+- Crimson Daggers — Art forum (//crimsondaggers.com/forum)
+-- Forum: PERSONAL ARTWORK (//crimsondaggers.com/forum/forum-9.html)
+--- Forum: SKETCHBOOKS (//crimsondaggers.com/forum/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Lunatique's Sketchbook (/thread-9535.html)
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-01-2024
(01-31-2024, 05:33 PM)cgmythology Wrote: Great work with your latest! I think I prefer the second one, as the white background at the top in the first one is a bit too much, it detracts from the figure IMO. Great brushwork altogether as always, keep it up Robert!
Thanks! I wanted to create a more dynamic background since I find most of my portraits have that "Sears studio portrait photo" look with an amorphous background, and I wanted to break out of the mold. But sometimes a simple background with minimum distraction is best.
(02-01-2024, 08:31 AM)Jephyr Wrote: Just awesome work!
I've seen the 'angel girl' piece somewhere before. Was it in Spectrum? http://crimsondaggers.com/forum/attachments/129583/promise_no_logo-repainted-rgb.jpg
Thanks! Yes, that one was published in Spectrum before. A few other pieces were published in the Expose publications and in various magazines.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-06-2024
Some work-in-progress portraits:
A bit more progress on this one:
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Artloader - 02-08-2024
Loving your portraits - really eye catching - keep it up :)
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - cgmythology - 02-08-2024
Awesome updates! Really nice colors on all of them, very pastel-like which I enjoy. Also again, very interesting texture and brushwork for the backgrounds, well done!
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-17-2024
Thanks!
A bit of progress. Backgrounds are always a struggle for me. I want it to contribute to the overall composition, but not too distracting, and not too boring either.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-18-2024
Some progress on this one:
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - cgmythology - 02-25-2024
Looking better and better! Great brushwork on these, and the textures are well improved and interesting on both images. Looking forward to more updates as always!
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-27-2024
(02-25-2024, 08:14 PM)cgmythology Wrote: Looking better and better! Great brushwork on these, and the textures are well improved and interesting on both images. Looking forward to more updates as always!
Thanks! The current challenge for me is to get the subject to look as interesting as the background in terms of brushwork. Too often my subjects are rendered significantly tighter than the background, but ideally, I'd want the two to integrate more.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-27-2024
Finished! I really thought about how to integrate the subject with the background and this is what I came up with.
![[Image: DylvVCM.jpeg]](https://i.imgur.com/DylvVCM.jpeg)
Closeups:
![[Image: bBI79nY.jpeg]](https://i.imgur.com/bBI79nY.jpeg)
A few steps during the painting process:
![[Image: ZUok4nj.jpeg]](https://i.imgur.com/ZUok4nj.jpeg)
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Jephyr - 02-29-2024
That's a lovely portrait — well done
You wrote earlier that backgrounds were a challenge. With that in mind I offer the following:
Maybe your going for an abstract BG but otherwise suggest adding some depth there — ie are those tree or plan blossoms of some kind? Adding some distant low saturated elements in the far distance behind her and mixing in some of that in the closer elements will give your BG more interest and depth.
Or some details about what the BG represents: If it's tree or plant flowers — some details of flowers or leaves may help the viewer understand. If it's snow or rain then that's hard to 'get' as well.
Either way, it cannot be denied that your skill as a portrait artist is well developed. Congrats and hope to see more soon
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 02-29-2024
(02-29-2024, 08:23 AM)Jephyr Wrote: That's a lovely portrait — well done
You wrote earlier that backgrounds were a challenge. With that in mind I offer the following:
Maybe your going for an abstract BG but otherwise suggest adding some depth there — ie are those tree or plan blossoms of some kind? Adding some distant low saturated elements in the far distance behind her and mixing in some of that in the closer elements will give your BG more interest and depth.
Or some details about what the BG represents: If it's tree or plant flowers — some details of flowers or leaves may help the viewer understand. If it's snow or rain then that's hard to 'get' as well.
