[Tron]

what do you think about it?

[n8]

woo...bold...i like..3 cheers for loomis!!..
hiphip!!.(insert horray here)
hiphip!!.(insert horray here)
hiphip!!.(insert horray here)
yay

[patrick]

Very nice. Do your parents know you caught them fooling around on the couch???

[silber]

uhh great!
I like the way it fade out much!
very nice line.
some areas seem to have a lack of contrast though
it's like you used too much middle grey
and forgot the very dark darks

did you used reference?

[Tron]

here�s the reference:


@ silber:
i reduced the contrast because i just wanted to concentrate on the heads and faces.
if there was more contrast in th whole painting, it would look more boring.

@ n8, patrick:
thanks for your replies

[krobar]

i see some any problems with the lady's face but i'm not a specialist...the rest is perfect for me

[Art Addiction]

Her left eye seems very awkward compared to the photo. Come to think of it, the orientation of both eyes is rather weird. Fix those and I think you'll have it made. Still, it's better than I could ever do in pencil.

[silber]

hmmm I'm not sure about that but if you wanted focus the face you should have add contrast to the faces or the area next to the faces-IMHO dark areas(or contrast) focus and''hold'' the eye.

[silber]

oh forgot to ask:
in what way this was inspired by loomis?

[Tron]

hi, thanks for crits!

@ art addiction:
well, you�re right. i think that the eyes are too close together, too. i made that mistake, when the drawing was half-finished.
but that doesn�t matter , because this drawing was made in order to demonstrate what loomis says about drawing. and that�s also an answer to you, silber:

1. it�s 10% what your drawing-technic is, and 90% waht you draw, that means, don�t draw everything(when you do that you can�t ever get better than the pictures a camera can make), you have to draw what YOU see in the picture , and i tried to do that.

2. you will first have a look at the heads, because there�s the greatest contrast of the whole painting (look at the hair), so i express that i�m interested in this interpersonally communiction. that�s my interpretation (what i said in 1.)

@silber:
what means: faces-IMHO ?
yes i should hold the eyes a little bit more,
but i didn�t want to peck around ...

[silber]

......the area next to the faces
(NEW SENTENCE)
-IMHO .......
IMHO means In My Humble Opinion

I know what you are talking about
but I still think the picture needs some more balance--I still haven't read the loomis book but I know that there is a section about values.
check it out -that's what I meant
-just too much middle-grey-values

[Collosimo]

I would say Loomis simply inspired him to draw! not neccesarily any other reason.

(ehe.. perhaps the photo is from the Loomis era too)

I agree with Silber, you need a range of values for 'technical' purposes. I also agree with you that there is no point in us duplicating what a camera can do. I can see that you have focused on the intimacy of this picture. Perhaps it would be best if you could explain why midtones were chosen for that overall purpose? I am a little confused as to why the value range is so limited, I personally think that the quality of light and shadow in the photograph is the main indicator of intimacy. The play of light over both their forms, really expresses that concept. That is one reason I think that value range and more work on shading is needed.

Loomis certainly is right when he says:

"In art we are dealing with something far removed from cold science, where human element is everything."

You must be careful though to read the proper message from his teachings.