Danielle
 

Hi,

I am new to your forum. This is only my second post. I think I will just dive in.

As usual for me, I have taken upon myself a new medium, pastel, and new subject area, portrait. Both at the same time which I never seem to take and easy route. But, here I am.

I live in an area where there is no access to lessons or schools for portraiture. The closest would be 2 to 3 hour trips each way. Due to work scheduling and a mom with alzheimer in my care, I cannot do the traveling that would be required.

I have been trying to study on my own, for about a year now, with the use of much reading and many books and feel I have reached an impassable point that I do need help.

Please look at my daughters portrait and see if your might be able to help me. Thanks for looking and/or commenting. geri

Beautiful!!!!
 

:thumbsup:

Geri....I find this to be wonderful! Just my humble opinion, from a fellow pastellist. I'm not good at this critiqueing thing (don't feel I'm qualified enough to do so), but thought I'd offer my "gut instincts". The only thing that jumps out at me is the flat black of your beautiful daughter's blouse. My eye is drawn to it and I'd suggest using a deep and dark burgundy/maroon/blue/purple/green....something other than black. Also, I LOVE the quality of the lines (especially in her hair), and the way they carry my gaze...I'd suggest using the same boldness of line in rendering her blouse, to suggest folds...but, maybe run the strokes in the opposite direction? Otherwise....beautiful work! Keep it up!

Very nice. You did soooo many things right in this portrait... I especially like your cool halftones and overall composition. I think that you have a lot of talent and am impressed that you can do so well in a new medium with new subject matter.

There were many years where I was sandwiched between caring for a mom with alzheimer's and my own small children...it wasn't easy. Looking back on that time of my life, I realize how much that experience shaped me in a positive way as the artist I have become. BTW, after she died, the very first portrait I ever painted was of my mother http://www.kcwells.com/ruth2.htm

Even though you work in isolation, I'd like to think that you will seriously continue to develop your skills. There are posts on this forum about self-study with the Old Masters and I urge you to check them out.

Meredith,

Thank you so much for your positive reply. I did forget to mention in my original post that the portrait was not complete. And the areas are the ones mentioned. My daughter wore a black sweater that day. I just didn't take it any further then what is there. Even incomplete, your reaction made my day. Thank you.

Karen,

Thank you so much for responding. One of my greatest pleasures is searching the internet for the Old Masters. And studying their application and strokes. I find it as an invaluable learning tool. At the moment I am tremendously enjoying Mary Cassatt.

I am so sorry for the loss your mom. It is an illness that no human should have to endure. I viewed your portrait of your mom. It is done with great love, respect and tremendous ability. Thank you for sharing. Geri

Geri, all I can add so far is, you are on your way, if not there already! Wonderful!...L

Wow!
 

Let me get this straight....
Youv'e been studying from only books for just a year? I think this protrait is amazing. I think your portrait is so powerful that you could have just left it alone with out the black sweater. This piece reminds me of the picture I'm attaching. Notice the gestural lines that the artist has used for the remaining composition. Also, there's a white line under your daughter's right eye that really caught my attention. Maybe you could tone it down, especially in the right corner of the lid. If what you say is true about only learning from books I am seriously impressed. I look foward to seeing more of your work.

Geri, I am so very moved by your persistence during a very hard time for you. I am so convinced that if we do what is right in serving others at our own expense, God will nurture the gifts He has given us.

This is a very strong drawing. The lines are beautiful and strong. The form is great. Detailed where detail is needed, ambiguity where it is needed. I know who your real Teacher is.

Leopoldo, Thank you for your encouragement. I feel that I am lacking something and am not yet there. I have something in my minds eye, I can't put it into words which makes it very frustrating, when I do it, I will know (I hope!!) and then I will be there. But until then, I will keep plugging along.

Joseph, Thank you for your suggestion. The right eye has been taken care of this very morning. And, looks so much better. The painting you included, who is the artist? I would like to view more. Perhaps you could provide a link?

Lon, Your comments are so generous. You know, since I was very little, I have known who my teacher was and I would not have changed a thing. Thank you for noticing and understanding. Geri

Artist
 

The artist's name is Tim Iverson.

