and style but this is what I'm getting fun from. In the future also I'm not going to change my style, rather I go for subjects with complex compositions and a bit of emotional impact.

I strongly believe realism is the most impressive form of artwork we can do with pencil (I agree to the fact that our great masters did many masterpeices with line drawing though). I feel that making art "caviar to the general" is not a sin. I'm also convinced that I'm in a wrong place. You people used the words aversion, jarring, mere exercise in accuracy, slavish copying...referring to over 40 hours of my work. Might JD Hillberry had done the drawing "after the critic" referring to critiques like these???

I stand by my original comments.

I am a realist, in that people say my ten minute drawings are "likenesses." Those drawings are not photocopies, however. Photo realism does not utilize any choice and little evidence of style. It denies the observer the use of his imagination, an important ingredient in drawing.

Do you want us to say you are a highly skilled copier? I will give you that.

Seenu,

If you ever go to an art school, you will quickly learn that your 40 hours spent on a drawing are irrelevant. Your work has to stand on its own when you're not there to tell people how long you worked on it. Whether it's your 40 hours, or Lon's six minutes, the drawing has to speak for itself.

Your skill level hasn't come into question. Rather, you've gotten many valuable suggestions for improving your work. What a great gift! Don't look at these suggestions as insults.

I guess you can all sense my frustration about these exchanges. I'm drawing every day, and I don't want to post my next picture, only to see that dreaded zero, and not know that it means.

Thanks to all of you who take the time to share your expertise.

Can I request the administrator/moderator to delete this thread to stop this litany ?? I do not want any critiques from you. I will do what my mind tells to me(I've been doing that so far). Nothing is standard in art.

Seenu,

Indeed, this Forum is for those who are committed to a profession in portraiture. This is currently stated in the registration dialog. This is nothing against anyone who chooses to just have fun with their art, it is simply that our focus is different than that.

Critiques
 

Dear Seenu,

I can understand where you're coming from. I was new to this Forum too and to the critiques, but I must say I wish that I had slowed down and listened more to what the professionals had to say. It has really made me think in regards of how I approach to my artwork now.

I had thought I had techniques down pat, but it's always a learning experience no matter how great you think you are. Every artist has room for improvement. Thanks to Sharon -- she really gave good advice. Besides, what were we thinking when we subjected our artwork to placed for critique? We have to take the bad with the good sometimes and it's always a hard thing to swallow the bad. Other artists may see things that we ignore to see. Hope you come back.

Melissa