Either way, it cannot be denied that your skill as a portrait artist is well developed. Congrats and hope to see more soon
Thanks! I've thought about fabricating representational backgrounds for these types of portraits, but generally speaking, when I paint portraits of real people from references, I prefer to keep fabricating to a minimum and stick to a more traditional mentality of simply painting the subject and scene in front of me, and if there's no recognizable background, I would either go for something vague or abstract that doesn't transport the subject to a place they weren't in when the reference photo was taken. Maybe it's my desire for a sense of authenticity--I'm not sure. When the references do contain recognizable backgrounds, I usually depict them, and if they're too distracting, I would go for the abstract approach.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - JosephCow - 02-29-2024
It's interesting how your portraits really come alive in the final stage. Of course the foundation is necessary but the nuances you add at the end make it beautiful.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 03-03-2024
(02-29-2024, 02:25 PM)JosephCow Wrote: It's interesting how your portraits really come alive in the final stage. Of course the foundation is necessary but the nuances you add at the end make it beautiful.
That's an interesting point. I've mentioned that the portrait painters I admire all paint with a lot less detail than I do, since they're usually alla prima painters, and time is a luxury for them. I don't paint alla prima anymore (I used to when I was younger) because I like being able to take my time and experiment instead of feeling the pressure of getting it done before the model gets too tired. And to artificially limit how much time I could spend on a portrait feels odd when using photo reference, because it feels contrived.
The interesting part of your point is that the final stage makes the portrait come alive with the nuances that are missing in the rougher stages, but those details are what I've been wanting to leave out in order to paint more like the alla prima painters I look up to. So it's a strange dilemma, which has my goal and what people like about my portraits at odds with each other. The struggle for me has been to keep some of those nuanced details but also get looser so there's more of an alla prima look to my work, and it's been a real challenge to strike that perfect balance. Maybe it's not even possible because it has to be one or the other, but I can't be sure about it until I've decided it's time to give up on the experiment.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - JosephCow - 03-03-2024
Yeah I totally get that dilemma. I don't think it's a matter of spending less time or more time probably. It's more that the nuances in the final version include very small changes to corners of the mouth, brows, eyes and so on that make the face look expressive. It may be possible to capture these things in a blockier stage, if difficult. I wonder if a solution could be to paint over the portrait again once the nuances and life have been achieved in the face to simplify parts of it and bring it back to a looser stage, yet retaining the good qualities the detailed version has. That might seem to be a somewhat artificial way of making a painting look alla prima when it really isn't done that way. I know from reading accounts of him painting, that the painter Sargent, for example, scraped down and repainted his finished portraits many times before arriving at the final result. Though his paintings look to be done quickly in one sitting, it took a lot of preparation and attempts to make something look fast and effortless. Maybe it's similar for you?
That being said when I look at the painting close up I can see that there are already some parts that are simple strokes. And the seemingly tight parts are not overly detailed. So I'm not really sure I see any 'unnecessary' details in any case.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 03-03-2024
(03-03-2024, 12:11 PM)JosephCow Wrote: Yeah I totally get that dilemma. I don't think it's a matter of spending less time or more time probably. It's more that the nuances in the final version include very small changes to corners of the mouth, brows, eyes and so on that make the face look expressive. It may be possible to capture these things in a blockier stage, if difficult. I wonder if a solution could be to paint over the portrait again once the nuances and life have been achieved in the face to simplify parts of it and bring it back to a looser stage, yet retaining the good qualities the detailed version has. That might seem to be a somewhat artificial way of making a painting look alla prima when it really isn't done that way. I know from reading accounts of him painting, that the painter Sargent, for example, scraped down and repainted his finished portraits many times before arriving at the final result. Though his paintings look to be done quickly in one sitting, it took a lot of preparation and attempts to make something look fast and effortless. Maybe it's similar for you?
That being said when I look at the painting close up I can see that there are already some parts that are simple strokes. And the seemingly tight parts are not overly detailed. So I'm not really sure I see any 'unnecessary' details in any case.
I've actually done what you suggested, where I felt I over-rendered and then would do another pass to rough up the painting to make it looser. I don't like doing it for the same reason you mentioned. I do wonder if Sargent, Zorn, Sorolla, and Schmid had been born in the digital age and grew up with digital art, how would that have changed their sensibility and approaches?