Question
 

I must have missed something somewhere because I am wondering who you are referring to as your real "TEACHER". I suppose you are talking about GOD or yourself, but thought I would ask to make sure.

I'll just second the others' observations and say also that we should all be so lucky as to reach an "impasse" that reflects the level of artistic intuition and understanding of technique that is demonstrated in your work. If the learning curves of any others here have been a smooth constant ascent without any plateaus (or potholes or slippery slopes), they're pretty rare amongst the usual experience of battlers in the cause.

A very small technical note, relating to the eyes. I don't know if this "means" anything, but the light on the subject is coming from our upper left, but the catchlights in the eyes are in the right side of the corneal area. The catchlights are also quite large, as well, and the combined effect is to kind of make the eyeball "bulge" out rather sharply, especially in the eye on our right. The shadow under the brow on that eye on our right might also extend just a little farther from the nose shadow -- not all the way across the upper lid, but perhaps into the area where the upper lid is meeting the iris. This would allow that area to recede a little, to be "tucked into" the shadow from the bridge of the nose, and thus enhance the roundness of the eye.

As for training in isolation, it certainly has its drawbacks, and even well-written books are kind of quiet companions. I have profited greatly from art instruction videos, which besides often (alas, not always) conveying useful information, kind of invite a like-minded friend into your studio for a bit of human contact (though not, unless you want to ruin the tape, a shared cup of tea). Most of my videos are on oils, but for drawing and pastels I would highly recommend Daniel Greene's "Portrait Drawing" and "Portrait in Pastels" videos. Those are worth owning, because you'll watch them over and over. Because "new" purchase prices can be a bit over the top, be sure to check availability at libraries (including any distant libraries that may have network or reciprocal lending arrangements with your local branch). Alternatively, you might investigate online sites, such as www.art-video.com , where after payment of an annual membership fee, instructional videos can be rented for a fraction of the purchase price (and the rental may apply to purchase, if you decide that you'd really like to own the tape, after all.) Anyway, I mention the videos because I've always been someone who benefitted more from a five-minute demonstration of technique than a five-chapter explication of it (too often read in the after-fatigue, pre-dream final stages of the day).

To the extent that you are using books, keep in mind Harley Brown's advice regarding his, that it shouldn't be perused in an easy chair, but should be open right next to the easel as you actually do the technique exercises. I have to admit I don't often do this, though I had fantastic results when I did so with Paul Leveille's oil portrait book, and he has a similar pastel book, "Painting Expressive Pastel Portraits," with lots of procedural and colour demonstrations (though perhaps unfortunately without shots of the live or photographic reference).

Best wishes,
Steven

Geri,

You've done quite a nice job on the portrait of Danielle. I especially like the flow of the hair. I have only one tiny suggestion. I think the highlights on the eyes would be better somewhat de-emphasized to avoid a glassy-eyed appearance. These are the reflections of the primary light source on the moist surface of the eye. Making them slightly darker and/or smaller would take care of it and let the viewer appreciate the beauty of your subject and the way you have captured her without distraction.

Keep in mind that I sometimes find things to criticise in Rembrandt as well, and I hold him in the highest esteem.

Virgil Elliott

Joseph,

Thank you for the artists name. No, Joseph, no teachers here, just life experiences. Wish I did have a teacher close enough to get to. I would run to the nearest workshop.

Steven,

Thank you for your kind comments. Actually, I have all the books you mentioned, Harley Brown, Paul Leveille and Chris Saper's new book "Painting Beautiful Skin Tones with Color and Light." Among others also. I find them to be a resource and an education that one could not survive pastel without. At least not me. I cannot find any books out there by Daniel Greene. I am sure they are there, I just can't locate them. I did take a moment, as suggested, and check out the video site. Daniel Greene has a video there for drawing a portrait. Has anyone see this? I wonder if it is worth the $69, if it is a demo in pastel?

