Forums > Critique > What do You Think of This Art?

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Comments on this drawing are appreciated. It's done, but what do I need to do to improve?  Thanks

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/121204/06/50be05bf5f605_m.jpg

Dec 05 12 08:43 am Link

Photographer

dcsmooth

Posts: 1191

Detroit, Michigan, US

I like it a lot, the only thing I see that could be different is her foot/shoe is a bit distracting because it isn't all there.

Not being an artist I don't know if the same rules apply as in photography, but if it were a photo then cutting the foot is a big negative, if you show any of the foot/shoe then you need to show all of it. Cutting in mid-leg like on the other leg works fine.

Dec 05 12 08:52 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

dcsmooth wrote:
I like it a lot, the only thing I see that could be different is her foot/shoe is a bit distracting because it isn't all there.

Not being an artist I don't know if the same rules apply as in photography, but if it were a photo then cutting the foot is a big negative, if you show any of the foot/shoe than you need to show all of it. Cutting in mid-leg like on the other leg works fine.

Thanks.  It was based on this photo, and the foot was more cut off

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/120517/18/4fb5a9918744a_m.jpg

I like this photo, she is beautiful, but I had to fit it  in a 14 x 17 size, so something had to give.  But yeah, it can be distracting, I agree.  Thanks for the feedback

Dec 05 12 09:04 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

anyone else?

Dec 06 12 06:55 am Link

Photographer

Drew Smith Photography

Posts: 5210

Nottingham, England, United Kingdom

It's good.

I think you lost the expression in the face a little (I looked at your drawing first) compared to the photo.

Yes, the shoe is distracting.

Overall I'm getting more of a 2D feeling from it rather than a 3D feel. Maybe some more shadowing to give some depth.

Hope this helps.

Dec 06 12 09:18 am Link

Artist/Painter

Christopher Willingham

Posts: 21859

Long Beach, California, US

As Drew Smith has already touched on - your lighting and shadow is off.  The intensity of your lighting and shadow is constant from head to toe in your drawing - and that flattens your image.  If you take a look at your reference photo, you will notice that the light cast on the model's face and upper torso is more intense than the light on the lower half of her body.  Even though the fall off is subtle in the photo, it gives it depth.  Also, take notice of the ambient light as well - how the body receives lighting that is bounced from the environment.  Once you indicate those things - this piece will have much more depth and life.

Now get to it!

Dec 06 12 09:32 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Drew Smith Photography wrote:
It's good.

I think you lost the expression in the face a little (I looked at your drawing first) compared to the photo.

Yes, the shoe is distracting.

Overall I'm getting more of a 2D feeling from it rather than a 3D feel. Maybe some more shadowing to give some depth.

Hope this helps.

it helps a lot.  Actually, this is a really crappy scan, that I hope to correct.  there is a bit more shading in it, it got washed out.  But the face is a concern to me.  Shoe, can't be helped much due to the size and format, but I will consider it in the future. 
Thank you!

Dec 06 12 10:33 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Art of CIP wrote:
As Drew Smith has already touched on - your lighting and shadow is off.  The intensity of your lighting and shadow is constant from head to toe in your drawing - and that flattens your image.  If you take a look at your reference photo, you will notice that the light cast on the model's face and upper torso is more intense than the light on the lower half of her body.  Even though the fall off is subtle in the photo, it gives it depth.  Also, take notice of the ambient light as well - how the body receives lighting that is bounced from the environment.  Once you indicate those things - this piece will have much more depth and life.

Now get to it!

thank you!  I appreciate it

Dec 06 12 10:33 am Link

Photographer

Peach Jones

Posts: 6400

Champaign, Illinois, US

yes, I agree about the shadowing issue to give it more depth and detail. But those are things I think you can fix in a pretty short time. I like the partial foot where it is. It adds more tension and possibility. Many times it is good to show a bit, and not the whole package. That is what I am thinking about the foot.

