Face painting shading

planetFigure

Help Support planetFigure:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Bob! .. Could you give us an example or two, (in picture format?) of what you actually mean,? and then your preferred contrast?:). All faces are different, as are the individual painters skill in portraying this aspect.

Don't get me wrong, there are some very animated faces submitted now and again, but there is also some sublime work! Which I could never achieve! .. but is this not the, 'Learning Curve' which we all go through?. PF, is not as elitist, as 'Putty& Paint';).


Regards,

Mark
 
As I understand it, the smaller the scale, the higher the contrast. This the gospel of the figure painting gods, Hail Mary and how's yer father.

Don't ask me how this works but smaller scale scale figures do indeed look better with higher contrast overall, not just faces, imho.

Billy :)
 
It's just the current prevailing fashion in the hobby. Like in AFV modelling, where we have the whole "colour modulation" thing and the exaggerated weathering techniques as promoted by the "Spanish school".

With regard to face painting, the "coal miner" look has been in vogue for a few years now, as has the "lobster-pink-with-burgundy-shades-and-white-highs" method. I'm not a massive fan of either, although that's not to say that some exponents of these styles aren't superb brushsmiths whose talents journeyman painters such as myself can only marvel at.

For my money, the best flesh painter on here is Sergey Popovichenko. He seems to nail it just right each and every time: Very lifelike tones, contrasts not overdone, doesn't matter what scale.

And I agree about 'puttyandpaint'. I had to chuckle at the statement in their FAQs that their "invitation only" policy is (quote) "not an elitist thing"- it's just to "maintain the quality and scale" of the site. In other words .... no mediocre riff-raff allowed!!

- Steve
 
There's a school of thought that says painting deeper contrasts prevents your figures face from becoming "washed out" under auditorium lighting during model contests etc. I for one think painting too deep contrasts makes the face look clownish. I try to paint faces to what I think looks normal as I'm the one who looks at it occassionally in the display case at home the rest of the year.

Gary
 
I think a lot of it is in the eye of the beholder. What may be too much contrast for one person might look just fine to another.

Pretty much all miniature painting involves exaggerating light and shadow. You're not just painting your figure in flat colors and letting the room light do the shading for you. But certainly there are a lot of top level painters who really push the contrast between light and dark. You might like that style or you might not. Of course what may seem like too much contrast up close may seem just right once you take step or two back. Often when you see the picture here or elsewhere online the actual figure maybe be much smaller in real life. I think a lot of my images are roughly twice the size of my figures.
 
Bob! .. Could you give us an example or two, (in picture format?) of what you actually mean,? and then your preferred contrast?:). All faces are different, as are the individual painters skill in portraying this aspect.

Don't get me wrong, there are some very animated faces submitted now and again, but there is also some sublime work! Which I could never achieve! .. but is this not the, 'Learning Curve' which we all go through?. PF, is not as elitist, as 'Putty& Paint';).


Regards,

Mark

I think Mark he is referring to the Burnt cushion style of face that is so predominant at the mo , got to agree it is a bit cartoonish , but more of the subtle face painters are going over to this style for comp work or it just gets bypassed by the judges , purple faces are the mark of too much whisky :D
 
This is where it should be .
examples of PF members DSC05781.JPG IMG_2290.JPG IMG_9980.JPG
 
The great qualifier here is: do you paint for the naked eye or the camera ? It's very difficult to get it right for both. Quite often the work I saw 'in the flesh' at shows, for example, looked better in the pictures posted online or published in magazines afterwards.

I think it takes great skill to paint anything naturalistic at a small scale and the painters who can do it (like Bill Horan, for example) are really gifted stylists. I've come to realise that less talented painters, like myself, need to work at larger scales to achieve anything that looks vaguely realistic.

Speaking personally, I don’t actually like the very precise, almost cartoon-like, way that many prize-winning figures are painted these days; often using over-saturated colours. The other extreme is equally bad too of course: muddy tones and chalky colours; but I do prefer a middle ground realism.

Once upon a time there was a clearer divide between a low-contrast ‘military’ and a high-contrast ‘fantasy’ style; exemplified by the so called ‘Golden Demon’ standard. Now it seems that high-contrast is gaining ground, possibly because acrylics have become the more popular medium to paint with. But acrylics don’t have to be laid on in such a jewel-like, perfect way; the techniques of painting with them have advanced a lot since the 80′s.
 