Just a question, though it will show my ignorance. I really was unaware that one can "copy" or perhaps practice would be a better word, from a published book. Karin Wells suggests to copy the masters. Aren't these paintings copyrighted, hence, forbidding you or I to copy the work? Just curious. Hoping this isn't illegal, and not wanting to hear my doorbell ringing, pressed by a shiny badge, I have on occasion, found a painting in a book and copied it to see where my level of skill is, never reaching the level of the artist. Then nicely tucked it away in a draw. Just thought I would ask.

Virgil,

I have met nothing except, kind, generous people here. You are not an exception. Since I have no teacher, I need the suggestions if I am going to improve. And improving I need. I am my own worst critic. I have found that my eye, after a while, sees what it wants to. Then the obvious is what I have missed. That's why a fresh viewpoint is needed.

Hopefully, some day, I will be able to look at a painting and knowing the mechanics, will be able to comment. Believe me all suggestions have been taken as a view for improvement, carried out, and the results right on target. And I thank you all for taking the time.

Geri

Daniel Greene does have a book on pastel work, but it is long out of print -- however, there seem to be gazillion of copies available, because I have seen them at mall discount outlets and on internet sites and so on. I wish I'd bought every one I'd ever seen, and parlayed them on Ebay -- I could have retired. Quite honestly, I'd send you my copy, but it's in storage a half hemisphere from where I am. But I'm serious, because my art "career" began by another artist's handing me a copy of one of her favourite books, and I'd be so happy to pass on the favour. Joe Singer has a good one, too, but it's older and out of print, and the fact is, the advances in colour printing technology make the more recent publications a lot more exciting to work with anyway.

You're a bit past Greene's portrait drawing video, interesting as it is. I'd recommend starting with his pastel portrait video, which actually incorporates the drawing video's teachings. However, it's about drawing and laying on pastel and you won't get a lot of "now this is cadmium red 373 and this is caput mortuum 242 laid over it". Still . . . Daniel Greene's very generous with everything he knows. I don't believe his studio has a website. I'll try to dig out the studio address (it's in North Salem, New York, just north of NYC, on the Connecticut border) and post it or e-mail you, and they'll send you a brochure with the video information. I wonder if there aren't at least a small handful of other artists, whom you might contact via a local art store bulletin board, who would share in the expense of the videos with you.

Again, the magic lies in just keeping at it. Scales eventually come to the pianist, muscle memory to the guitarist, molecular structure to the chemist. Truly -- and I hope you will believe this -- you've already mastered a great deal of the very hard work involved. Stop for ten minutes before and after every session and quietly, contemplatively remind yourself of that, without any obligations or expectations.

Best wishes,
Steven

O.K. to Copy....
 

Geri,
After a certain number of years after an artists death their work belongs to the public and has no copyright. Since all of the Old Masters are long past, it is ok for you to copy their works. I'm pretty sure it's ok to sell them too as long as you don't try to pass it off as the original. If I am wrong about any of this, someone please let me know.

Nope. The Old Masters** are long dead (as are their lawyers)...if it still makes you nervous, you can copy from any book in the Dover Pictorial Archive Series...(there are thousands of 'em)...as it clearly states on the front that they are copyright free.

As far as I know, most major museums encourage copying and recognize it as the time-honored tradition in training artists.

The only problem you could have is in trying to make money by passing off your copy as the original. Making a forgery in order to defraud is immoral as well as llegal.

The unofficial rules in copying are to make your copy a little different in size and to clearly sign it as a copy after...(insert name of artist).

NOTE: I loosely define the "Old Masters" as pre-impressionist. I do NOT consider any Impressionist or any of those who came after them to be an "Old Master." I'm talking Titian, DaVinci, Velasquez, and going as far back as Giotto.

Sounds awfully close to the punch line for a good-news/bad-news joke, or the definition of "mixed blessing".

Steven,

That's funny!! Mixed blessing. It probably is, for us.

Might I also say again, thank you for your support and encouragement. It's exactly what I need. Just to think that I have progressed over the past year is a great reward for me. I will keep looking for Daniel Greene book and/or video. It's not the $69. that bothers me, but not wasting it on something that won't teach me. (Of course let me qualify. Most things at this point is a learning experience.) I have seen videos that I was very glad were not purchased by me. Maybe I just don't know at this stage what I am looking for. As I said to Leopoldo, I have something in my minds eye that I can't get out or put into words.

