by St.Luke » Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:26 pm
That is better artfont.
Seeing the new enlarged image made a big difference.
I liked the way you have done some of the rocks, especially how you highlighted some of the areas.
Also how you done some of the vegetation, especially some of the leaves.
Though you done a great job, I feel that it is not yet completed. Maybe some of the detail is lost from the photograph.
What I find from your painting is that some parts look very real and 3D, while other parts look too flat and 2D.
I am only making a gentle suggestion here. Don't rely on photographs too much.
Photographs are not always the best guide to use. Exercising artistic liberty is what makes a painting better (subjective) than a photograph (objective).
For instance, a photo of a wet rock could just look plain and darker in color. While a painting of the same thing with a slight touch of light reflection suggests that the rock is wet.
As a guide, the best position to view a painting is one and a half the distance of the longest side of the painting.
If the painting is 4 feet tall, then the ideal viewing position is 6 feet away.
From that distance if some of the detail (light and shading) is washed-out from that distance, then the detail may need to be more dramatic to stand out. And visa versa.
Hope I was not out of line with my response. If so, please tell me.