Disclaimer: This is my first time using blogger so I uploaded the pics all backwards.
Some of you already know I work at an assisted living home and I've been doing portraits of the residents for a summer project. Here is a big one I've been working on (40"x48"). I've included the original image so you can see that I've had to move the figures for compositional reasons but then I've also had to figure out some of the lighting since I've placed the lamp a little bit higher and moved the woman on the right much closer to the lamp. How does the lighting look to you folks?
Bonus question: Does anyone know why one of these portraits is working better than the other? I really like Maurine's face (she is on the left in the painting, and on the right above on the close up shots) but I don't like Jane's face so much. I think it's because the light is hitting her face straight on so there's not much dimension and a lot of symmetry. I'm wondering if you have any suggestions to make her face work as well as Maurine's.
8 comments:
So I realized there is a huge glare in the middle of the painting so it might be hard to discuss lighting. sorry.
For me a problem with the face on the right side is that you have amped up the contrast of value a lot from the picture. This appears to be happening mostly in the face. I don't know if that's the only reason it's not working as well as the other but for me it's one reason. The hair contains a lot of values that are not in the photograph. The right side of her face seems like it might have more cools as well with the very warm lighting on her left side. Hope this helps.
One other thing I noticed in Jane that bothers me a bit is the intensity of the light on her left arm (right side of the image) having both arms with this higher intensity takes away from the effect to the warm lamp light.
Maurine's face is well sculpted. Opaque paint fills in her face nicely, and the lighting is cohesive across the planes of her face. Cool, grey from the left and hot, orange from the right.
However, Jane's face seems to have a complicated spread of lighting. Hot orange (strangely dark?) from left, white flash from the camera from the front (mainly gotten from her forehead shine), and a sort of dull-yellow from the right? I would omit the camera-looking shine, because it seems to be absent from Maurine's side of the painting. Also, the dark orange blob on Jane's forehead is kind of bothersome...because of its dark value, I don't read it as light, even though it's the right temperature. Overall, I might try to sculpt Jane's face with softer transitions between the changing planes of her face (like you did with Maurine's). At the moment, there's a lot of unexpected light-dark contrast there.
One last thing, because Jane's been moved right underneath the lamp, I would predict A LOT of very intense, very bright light to be hitting her shoulder and stomach area...similar to what's hitting Maurine's chair. I think Jane's face might be better lit as well.
P.S. Love it! I'm excited to see it finished! And is that a yogurt cup that Jane's holding? That SOOO says assisted living/hospital. Nice touch. I loved those things when I was in the hospital for Micah. mmm. So good...
I lied, one more thing. I think Jane's lips are too perfect in the painting. In the photograph, they're a little crooked, and that's one thing that I LOVE about Maurine's painted portrait. Adds so much character to her.
Hey thanks, you've both given me a lot to work from. And yeah, that's totally yogurt in her hand. If Jane ever sees this, she's going to be pissed that I put that in there. Haha.
I think Alyssa is spot on. Maureen's face seems much less conrived; the the warms on the right side have that convincing "glow" - especially that yellow ochre strip on her jowls, while the warms on Jane's face look ketchupy.
There's a deeper expressive quality to Maureen's face; Jane's face lacks a little humanity. Compare the photo of her and your painting side by side and look at them as people - not painting technique for the moment. A little droop in the eyes, crooked mouth, these are things that can add that character. BTW I think her posture does have a lot of character; her face just seems a little stiff.
my art background comes more from photography and character design, so my comments will be in that vein.
there are some big issues related to creating an image from a photo.
to get started you really need to ask yourself: 'is this photo sooo great that a painting of it will also be great?' it's a matter of reference vs replication. if that photo is for reference, then there will inherently be differences between the photo and the painting other than just one of them being made of paint.
to me the snap is a reference of the people and what they look like, not an image you're trying to copy in paint. follow?
therefore, don't replicate those elements of the photo that make it a sucky snapshot, namely the lighting. you'll either need more reference of better lighting, or bend over backwards creating something that works on the canvas. because the flat frontal lighting vs the weak lamp lighting are a bad place to start from.
really consider what your key light source will be and what the secondary light sources will be.
character wise, i agree with Tyler completely. idiosyncrasies give a person character, both of these have plenty of character and have interesting faces. really work on nailing the nuances of posture, sloped shoulders, saggy breasts, big belly, quirky smile, glaring eyes. there is a lot more character in the photo than the painting. i don't know these ladies, and it's one thing if this is a present you'll give them, but unless they will be standing on hand in a gallery where every viewer can talk to them and get to know them, you're image will have to convey those things. props go along way to convey character; the yogurt is great, the reading table and open book are good too, but you've eliminated them. think of how you can maximize the background elements to establish context and character.
really go for the gold in making an image of 2 interesting individuals, instead of a snap of 2 generic old ladies.
i know that was long winded, hope it helps.
Post a Comment