Karin,

Although I enjoy the impressionists work and I feel a great deal could be learned from them, I also feel for the nittly gritty I would turn to one of the Masters that you mention. I am extremely fond of Murillo and Velasquez. I probably would begin, no I will begin, there. Thank you for sharing your knowledge, it is most appreciated.

Joseph,

Thank you for your reply. It opens an entire new world of work for me.

Geri

Me, too, Geri. I own some of those useless videos. You won't ever be disappointed in any of Daniel Greene's videos.

This pastel shows a great deal of emotion and love for the craft. The use of warm and cool hues are executed with profession, the placement of the figure on the paper is perfect and the hair is so well done. Beautiful pastel work.

Geri,

I share the favorable comments and helpful hints given for your pastel portrait of your daughter. It's a good effort and you are doing many things extremely well. Keep it up. I would suggest, however, that you sneak up on your highlights and use them judiciouly. Once you get to white (or near white) there is no place to go. It's something we all have had to learn. That we should resist the temptation to put highlights everwhere. Sometimes more is less. I must confess that I still tend to do it. A highlight on the nose looks so good that I put one on the chin, then the forehead, the eyes, etc. and soon they have they have collectively lost their impact and take on more importance than the beautiful middle and dark tones such as you evidenced in this portrait. Not to dwell on this but the hair on our left is wonderful but not helped by the light highlight line. Make it only as light as you need too. Again, sneak up!

Good Luck

Jim,

I am so tickled with myself. Viewing the painting on the forum/monitor, the streak in the hair bothered me also. So I got up from my chair and gently subdued the streak on our left side. Then thought, maybe I should not have done that. It does look better, it was really pulling the eye, I thought. Thank you for the confirmation that I proceeded in the right direction.

As for the highlights, you are correct again. I am thinking I will tone those down also. Maybe with just a slight finger pat.

Thanks so much. Geri

Re copyright: beware Bill Gates
 

Just a few years ago, Bill Gates bought up a vast quantity of digital rights to the world's art treasures. Let us all keep in mind the monopolistic behavior of the first business enterprise he founded, and make sure to challenge any sign that he will use his "rights" to infringe on ours. A "caveat art" to coin a twisted phrase.

Where on earth did you hear that stuff about Bill Gates and the digital images?

Anne,

Are you saying that everytime we now see a, say Rembrandt, in a book that we cannot use it for practice or copy work because Bill Gates may have a digital copyright on this particular painting.

Or are you saying only on the computer. I don't think I understand what the meaning is. I wonder if you could clarify for me. Thanks Geri

Yes, where? You really ought to quote your sources. I am really tired of unqualified remarks about Bill Gates. Few have contributed as much to society as he. And I am not so sure that his company was so monopolistic as you perceive it to be. Are you a Mac enthusiast?

Seem to have struck a nerve
 

I will search out some current sources to back up my statements that Bill Gates purchased DIGITAL rights to the world's art treasures. As I recall from the articles I read going back at least five, maybe seven years, worried observers thought by owning the digital rights that Bill Gates would be able to prevent other interested parties from being able to use DIGITAL images without paying him/his company royalties. Much like Michael Jackson owning rights to the Beatles' Apple music library (please don't jump on me if I don't have the terminology correct, as my background is in print publishing not music.) So no one can play or record a Beatles song without paying Michael Jackson a cut.

And please don't jump on me in any event. I meant to convey that we all might share an interest in making sure that we can continue to have access to things we want to. Seven years ago who would have anticipated that we would rely so heavily on the computer as a visual communication tool? Few did but Bill Gates was among them. It is of course quite possible that Bill Gates did not pursue the business strategy that was feared.

And Bill Gates does inspire fear. He is a formidable competitor and he has the resources of a multibillion-dollar company to back his ideas, however farfetched they may seem on the surface. From my experience as a Microsoft customer for more than 20 years, I truly believe that he is such a driven entrepreneur that if he thought there was a way to make money from the DIGITAL rights he owns, he/his company would not worry much about who was inconvenienced.