Dec 06 12 10:00 pm Link

Photographer

Rik Williams

Posts: 3504

Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Let me start by saying it's a lot better than I could ever do, however I'm not much of a painter or sketch artist.
To me this image is far to literal to be considered art (IMHO) There needs to be some element of subtlety for this type of image to work, sure it's in perspective, but the shading is off and the lines are... well they're too strong and obvious. It seems profoundly etched into the canvas, which is appropriate for some instances, but I feel it's a little awry in this case.
Let me put it more into the way I'm seeing it. If it were true art, I could imagine it being tattooed into flesh, but not as is.

Dec 06 12 11:08 pm Link

Photographer

Fist Full of Ish

Posts: 1918

Oak Ridge, Tennessee, US

It looks like the right hip needs some work, but 'pretty good!

Dec 06 12 11:15 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Peach Jones wrote:
yes, I agree about the shadowing issue to give it more depth and detail. But those are things I think you can fix in a pretty short time. I like the partial foot where it is. It adds more tension and possibility. Many times it is good to show a bit, and not the whole package. That is what I am thinking about the foot.

Thanks Peach.  Again, it is a really bad scan, and I'm sorry.  The middle is not as washed out as it seems.  But thanks for the comments, especially about the foot.
Hope to see you up here next month.  I'll be in touch

Dec 07 12 11:31 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Rik Image wrote:
Let me start by saying it's a lot better than I could ever do, however I'm not much of a painter or sketch artist.
To me this image is far to literal to be considered art (IMHO) There needs to be some element of subtlety for this type of image to work, sure it's in perspective, but the shading is off and the lines are... well they're too strong and obvious. It seems profoundly etched into the canvas, which is appropriate for some instances, but I feel it's a little awry in this case.
Let me put it more into the way I'm seeing it. If it were true art, I could imagine it being tattooed into flesh, but not as is.

I appreciate the comments, even if I don't agree about being too literal.  However, I understand where you are coming from about some lines being too dark,  Thanks

Dec 07 12 11:33 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Fist Full of Ish wrote:
It looks like the right hip needs some work, but 'pretty good!

Thanks, you might be right, even though I tried to put more curve into it

Dec 07 12 11:33 am Link

Photographer

Mark

Posts: 2893

New York, New York, US

legs are out of proportion

Dec 08 12 09:45 pm Link

Photographer

Jon Winkleman Photo

Posts: 105

New York, New York, US

The drawing has a nice Vargas quality.

That said I see two technical issues. The larger is "figure/ground." It's something that most artists struggle with at some point in their development. the term refers to how a figure or object sits or stand on the ground or another surface. Your model seems to be floating above the bench rather than in physical contact with it. Many ways to approach this from using shadows to giving greater weight to the outside edge where is makes contact with the bench. In art school they simply made you draw tons of different  things that had figure/ground until you figured out how you could best make it work with your style of drawing.

The other technical problem is the unclear foreshortening and perspective of the torso. It isn't clear whether her torso recedes back at an angle or is simply a stumpy torso. Again just keep drawing subjects with foreshortening until you figure out what works for you. Two techniques that help create forshortening would be a slightly more pronounced perspective as her body recedes. Another is to subtly shade her torso darker as it recedes.even if it is just near the waist area.

Ask at teacher at any art school. Most of their students struggle both at first. Great start!

Dec 09 12 12:57 am Link

Artist/Painter

Vincent Wolff

Posts: 2866

Chicago, Illinois, US

Jon Winkleman Photo wrote:
The drawing has a nice Vargas quality.

That said I see two technical issues. The larger is "figure/ground." It's something that most artists struggle with at some point in their development. the term refers to how a figure or object sits or stand on the ground or another surface. Your model seems to be floating above the bench rather than in physical contact with it. Many ways to approach this from using shadows to giving greater weight to the outside edge where is makes contact with the bench. In art school they simply made you draw tons of different  things that had figure/ground until you figured out how you could best make it work with your style of drawing.

The other technical problem is the unclear foreshortening and perspective of the torso. It isn't clear whether her torso recedes back at an angle or is simply a stumpy torso. Again just keep drawing subjects with foreshortening until you figure out what works for you. Two techniques that help create forshortening would be a slightly more pronounced perspective as her body recedes. Another is to subtly shade her torso darker as it recedes.even if it is just near the waist area.

Ask at teacher at any art school. Most of their students struggle both at first. Great start!

thanks Joe

Dec 10 12 07:06 am Link