Results 1 to 4 of 4
Thread: Eaten wip
April 1st, 2013 #1
Hide this ad by registering as a memberApril 1st, 2013 #2
Acrylic on canvas? I ask because a few things that stick out for me might just be acrylic things (it has a kind of dry look to it that I've never liked).
This is a really hard picture, and you're pulling it off pretty well. The separation between her breasts and her pelvis could be a little plainer. I'd like to see the shadows fall on her more (it would make it look like she's really in there). You'd see some glimpse of bottom teeth, probably. It's an ambitious thing, though, and I don't want to sound churlish about it.
I was once on the receiving end of a critique so savagely nasty, I marched straight out of class to the office and changed my major (sketchbook).
The Following User Says Thank You to Stoat For This Useful Post:
April 1st, 2013 #3
You have three different vantage points in the scene, which is hurting any believable illusion of depth. The first 'eye level' is roughly aligned with the tonsils. The entirety of the mouth agrees with it, except for the top incisors. Notice how we have a sudden transition from seeing the bottom of the molars, to a frontal view for the incisors. The woman is seen from another, lower vantage point, which also doesn't have a compatible focal length as the rest of the mouth. All together, they add up as subtle depth and horizon inconsistencies that make this looks like two references pasted together, rather than a cohesive scene.
I've attached what I feel are the 3 different horizons, as well as some small, doable tweaks to help fix them:
To fix the issue with the incisors, they simply need to be repainted so that we see more of their underside - making them agree with the molars in terms of 3D space. The vantage points at the tonsils and for the figure are close enough that we can assume they are the same. The figure does seem to recede into the background too quickly (the depth issue mentioned earlier, which in turn was predetermined by the lens used for that reference). If you make the lower body larger, the total space will feel a little more believable.
If you want to go TOTAL BOSS MODE, here's how you can approach this with more accuracy: Construct a simply manikin maquette for the figure (dough would probably be best. maybe foil. either way i wouldn't want sculpey anywhere near my mouth). Place said maquette in mouth. Set up appropriate lighting. Take pictures (aiming for a focal length that compliments the overall statement you want to make with the piece). Use these new references to guide your proportions and construction. Use your older references to guide you for anatomical detail.
The Following User Says Thank You to Hexokinase For This Useful Post:
April 1st, 2013 #4
@ Stoat its on a oil panel i was experimenting with. I have thought of revisiting the model work and try to figure out some drop shadow or something to give the impression that she is laying inside
@ Hexokinase It was actually 2 references spliced together. Trying to find the right height to photo the woman so this would line up was a bit of a challenge and i went with the closest i could get. Error was made in the painting of the teeth and it was not visible to me. I saw some issue with the molars but i didn't with the incisors.
Thanks to both of you. I'll have a few things i can rework, although seeing how its in oil i may not be able to address everything which is a pity. Glad its only a learning piece for me. I think its only my 4th painting in Oil.