From what I can tell, the difference between what the artists I admire do and what I do, is their brushwork is significantly more economical. That is the byproduct of having time-limitation due to painting alla prima, but the approach has also created a look that's very alluring to a lot of artists, including digital artists working from photo references without the time constraints. When I analyze works from Craig Mullins, Wangjie Li, Yizheng Ke, and others who draw and paint within the realm of that sensibility but work digitally, I try to figure out what they're doing differently from what I'm doing. They're basically going after the same alla prima look but they're working without the time constraints and using photo references, just like me. So, my conclusion is I need to be more ruthless in how I simplify, be more economical in my brushwork, and push some areas into further abstraction in order to achieve the look I want.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - cgmythology - 03-14-2024
The recent portrait is excellent, probably one of your best. The background compliments the figure ridiculously well with great colors and contrast throughout the image. Well done!
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 04-08-2024
A few portraits I haven't posted yet.
BTW, this is Jiheon from the k-pop group, fromis_9, and it's pretty much impossible to capture the infectious and radiant smile she has when she's performing on stage, and this is where I think video is a much more effective medium than photos or drawings. Just watch her perform for ten seconds and you'll know what I mean:
https://youtu.be/cQhfzCI-4kI?si=ZRTiUu86geIec4wj&t=19
That smile can power an entire city, and if you're not also smiling when watching her perform, then I hope whatever it is you're going through in your life right now will soon get better.
This RDJ one was a quickie, about an hour or so, since it was a portrait sketching exercise done during class, where I was guiding students on how to do a portrait quickly but still capture the essence of the subject.
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Damien Levs - 04-08-2024
Your portraits are insane. Amazing work here.
I literally have nothing to offer except that I hope I can get to this standard of portraiture in the future.
I was going to ask how long the RDJ one took, but you answered that in your text. 1 hour is crazy. I've pretty much only got a line drawing down in that time.
Looking forward to seeing more!
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - cgmythology - 04-09-2024
These look incredible Robert, masterfully crafted. Great likeness and the values and texture work are exquisite. Well done!
RE: Lunatique's Sketchbook - Lunatique - 04-09-2024
(04-08-2024, 07:41 PM)Damien Levs Wrote: Your portraits are insane. Amazing work here.
I literally have nothing to offer except that I hope I can get to this standard of portraiture in the future.
I was going to ask how long the RDJ one took, but you answered that in your text. 1 hour is crazy. I've pretty much only got a line drawing down in that time.
Looking forward to seeing more!
Thanks!
I looked at your sketchbook, and I think you have solid enough foundations to do portraits more quickly, but it'll take some work to get there.
As with any specialized subject matter and style, just dabbling in it won't get you to the level of proficiency you desire--you have to fully commit to it for a prolonged period of time. Although I did not specialize and focus on portraits in my art career, it was one of my favorite subject matters so I did a lot of it. By a lot, I mean I probably have done well over a hundred of them over the decades. And now that I'm no longer working in the entertainment industry as an artist, it's the only subject matter I still enjoy doing. All the other stuff--sci-fi/fantasy/horror concept art and illustrations, graphic novels--all that stuff just doesn't interest me much anymore, since I prefer to dedicate my imaginative side to writing novels instead.
I'll describe my history with portraits and offer some tips that might help you.
I got serious about art around age 14 (I'm 52 now), and I was immediately drawn to portraits, even though I lived and breathed anime and manga, as well as sci-fi/fantasy illustrations and American/European comics. The academic/classical side of Western art was in a way the lofty aspiration, and I would just stare at the works of masters like Bouguereau and Waterhouse and Sargent.
So from age 14 and on, I would do portraits often, and I didn't just draw/paint from photo references. I pushed myself to also do them from life, and the logistical limitations were beneficial in developing speed and accuracy, as well as making critical choices in what to selectively detail and what to merely suggest. Real-life models do not have the patience to sit there for hours on end, so I'd be lucky if I could get 30 minutes out of them, and I was forced to work quickly. I was also inspired by the portrait artists I've seen at the various art & wine festivals or at tourists spots, where they'd set up booths and draw customers in a very short amount of time and capture their likeness and essence. Although I had no intention to ever do that type of work for a living, it was still a fun challenge to myself to be able to do the same. I'll show you some of my early portraits done from life and from photo references during my formative years (they're all from life unless I specify a piece was from reference):
This one was a friend who liked to model for me from time to time, and I think I was 16 when I did this one:
Here's one from photo reference, done with one of those plastic-tipped ink pens, around the same time:
Some of you might recognize this one, as the original was by Boris Vallejo, whose work I referenced. I did this also around age 16.
This was also from reference, and I did a lot of these types of mixed media portraits.