The issue is similar in one way to that which Napster raised, that is, people liked being able to download and share whatever songs they wanted, but the music industry didn't want them to do this because they would lose money. And yet it is different than Napster, because we are talking about access to images that have been in the public domain. It would be a change to have to pay for them.

I am not a Mac user. But I am a sadder and wiser Forum user since my comment provoked the responses it did. I just wished to alert an online community of people who care about art to a potential threat to some of the freedom we enjoy in viewing and using images of the world's art treasures.

I believe the reference to Bill Gates has to do with his Corbis business enterprise (www.corbis.com) which indeed is a massive library/museum of stock photography and fine art digital images for professional and consumer use (assuming you successfully register at the site). I've never tried to register and I don't know what sort of "fine art" works are included, but my impression is that it's material the copyright for which was purchased by Corbis from the artist or other entity who owned the right. Obviously, millions of digital images are being created or captured every year, and the best of them have commercial value, as Bill Gates has astutely noticed.

The site has, indeed, generated some copyright concerns and litigation, but from what I've seen the problems seem to stem from alleged use by Corbis of copyrighted material without permission or payment to the owner of the copyright. In one case, an architectural photograph contained a shot of a sculpture in front of the building, and the sculptor protested the commercial use of his artwork without permission.

It should be understood that claims to rights to digital images -- and to the legal right to make those digital images -- isn't a threat to anyone who wants to go to the Met and copy a Rembrandt. What Corbis is protecting is the product of its unique digital imaging technology. If anyone were to, say, spend a year creating hundreds of digital clip art images, we would expect that person to have the right (the copyright and other rights) to say who could use the images and how -- whether they were images of poodles or dump trucks, or of the Mona Lisa or the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Doesn't mean that I can't go to those original sources and produce my own copies (as long as the originals aren't protected by copyright).

Just to indicate how weird all this intellectual property stuff can get, I used to work for a company that published legal opinions from courts throughout the country. What could be more "public"? And yet because the company had an oft-denied but de facto monopoly in the business, our books containing those judicial opinions were the preferred citation throughout the legal system. And guess what? The company claimed (successfully) that the peculiar arrangement of the opinions in its books -- generating unique page numbers -- was copyright-protected added value or work, and that if another publisher wanted to cite to our publications, it had to pay us to use "our" page numbers. As Dave Barry says, I am not making this up.

Anyway, I'm not too worried about Corbis (though I'm kind of leery of some other massive online digital art collection sites). As with any other good story, it has generated a lot of "urban myth" type of spin-offs. It's admittedly difficult to sort it all out.

Steven

Visit to Corbis
 

While Steven was writing his reply, I went on to Google and located Corbis. I was pleased to see there is a library of royalty-free images and wanted to see what it contained. But to register required providing credit card information!

Macaholics Anonymous

My name is Steven and I'm a Macaholic. Sometimes I hide this from my friends and family. During the day, I often think about the next opportunity I'll have to sign onto my Mac. I buy Mac products from several different stores, so as not to arouse suspicion. It has changed my sleep habits and my ability to concentrate and my sleep habits and ability to concentrate as well. The anti-Mac tormentors are part of a vast right-wing conspiracy. I am not paranoid, too. I just wish they'd make more software for my Mac. By the way, Beta was superior to VHS, too, but there you go.

Remember, what's said in this room stays in this room.

What Corbis' lawyer says about their services
 

Copied and pasted from a website I can't return to, as I have too many windows open now. Bill Gates is very smart to have anticipated that there would be a business in electronic rights. Perhaps as these comments suggest Corbis is more concerned with multimedia, music and photography. That would suit me!

"Things have changed a lot since the last revision of the Copyright Act in 1976. When that act took effect in 1978, all finished creative work put in a tangible form is protected by copyright without any formalities. Copyright simply springs into existence when the work is created. A lot of people don

Corbis' copyright clearance
 

This newsletter offers a "Case Study on Copyright Clearance" by the legal counsel for Corbis. It is actually a succinct summary of current copyright law, which would be helpful to anyone interested in a basic overview. Then he discusses implications arising from the increasing interest in using digital use.

