[Nex]

*hands over beer*

here ya go buddy!

Well after partikle's pic and Liquid! joining the board I feel a bit stupid posting my crap here..

Well here is my newest painting-

It started out as a 'standard' use your reference head painting but it turned out into a portrait of someone I used to know.

There is the pic:


here is the reference that I started with: http://unet.univie.ac.at/~a9627269/ref.jpg


Well.. I hope that someone has the time to give me some tips and a cruel crit

Shoot away!

[Snake Grunger]

She looks fat on your drawing
On the ref she's thinner.

[Nex]

well, as i stated i started out with the reference but then made a portait of someone else I know out of it-

I have no picture of her but she looks a bit more "husky" than the woman on the reference and she has a small mouth (almost comically small).

[psi burn]

wow that looks strikingly similar to the girl from Dawson's Creek....

[nori]

very cool nex. I like it a lot.

eye browns and forhead look a little weird to me.

keep 'em coming..

[Rob M]

I'm pretty sure that is in fact, Katie Holmes, the hottie from Dawson's Creek.

If not she's a clone, I swear it!

[Rob M]

Anyway, I took it into photoshop and did a quick "de-fatting".

I sharpened the cheeckbones and got rid of some of the right side of her face (our perspective).

Heres some comparison pics.
ORIGINAL


EDITED

[jasonN]

Yay! Katie!

Okay, I know it's not meant to be Katie anymore, but IMO you should stick with the photo because then people will be saying "she looks like a chubby katie holmes"

Aside from that, the pic is looking great so far, the skintones and lips are beautiful. I like how the hair is dark blending in with the background. Cool
-jason

[Nex]

psi burn: well.. could be she is a clone..
hmm.. maybe thats why she had that
strange number on the back of her neck

No seriously the reference picture was labeled "katie-something" so maybe she is from dawsons creek.. I never watched it that long to see her in there.

Rob M: thank you for showing me! I was not aware of that problem that much. She still resembles this girl I wanted to portrait so maybe she is not that chunky after all
Would you mind telling me what you used for blending the colors on her right cheek?
I seem to be unable to get a smooth colorflow.

nori: thx! yep you are right.. the forehead looks like sunburn and the eyebrows like makeup or something.. I'll fix that.

JasoN: thanks a lot!

[Rob M]

No problem!
For her right cheek, I assume your referring to it by her perspective.
So, to get the colors to blend I just created a new layer, sampled one of the areas to the left of her cheeck for a darker shade of the same skin tone, then just used the airbrush on low opacity.

Spots that still dont seem to blend can be smudged with a soft brush and about 30% presure.
I also smudged the original layer to further smooth out the shadow.

Hope that helps.

[dEATH.Tool]

The eyes have it Nex! I like the piece, but the eyes is what really makes me like it! A little here a little there this pic will be even better imo....but let's just see it when your done.

[Rob M]

Is this the sort of blending your looking for? I just used the smudge tool on a low pressure setting with a soft brush and blended the colors some.

Hope you dont mind me playing around with your image. It's excellent by the way.



------------------
-------------------
Rob M
[email protected]
-------------------

[Nex]

dEATH.Tool: thanku!

Rob M: I am sure it sounds stupid but I never used the smudge tool much before.
thanks to you i experimented around with it and actually found a way that works-
thanks for that, you earned yourself another free beer

[Rob M]

Well, thanks!
BTW, It's not stupid at all not using the smudge tool. For a long time I never used it until I started playing with the settings.

Keep making images like these, Nex!
The eyes in this porttrait are great! What's your secret for the eyes?

[Liquid!]

Hmmmm.... Katie Holmes.


Back to work.

[The Dude]

I like the pic...I think the ear could use
some more definition though.

| The.Dude |


PS - THanks for the beer!

[This message has been edited by The Dude (edited September 26, 2000).]

[Prometheus]

wow man , that rocks , now you are the guy that can help me about the haird thing , vould you give me a mini mini tut about how you did the hair ? Cause I really need it for my pic , oh and if someone knows how he did the eyes (shiny thingy) pleae tell me , cause , I have p^robs with , eyes and hair for colloring , so help me out please

[sfr]

Hmm... here are a couple of things that came to my mind when comparing your painting and the reference:

Yours looks very flat - the only real shadow is on the neck and the shadow edge is quite sharp, which makes for a rather odd effect. It's not automatically bad if you flatten the contrasts for your picture, but you always have to stick to the value scale you choose (which means that areas of similar value in the original must also have similar value in your painting - that's not quite happening here).