This one was when I was slightly older, around 18/19 (the same year I became a full-time comic book artist). It was the fiancé of my friend's best friend:
This is her with makeup on:
This one is a year or two later when I was about 19/20. She was the GF of my GF's ex's at the time:
This one was when I was around 25, and my GF at the time. This one portrait from life took the longest (at that time) because she sat down to watch The Devil's Advocate and I started drawing (I had already seen the movie but she hadn't), and by the time the movie ended, I also finished drawing:
These two were when I was about 29, while working in a game studio. I created a weekly life drawing session where anyone in the company could join us after hours to do it. The company funded it, and I hired life drawing models, and each session would be around 2~3 hours. We'd do fast sketches (15~30 seconds each) for a bit, then 5~10 minute ones, then 30 minutes, and an hour. Around that time, I wanted to push myself to be more accurate and decisive, so I started to do these sessions with nothing but ballpoint pen, so I could not afford to make mistakes.
But I also did the more conventional charcoal and paint stuff too like these:
Fun fact: This model wanted to smile for the portrait, and I asked her if she was sure because her face would get really stiff after a while, and she said as long as we didn't take forever, she could do it.
When I was short on time, I'd do a much simpler sketch like this of the model.
A few more years later, I was in my early 30 and married, and I did some portraits of my wife, Elena, ranging from quickie sketches to fully finished paintings.
From reference.
From reference.
It was also around this time when I started to get comfortable with digital. I started digital in 1998 but hated it for years until I saw what digital artists like Craig Mullins could do with the same set of digital tools that frustrated me. I decided to put in the time and effort to get better at digital (and I didn't have a choice because everything in the commercial art world had turned digital, so I had to sink or swim).
From reference
This one was actually half from life and half from reference. She sat for the painting session broken up into multiple days, and I also took photo reference of her sitting there, with the same lighting. When I was done with the life painting (and her being too tired to continue), I checked it against the reference photos to see if anything needed some touching up.
From reference.
And then I started doing less and less art outside of my day job (art director for video games) because my focus had shifted to composing music and writing novels. I did a ton of teaching of art, but the only art I did was paintover critiques for students or class demonstrations. It wasn't until 13 years later did I finally start to feel the pull towards painting for myself again, and it started when one of my art students wanted to do a portrait painting of JinSoul, a member of Loona, a K-pop group we both loved. This was the portrait I did of JinSoul for class live demonstration (this was in 2019):
After doing that class demonstration, something clicked. I felt the same sense of immersion and flow I used to when I was younger, and my desire to push myself to get better at portraits slammed back into me. I think it was a few different factors that converged at the same time that got be back into it.
1) I have always lamented that I never got as good at painting portraits as I wished, despite having done quite a bit of it over the decades. I loved portraits by masters like Richard Schmid, Sargent, Zorn, and others who painted in alla prima, although I don't necessarily feel the need to also paint alla prima--I just love the look of that style.
2) I was really inspired by the digital portraits of Yizheng Ke and Wangjie Le that looked very traditional and expressive.
3) Doing fan art of K-pop artists is common in the fandom, and when I was a teenager, I did tons of portraits of J-pop idols, J-rock bands, Japanese actresses, etc. The part me that wanted to capture the essence of accomplished, talented, and photogenic people is still alive in my middle-age, and I've seen some excellent portraits of K-pop idols done by their fans that made me want to throw my hat into the ring and see what I can do.
And that's how I got back into doing portraits again. All the portraits you have seen posted in this thread before this post, were done after that JinSoul portrait, in the last 4+ years. In all of them, I've been searching for a balance of fidelity and expressiveness that represents my artistic fingerprint. And the search continues.
So, after having shown you all that, I don't know if you have noticed something--the only thing that really separates the portraits I did as a young teenager from the ones I do now, is everything else other than accuracy in likeness. This is a critical point, and I'll explain.
See, I don't think my technical skill has improved all that much since my teenage years. You might think that's weird, but the thing is, I didn't have much trouble with accuracy of likeness by the time I was around 15~16. Sure, I've had my share of stinkers too, but those were few and far between once that earliest phase of the beginner was over. Perhaps I was precocious in the development of my technical skills early on. But you might have also noticed, back then, I was lacking in all other aspects, and the most obvious was a compelling presentation. And that is the critical point. Portraits are about more than just technical accuracy or likeness.