And I agree about 'puttyandpaint'. I had to chuckle at the statement in their FAQs that their "invitation only" policy is (quote) "not an elitist thing"- it's just to "maintain the quality and scale" of the site. In other words .... no mediocre riff-raff allowed!!

- Steve

Putty and Paint: The finest figure painters, sculptors and scale modelers ...:wtf::smug:


Have to agree.

- Steve

Depends on the scale you are working...

Cheers,
Pedro.
 
Am just curious...why does it seem that miniature face painting often has really contrasting shading? Almost an overdone aspect? Under the eyes, the nose, the chin...seems, to me, almost comical. Isn't a more subtle shading more realistic?

I took the liberty to post this two STUNNING works of the best number one painter (for me) still in activity Mr.Bill Horan that one day back in 2011 I had the honour of shaking his hand.:joyful:
Is this contrast that you are talking about?
This is 1:35, 1:32 or 54mm in some cases and the contrast that you see is great.



cheers
 

Attachments

  • Horan_264_4x6.jpg
    Horan_264_4x6.jpg
    158.1 KB
  • Horan_277_4x6.jpg
    Horan_277_4x6.jpg
    89.7 KB
A lot of painting is now done for the camera esp the box art stuff , also there are a few who digitally enhance there work ,some look great on camera and no so in reality but
it works the other way also, painters with little camera skills tend to lose out on the picture post .
I have seen some stuff that looks extremely good on picture and is so much better in reality .
 
A lot of painting is now done for the camera esp the box art stuff , also there are a few who digitally enhance there work ,some look great on camera and no so in reality but it works the other way also, painters with little camera skills tend to lose out on the picture post .
I have seen some stuff that looks extremely good on picture and is so much better in reality .

Without naming any names, I have seen a few postings during the time I've been on here and on other figure forums in which I've strongly suspected Photoshop sleight of hand or some other jiggery-pokery (highly detailed, perfectly painted eyes even down to tiny catchlights in 54 mm? ... gimme a break!)

The point you make about photography is also a valid one Ron - it can both flatter and deceive, or not do a piece justice at all.

- Steve
 
A lot is done these days to appear good under digital photography. Apparently many shades & highights are lost in this that the naked eye sees.

A lot is to do with current trends, which are dominated by Italian & Spanish painters. All very talented, don't get me wrong.

Much of the painting we see in competitions I reckon is done to look good under lighting conditions you are likely to see in comp rooms. Euro is an excellent example of this. The comp room tends to be unbelieveably bright. The top painters compensate for this accordingly. Often as well, we see box art pieces at Euro, and figures are painted to make this look 'better'.

There is a middle ground, which is what I tend to persue (badly....)
 
Without naming any names, I have seen a few postings during the time I've been on here and on other figure forums in which I've strongly suspected Photoshop sleight of hand or some other jiggery-pokery (highly detailed, perfectly painted eyes even down to tiny catchlights in 54 mm? ... gimme a break!)

The point you make about photography is also a valid one Ron - it can both flatter and deceive, or not do a piece justice at all.

- Steve
I have had my suspicions there also Steve , re eye painting :rolleyes:
 
A lot is done these days to appear good under digital photography. Apparently many shades & highights are lost in this that the naked eye sees.

A lot is to do with current trends, which are dominated by Italian & Spanish painters. All very talented, don't get me wrong.

Much of the painting we see in competitions I reckon is done to look good under lighting conditions you are likely to see in comp rooms. Euro is an excellent example of this. The comp room tends to be unbelieveably bright. The top painters compensate for this accordingly. Often as well, we see box art pieces at Euro, and figures are painted to make this look 'better'.

There is a middle ground, which is what I tend to persue (badly....)

God only knows what will turn up at euro now they have changed the comp room lighting ,as far as im led to believe it is now a deep blue tint
 
Thank you Ron for including one of my busts as an example.It just happens to be my personal favourite face i've painted .
There are trends that come and go in our hobby,there's realistic ,artistic and there's the in betweeners.With the initial advent of acrylics there was a strong contrast style and some of it still prevails today.In my opinion the South Koreans although using acrylics have face painting down to a fine art.But it's all down to personal taste really.

 
Back
Top