Also, less contrasted values means that the drawing gets more attention, and the flaws of the drawing therefore become more apparent. This is unfortunately happening in your image, as the face is rather disproportioned and the flatness highlights that. I'm bad at drawing, so I try to hide my crappy drawing by using stronger contrasts and plenty of dark values - it's cheap, but sometimes it works
(one detail thing related to this: eyewhites are called eyewhites but that doesn't mean you should make them uniform white or light gray - feel free to experiment with any values that will make them look better in relation to their surroundings, and same thing with the color...)

In any case, going for stronger contrasts when painting could help you get a better idea of the form. When you look at this reference pic, there's pretty solid round forms all over her face except the nose which isn't so clearly defined. Your painting seems to miss most of these, and the shading starts to look more like a vaguely airbrushed decorative thing on a flat shape - not good for a portrait. This is particularly apparent in the forehead here, which is made of clear planes.

On the top right there's that form turn combined with the hairline that breaks the shape's outline, and I think you should definitely have that in your painting as well to make it understandable that the hair is merged into the background - now, your girl has sort of a bubble on her forehead. I try to save sharp shape outlines only for cases where they're absolutely justified - I'll rather go too soft than too sharp when I'm not sure. That's probably a bad approach on general, so I won't recommend it as an absolute, it just fits my way of working... But it's a rather complex issue, so give it some thought yourself.

Sorry if this critique seems harsh, that wasn't my intention - I just felt that I had something potentially helpful to say about this particular image, so I tried to keep it to the point. Well, if some of my advice was utterly dumb, I'm sure someone will correct it soon enough - that's the beauty of this forum

Saffron / Sunflower

[Frank]

right off the bat when I saw your picture I noticed that the head was too big for her face and that her ear was too far back. as others have suggested it's a good idea to use strong highlights and shadows. don't overuse the mid-tones. (I admit, I do this too much too.)
I fixed these problems, and created a nice little image for you. I didn't draw in the ear because I didn't have time.

The eyes are beautiful! I hope you finish this!
Frank

[Fred Flick Stone]

Nex-did you want us to drink the beers so she looks cuter? hehe j/k

There are a few things here to remember.

1. YOu are looking at a badly lit photo, in that I mean that there are too many dark areas, when reproduced, many of the subtle half tones are going to go the way of the muddy darks as well if you are not careful. A great example is the left eye, and how you have forgotten that there is a plane next to the eye, framing the eyeball, with the image you have painted, that entire plane has been ignored, or not mentioned in visual, because the item of importance is not visible at the time, pr you have not as much experience drawing from life, where you would remember this sort of thing. Copying photos doesn't teach you this at all, working from life will.

I downloaded the image to do a slight rework, I hope it will help, I can't get to it though until later tonight...

2. Another thing to consider is the overall tonality of the flesh. Again, this is due to the fact that the image is badly lit. She is lit right down the seam of her face that separates the front plane from the side plane, this makes everything look evenly lit on the front and side planes. One of them would be less lit than the other though. THe way you painted your image, all the flesh has been treated with the same tones, values, hues etc. 3 Dimensions hasn't bee quite realized yet. Again, this is another problem to be resolved with the usage of life drawing...

3. THe eyes don't seem to be sitting on the same axis, the right one dipping a bit lower than the left. And the highlights on both eyes are a bit too consistent. One would be more prominent than the other, seeing as there is only one light lighting her, and it can't evenly light both eyes if it is more justified over the right eye... The other thing to keep in mind with the eyes is that when someone is looking away from the camera, the pupils will not be perfectly round. THey are going to turn into ellipses, more oval. Moreso,they will take on a slight downtilt to further push the direction the model is looking in. It gets a bit decieving when heads are drawn with an angle involved, but forget to fix the eyes to match.