My approach back then was too utilitarian. I sketched, I drew, and I painted, without giving enough thought to how the overall image was presented as a coherent and complete composition that utilized interesting textures and variety of edges, with selective detailing and purposeful abstraction. The way I rendered was also pretty clunky, without much finesse, expressiveness, and artistic intrigue. And those are the qualities I've been working on in the last few years.
Now, I want to show you something that kinda proves my point. See this bare-boned, utilitarian, sterile, and uninteresting portrait sketch?
Wanna guess when I did that one? 30 years ago? 20? 10? How about just a couple of days ago? Yes, it was from a couple of days ago. "Why does it look so...meh?" you might ask. You see, it was done for a class live demonstration for a student who had never done a time-restricted portrait sketch before and wanted me to show him how and guide him while he did his, and he had also never drawn much on paper so this was also kinda fun for him. He's at the stage where he still struggles with technical skill, so even just the bare-boned line sketch to get the accuracy of likeness is very difficult for him. If I had approached that sketch with the intention of imparting all the artistic flare I would have aimed for if I was doing it for myself and not for a class demonstration, it would have contained too many layers of artistic intent that would be difficult for him to decode and absorb. So I kept it totally plain and just captured the likeness with as little other qualities as I could. Until he gets his technical chops up to speed and is able to capture likeness in a short amount of time, he's not ready for anything else.
Notice that this latest sketch is not that much different compared to the portrait sketches I did as a teenager. In fact, I would say those early sketches are better because they have more artistic intent to them, with more interesting presentation. And this is the point I'm getting at. Now, with at least 36 more years of experience as a professional artist, I did a sketch that's not as good as what I did as a young teenager, and the main reason is because of artistic intent--or the lack of it. Because I already had technical chops at a young age, the main development I needed was honing my artistic voice--the intent that creates my individual artistic fingerprint. If I had done that 30-minute sketch with the intent of conveying a more compelling artistic vision than just a simple line drawing without much interesting creative flourishes, it would have looked a lot more interesting than what I actually did. (And a fun exercise would be to do more portrait sketching with that student, also with 30-minute limits, but experiment with different artistic intentions that are much more interesting, and then compare them.)
So my advice is to get your technical skill up to speed first and foremost, because portraits are about capturing the essence of the subject, and for most people that means likeness (unless you want to go in the modern art direction). But once you get your technical chops to speed, focus on everything else that matters--the qualities that separate utilitarian and uninteresting portraits from expressive ones full of artistic flare. If you can capture likeness quickly, then the rest of the time you can spend on the artistic presentation of expressive line quality, brushwork, selective detailing, the balance of fidelity vs simplification and abstraction, and overall composition.
Another thing I find helpful, and I think some artists understand it intuitively, while some need it pointed out to them, is that you really shouldn't separate sketching and drawing from painting as if they are distinctively different phases. There are some portrait painters who don't even sketch in the basic features and shape of the head and just start painting. The key is to remember that you never actually stop drawing when you're painting. Drawing is about making shapes, and when you're painting, you're still making shapes, except with a brush. But the advantage a brush has over a line-making tool like pencils and pens, is you can also convey values/colors very quickly, unlike how you'd have to do a lot of hatching with pencil and pen. So if you are proficient with a brush, you can draw and paint at the same time without needing to do a line sketch first, and that will speed things up dramatically. I have done portraits with different approaches--from doing an accurate line drawing before applying the values and/or colors, to a very quick and simple sketch that just indicate roughly where the features are and the general shape of the head, to no sketching at all and just start painting on a blank canvas, letting the brushstrokes do the drawing while I build up the shapes with values and colors. I recommend you try all these approaches and get comfortable with them, and then you can favor one that you prefer the most, or continue to try different approaches to keep things fresh and fun.
So to wrap up, I think good portraits are more than just about capturing likeness, because as I demonstrated, I could do that already as a young teenager, and it would be pretty sad to think I had peaked at age 16. Technical skills are not hard to attain--it just takes some practice. It's everything else that actually makes portraits compelling that requires many years of experimenting and trial and error to achieve. I wish I had known that when I was younger, and that's the advice I would give young artists who have the desire to get better at portraits (and I would say this applies to just about any subject matter artists would be interested in, not just portraits).
With all that out of the way, here are a couple of WIP portraits:
