Portrait Lady

[zokana]

So u say, i shloudn’t ask for criticise when I use photo as reference?

Meant more that it’s tricky to say anything when someone is using a photo ref. When suggesting this or that, the artist will refer to his photo, suggesting that the suggestion was crap. Who wants to compete against a photo? An other little problem is that no one wants to insult the depicted person, who might be someone close to the author. So you see the problem with photos generally (aside from discussions about the learning effect with photo refs)

Can u please tell me more about right foot, I dont understand “right foot is looking stiff”.

“Stiff” means not moved, not involved in the overall pose, and not affected by the environment - like when having iron bars built in.

Your photo is anyway not ideal to complete by imagination because it has quite an extreme wide angle perspective, which is most difficult to draw. Try to ask the lady again to pose for you. Here a roughly done paintover to show what i mean, but not meant as reference at all(!):

[MarcinG]

ok, now i will work on detail

[MarcinG]

Now I know what you wanted to show, and I was almost sure that what you draw was better than mine :bowdown: .

But When i show what you draw to the Lady, She whanted pose again…

And this show that your drawing was actually wrong :surprised. Left leg is bend over right leg knee very high and thats why it is almost impossible to put right foot leg on the floor like you draw. Ankle would be broken :).

I’ve coreected stockings seams little bit - maybe now this leg looks more natural to you?

Anyway Thx for helping me whit this.

“Stiff” means not moved, not involved in the overall pose, and not affected by the environment - like when having iron bars built in.

Your photo is anyway not ideal to complete by imagination because it has quite an extreme wide angle perspective, which is most difficult to draw. Try to ask the lady again to pose for you. Here a roughly done paintover to show what i mean, but not meant as reference at all(!):

[MarcinG]

ok, only foot, shadow and chair datails to go, rest is finished, I think :curious: .

I have worked on beckground and composition a little too.

[MarcinG]

final image:

[Lunatique]

The lighting doesn’t make any sense at all. You have a dominant main light source back-lighting the entire scene, yet the form and cast shadows are totally inconsistent. Why doesn’t the walls cast any shadows, especially when the form shadow on them are so dark? Why does the figure and the chair not have prominent form shadows?

In your viking thread, I suggested that you learn the critical foundations of visual art by studying and practicing properly, instead of continually doing images that will have glaring problems in the basic foundations. Your images will continue to have glaring issues until you address the holes in your artistic knowledge. The Art Techniques & Theories forum contains lots of very helpful resources that will fill those holes. For example, this great basic tutorial on lighting is listed in one of the sticky threads: http://www.itchy-animation.co.uk/light.htm

There are tons of other very helpful resources listed in the sticky threads, as well as interesting discussions on various topics of visual art in the forum itself.

[MarcinG]

The lighting doesn’t make any sense at all. You have a dominant main light source back-lighting the entire scene, yet the form and cast shadows are totally inconsistent. Why doesn’t the walls cast any shadows, especially when the form shadow on them are so dark? Why does the figure and the chair not have prominent form shadows?

1. Walls/background
   Walls are dark painted, and there is a little shadow from them… (maybe too small).
   Doing background I tried to do smth littlle bit unrealistic to give some interesting feeling to this image. I was focused creating something good in composition then something real. I didint want to make it obvious if this is door, or window or something unrealistic… Importanting for me was not to take eyes from the lady thats why background is so blurry.

2. I dont understand “prominent shadows”. But i think u r talking about that figure and chair shadow are too blurry?. And i must say i think thay cloud by better but i had problems with them, and i think that is best i can do on that level… But from the other hand I wanted to create feelling that strong light from the background is filling hole room, and the figure and chair has bounced light from the hole scene…

Thx for the tutorial about light.
I have some knowledge about light. I use this in my every day work,I took a peak in what u show me, and this is very good but not so unfamiliar to me. But I guess, after what you wrote, my calculations was wrong

[Quadart]

The image is too washed out. The woman looks like she’s still in the color block-out stage with the intense foreground and background lighting. You have to let one or the other light source dominate and address the proper shading (light modeling) of the woman and chair. The square format with the stark environment just reinforces the compositional wasted space. Maybe tone down the red in the walls as it takes away from the red bow. Since she is so strongly prominent in the scene, I’d flip the image so she is on the left, making for a more compositionally balance image.

Here’s a visual showing some suggestions, including cropping the image into a vertical format (the PO is a rough and only addresses a few things without changing too much of what you have done):

[MarcinG]

The image is too washed out. The woman looks like she’s still in the color block-out stage with the intense foreground and background lighting. You have to let one or the other light source dominate and address the proper shading (light modeling) of the woman and chair. The square format with the stark environment just reinforces the compositional wasted space. Maybe tone down the red in the walls as it takes away from the red bow. Since she is so strongly prominent in the scene, I’d flip the image so she is on the left, making for a more compositionally balance image.

Here’s a visual showing some suggestions, including cropping the image into a vertical format (the PO is a rough and only addresses a few things without changing too much of what you have done):

Ok, i’ve made changes u said.
I toned down the red in the walls less then u (i didnt like the color which was comming out from so strong toning down), And I’ve rotated the figure, chair and shadow, because I had feelling that she was about to felloff from the chair.

[MarcinG]

oh, and I pulled up hole backgorund a little bit because i saw the perspective is little bit wrong.

[MarcinG]

So, what do you think, is it better now?
I’m not sure about flliping the image, it looks strange to me…

[Wred]

I think flipping doesn’t matter. A picture should look fine (composition-wise) flipped in any direction.

[Lunatique]

Your lighting direction doesn’t make sense. Look at the direction of your cast shadows–they don’t even line up properly with your main light source, which is that open doorway. You need to study the very basics of lighting, as all lighting must be logical and based on the laws of physics. (EDIT: Ignore this paragraph–it’s incorrect and written when I was about to go to sleep.)

It also doesn’t make sense the cast shadows from the walls are so faint and diffused, while the cast shadows for the figure/chair are so dark and hard-edged. Your lighting and shadows must make sense and have logic behind them–you cannot be arbitrary about this stuff. You have to learn this if you want your work to have any credibility.

The figure and chair are still way too bright on the form shadow side. It is impossible for them to be that bright because if there’s a secondary light source or strong ambient light, then we would see the cast shadows being filled in more, and the walls would be a lot brighter than they are now.

I strongly suggest you focus on studying the basics of visual art–lighting, values, composition, color theory, anatomy/figure, perspective, etc. Make that your number one priority in your artistic development, and you’ll improve much faster than you are now.

[Quadart]

MarcinG–though the work may look a bit better with some suggestions, the overall image is still weak in just about every way. The image isn’t strong technically or compositionally and doesn’t make a strong or interesting statement. Unfortunately, all this image says, to me anyway, is ‘hey look at the ass on this babe on a chair I painted’. There’s really nothing else there. The image needs more substance in many areas.

---

Your lighting direction doesn’t make sense. Look at the direction of your cast shadows–they don’t even line up properly with your main light source, which is that open doorway. You need to study the very basics of lighting, as all lighting must be logical and based on the laws of physics.

Not making sense–I don’t know how you came to that conclusion . The shadows on the floor from the light entering through the doorway are correct in my PO as well as the last updated image. Also, the cast shadows can be skewed by the light coming through the door by where it’s placed (left or right on the other side of the doorway). Determining the shadows on the floor is pretty easy with a little linear perspective knowledge. But to prove the point, I put together a 3d mockup to verify.

[MarcinG]

Having two teachers is like having two bossess - you’ll end doing ur work for ever, and never gets paid.

Thanks god I have both of that kind of things behind me :).

bytheway Quadart, what light did u use in your scene?

MarcinG–though the work may look a bit better with some suggestions, the overall image is still weak in just about every way. The image isn’t strong technically or compositionally and doesn’t make a strong or interesting statement. Unfortunately, all this image says, to me anyway, is ‘hey look at the ass on this babe on a chair I painted’. There’s really nothing else there. The image needs more substance in many areas.

---

Not making sense–I don’t know how you came to that conclusion . The shadows on the floor from the light entering through the doorway are correct in my PO as well as the last updated image. Also, the cast shadows can be skewed by the light coming through the door by where it’s placed (left or right on the other side of the doorway). Determining the shadows on the floor is pretty easy with a little linear perspective knowledge. But to prove the point, I put together a 3d mockup to verify.

[Lunatique]

Not making sense–I don’t know how you came to that conclusion . The shadows on the floor from the light entering through the doorway are correct in my PO as well as the last updated image. Also, the cast shadows can be skewed by the light coming through the door by where it’s placed (left or right on the other side of the doorway). Determining the shadows on the floor is pretty easy with a little linear perspective knowledge. But to prove the point, I put together a 3d mockup to verify.

Actually, you’re right. I was in a hurry and about to go to sleep when I wrote that. My brain wasn’t firing on all cylinders and I somehow mistook the legs’ cast shadows as coming from a different direction, instead of simply being at an angle from the light source. I’ll never write a critique when I’m sleepy and about to go to bed again. :banghead:

Sorry about that, MarcinG. This almost never happens. I don’t usually write critiques when my brain’s already fried late at night, but I saw in my email notification that you were asking for follow up comments and I didn’t want to leave you hanging. I promise I’ll only write critiques when I’m not tired from now on.

[Lunatique]

MarcinG–though the work may look a bit better with some suggestions, the overall image is still weak in just about every way. The image isn’t strong technically or compositionally and doesn’t make a strong or interesting statement. Unfortunately, all this image says, to me anyway, is ‘hey look at the ass on this babe on a chair I painted’. There’s really nothing else there. The image needs more substance in many areas.

I think it’s mainly the inconsistent lighting and the amateurish execution that’s the culprit. There are a lot of fine artsy painters who paint very similar subject matters–scantily clad women in repose, lounging on a couch or straddling a chair, much like this image. The difference is that they portray a moody lighting or use creative brushwork and colors to give the painting some kind of artistic flair. They also use more interesting composition and know how to populate their scenes so it doesn’t look strangely sparse and contrived.

[Quadart]

bytheway Quadart, what light did u use in your scene?

I just used a generic point light with no fall-off. The faded white effect behind the door is not an attribute of he light but the graded reflection of it from a curved ‘seemless’ floor/wall. There is also a low intensity back light behind her (no shadow casting) to brighten her up a bit from behind.

I think it’s mainly the inconsistent lighting and the amateurish execution that’s the culprit. There are a lot of fine artsy painters who paint very similar subject matters–scantily clad women in repose, lounging on a couch or straddling a chair, much like this image. The difference is that they portray a moody lighting or use creative brushwork and colors to give the painting some kind of artistic flair. They also use more interesting composition and know how to populate their scenes so it doesn’t look strangely sparse and contrived.

You’re right. I should have worded that a bit differently.
What I mean is, if artistry doesn’t carry an image then an interesting statement/message has to. Otherwise an image reads like a text message instead of an immersive poem (potentially).

[Lunatique]

Otherwise an image reads like a text message instead of an immersive poem (potentially).

Hahha, just like in literature, if your prose was clumsy or trite, it’ll be considered cheap porn. If you wrote with more creative diction and syntax, then it’s considered erotica. If you really amp up the artsy feel and even inject some intellectual, psychological, and intellectual components into the sex scenes, then it becomes a piece of literary work.

[BillyWJ]

I just can’t accept the pose - it’s impossible in the first place, and the anatomy is wrong. This is why I always urge beginners to study as much figure drawing as possible. It’s also a cliched pose that’s been done (or attempted) a million times for cheapo posters, and it’s not artistically interesting, especially with the lack of anything interesting going on with brushwork, texture or lighting. It’s more suited to photography, anyway - there’s no narrative here. Why are we looking at this woman? Why is she half naked? Where is she? It’s got all of the elements for cheesecake and dirty pictures, but as art - there’s nothing there.

Honestly, I think this was too ambitious for your skill level. Good try, but you can and will do better. I would start with doing more figure studies, don’t worry so much about finished pieces for the gallery or the portfolio, worry more about capturing the human body, and doing something interesting or cool with it. Honestly, if this were in a portfolio for an artist I was looking to hire, I would’nt waste more than a few seconds on it, before moving on to another piece.

Also, if you want to see how to do something like this, but more artistically, start with the pin-up artists like Vargas.