4. You need to watch how you are connecting the lips to the face. The left side of the lips looks like they are not attached to the face plane. The lips reside on a surface known as the tooth cylinder, a protruding form, and rounded, so the other corner of the lips will be slightly tucked behind the arc. But, the angle of your head isn't so great that the other side would not be visible. It actually would still be visible, just slightly...
the lips also look a bit pasted on, in that you haven't blended out, or softened the long lines of the lips to the flesh. Again, I think a pictorial explanation is more necessary here than words, as I could throw analogies into this one all day, but one picture will explain it all. Just remember, they look pasted on, or cut out, however you need to see it...
The ear is also a bit off. It looks too narrow, or looks like it is attached to the further side of the head back from the side plane where it should be attached. The one thing about photos, the photographer never really thinks much about the hair shapes over the ears. We as artists though need to paint this stuff, so all the shapes are crucial to us. I would try and redesign the way the hair cuts across the ear so that it reads more appealing than of current. I think this will help that spot out quite a bit...

I would also try and extend the neck a bit more. Longer, slender necks are more appealing to pretty women than short boxy necks. WHere the turtleneck is cutting off the neck, makes her look a bit short, and squatty.

Also watch the amount of forehead you put into her face. It has a bit more now than the photo shows, moreso, there is a thin line of soft baby hair covering what looks like a half inch of forehead.

Something I just noticed also, the attachment of the jaw under the ear, it is a bit too soft. It doesn't look like there is a jawbone under the surface. It has been painted to softly. The reason the flesh is so dark in that region is that the plane of her face is facing a bit more away from the light source, thereby deepening the reddish value in it. This can be decieving...

I will end this for now, as I think I gave you more than enough to work with for now...I will try and get that image loaded back up, hopefully not too late tonight...

e- ya soon...

[Liquid!]

Fred: Great Comments. Thanks for taking the time to go into such detail. Even though its not my pic I'm learning tons!

Thanks for taking the time - you rule!

-c

[Fred Flick Stone]

Here is that repaint, I just stuck with the reference, obviously not knowing what your friend looks like. If you are unfamiliar with the facial anatomy, always fall back on surface, and knowing that surfaces exist, and the form is constantly changing planes, which will ultimately change the values, and the hues dramatically, based on atmosphere, and/or light sources.
I did this repaint straight over the top of yours, so there are still a few proportion problems I have noticed after the fact. But all in all, you did a great job with your painting, just remember the surfaces, and that photos lie about value, and you have to fill in many gaps to get it to look better than the photo, which is ultimately what you are attempting, I hope...

[immi]

Fred's back, and just like the terminator before him, he's become more of a badass...

[Nex]

Whow!
I never even thought I would get so much good advice and tips.

--

The Dude: you are right, I just blotched a few color shapes there but did not really spend time on the ears, I guess its a common sickness I have to get rid of.

RobM,Prometheus: to be honest the hair in this picture is just pure cheating. its dark hair on dark bakground, so just a few lines are enough to give the impression of hair.
But I can tell you what I did if it is any help: choose a mid color for the hair and a hard brush size 2 (or so) with opacity checked and draw some lines.
then choose a brighter tone and chage the hue a bit to blonde and draw some lines.
smudge it a bit along the legth of the line, add salt and voila thats hair.
There way better ways to do hair, so you might just ask someone who really can do it well.
With the eyes I tried to get the shape as right as possible (its still not very good) and then I added a detail around it and on the iris.(just some color points of different tones). last i added a stong highlight with a single 100% brush dot and a small relfection under it with about 50% opacity.
The eyes i drew are not that good so you'd better study a photo with a big eye on it than my version of it.
Oh and Fred (Flick stone) made a tutorial for eyes on this board.. just search it it has to be here-

sfr: thanks for taking the time to give me such helpful feedback.
Its exactly what I am after so no need to apologize for anything.
I always thought the wrong way on the contrast thing.. I thought I would go with lower contrast so I could hide some strangenesses on the shading. good you told me! I have severe probems with getting the proportions right so I guess it will take me some months to get a better grip on that.

Frank: Thanks for showing me. I will definitely work on it (especially now that I got my eyes opened on the problems here)

Fred Flick Stone: damn you got me. I thought the beer trick would work.

I can only second what Liquid! already said.
thanks for taking the time.

I have plenty of stuff to learn now and you just gave me the perfect dose of information to get me working on it.
I will definitely try to get more life drawing experience. Well i just realized its a whole different thing to draw something from what you see or drawing something from what you see and understand.
I guess I will dig up the 'suggested books' thread.

--

Well what else can I say.. this board rocks!


[This message has been edited by Nex (edited September 27, 2000).]