For the record, I think Bill Gates was a genius to anticipate the business opportunity. From reading this, I surmise that Corbis is more interested in multimedia, music and photography than fine art. And I think that's good news for us.
http://www.cyberbohemia.com/Pages/Br...ncopyright.htm

So, anyway, Geri -- you still there?

You're free to use any image you want for practice or copy work -- even Bill Gates' digital images. (You can tear those tags off the mattresses too.) Just be sure that if the image is the subject of copyright (as Bill Gates' would be), you don't try to sell or otherwise benefit financially or commercially from your copy work, without permission of the copyright owner. Even if there isn't a copyright issue, and even if you did actually draw or paint the copy (which gives you copyright in your work), the right/safe thing to do is to always identify the copy as such (usually by signing, for example, "Sweeney, after Rembrandt". (Age before beauty, you understand.)

Copy away, and good luck.

Steven, you're always good for lightening things up. Thank you for all your wonderful contributions! And Anne, thank you for researching and getting more complete information.

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, Anne, and I apologise if I did. I just hear so much bad about Mr. Gates. Most of it is hogwash. I do not think that anyone's rights are going to be impinged by his digital archive. If he does the work to archive art treasures, why should he not get a cut of the use of those digital archives? That won't stop people from getting other sources of copies of the masters to use in their computers.

I always thought that he helped the other manufacturers more than hindered them. If you are the best, you should prosper. It is a contentious matter, I just thought I would stick up for him. Successful free enterprise is always mistaken for evil.

Steven,

Yeah!!! I'm still here. Is Danielle still up there? Gee, think about it. Maybe, just maybe, a copyright on...... "Danielle." Hey Bill, hey Bill!!!

My mistake he's not listening. Oh well, maybe next portrait.

You guys are the greatest!! I'm glad I am here.

Geri

Portrait painter Margaret Holland Sargent (now there's a name for a painter!) told an interesting story a couple of years ago at ASOPA's first convention in New York City...

She was hired by Bill Gates to paint his mother. At some point he wished to see her progress on the painting and she offered to "JPG" it to him via computer...

His immediate response was (I'm serious) "What's a JPG?" And she had to explain it to him.....

Here is M. H. Sargent's website where (if curiosity overcomes you) Bill and the portrait of his mother can be seen: http://www.portraitartist.com/sargent/sargent.htm

Somehow "grand plots" seldom ring true with me. The "Bill and Melissa Gates Foundation" has taken on some verrry ambitious projects as an attempt to make the world a better place.

And the concept of Bill gobbling up artwork to hoard just doesn't fit...

Anne, my reaction to what you said was not meant in any way to be a "put down." I've simply heard so many stories about "Big Bad Bill" over the years that I almost automatically react in disbelief. I apologise if I hurt your feelings...

I love it too!

I saw your lovely portrait. You have made a great start! I taught myself to do pastels and am now showing them in Boston.

A TEACH YOURSELF PASTEL PRIMER 101:

A. Get Daniel Greene's tape "Erica", take his workshop if possible (he lives in NY state). Buy or peruse as many books on pastel as you can; libraries are great resources.

B. Buy the most colors you can get your hands on and the finest quality.

C. Do as much work from life as possible in natural light.

D. Try this: take a photo of a simple head in natural light. Seat your subject in the same light next to the photo. Rub your pastel color on a small piece of paper and hold it up to the photo to match the value. Then hold it close to the subject. This is a great aid in learning skintones. Most people don't realize how rich color is, even in a photo, and make their work too pasty.

E. Use Portra portrait color film (Kodak). It has the best skin tones.

F. The value sometimes is more important than what you think the color should be. Kitty Wallis says that when she runs out of a favorite color she is forced to consider a new one. You can get wonderfull surprises that way.

F. Use good paper.

G. Don't answer the door when you're working because (unbeknownst to yourself) you'll look like a chimney sweep.

Elizabeth,

Thank you so much for your reply. I am trying to catch up here. I am going now to view your pieces.

Geri