Eye like it.

[Excruciating]

There's something fishy about the eyelashes bending at the top and the eye is a bit wierd looking (skewed or something).
I was thinking about why you draw the eyelashes so realstic while leaving the eyebrows as black smudgy thing.
And why the so obvious change of color in the skin tones (It makes it a bit unsharp, but it got its charm I think though)?

Other than that: I want a tablet now, more than ever.

[Medley]

There's something fishy about the eyelashes bending at the top and the eye is a bit wierd looking (skewed or something).

The top eyelashes were coming straight out towards me, with a bit of an upper curve. That's hard to reflect in a two-dimensional image, and I probably didn't do it as well as some could have.

The eye looks skewed for a couple of reasons. First, I thought the straight-on, level approach would be boring and uninteresting. Second, here's the setup I used: I'm sitting at the computer facing the monitor directly in front of me. To the left of the monitor is the mirror, and to the right is the light source. I have astigmatism in my left eye, so I can see the reflection in the mirror better with my right eye. That means that I'm necessarily drawing the right eye.

So, what's the best way to see my right eye in the mirror to my left? Do I move my chair over (and back), knowing that I'm going to be doing this dozens of times? Or do I simply lean to the left until I can see my right eye in the mirror? Does the perspective make sense yet?

I was thinking about why you draw the eyelashes so realstic while leaving the eyebrows as black smudgy thing.

My intent was to make the iris and pupil the focal points, with the image having gradually less detail the farther out you got. A radial blur, if you will. I tried making the lashes smudgy things as well. Didn't work- had to start them over. One of things that particularly bother me about this image is the detail in the lower lashes. I really wanted them to be less defined. However, the light source highlighted them, and giving them less definition just struck me as wrong.

And why the so obvious change of color in the skin tones (It makes it a bit unsharp, but it got its charm I think though)?

I figured that someone would eventually point this out- particularly because the tones are blended so well in the iris. The artistic answer would be that it was part of the "less definition in the outlaying areas" theme. And that is a part of the reason I did it. But in all honesty, it's the smaller part of the reason.

The better answer is that the best blending of colors comes not from a simple blur, but by using a brush containing the two colors at varying flow strengths and opacities until a realistic blend is achieved. It's the Photoshop equivalent of mixing paints on the palette, except that in Photoshop you're mixing them directly on the image. In small, detailed areas like the iris, I find this is easier because I can zoom in to do the work. When I zoom out, the individual brush strokes aren't as obvious. And if I've made a mistake in blending, that's not as obvious either.

I could have blended the skin tones, but had I gone to that effort, I probably would have incorporated light, shadow, color, and contrast- since they all have an effect on blending. That would have meant adding detail to areas I wanted to de-emphasize.

-Medley.

[Excruciating]

So, what's the best way to see my right eye in the mirror to my left? Do I move my chair over (and back), knowing that I'm going to be doing this dozens of times? Or do I simply lean to the left until I can see my right eye in the mirror? Does the perspective make sense yet?

I suppose the best way to do this, would be spending more time looking in the mirror looking for detail (as in the iris) than for perspective. Make sure to do a sketch first (and draw a few lines to guide you) so your sure your perspective will be more correct. And later you can just remove this layer in photoshop anyways.

My intent was to make the iris and pupil the focal points, with the image having gradually less detail the farther out you got. A radial blur, if you will. I tried making the lashes smudgy things as well. Didn't work- had to start them over. One of things that particularly bother me about this image is the detail in the lower lashes. I really wanted them to be less defined. However, the light source highlighted them, and giving them less definition just struck me as wrong.

I'm not sure if I agree here. I really liked the lower eyelashes and I stillthink it's a shame with the eyebrow. It's such a radical change from detail to black spongey-smudge, however, the very first thing I did notice in this picture was the iris, so I guess it worked.

I figured that someone would eventually point this out- particularly because the tones are blended so well in the iris. The artistic answer would be that it was part of the "less definition in the outlaying areas" theme. And that is a part of the reason I did it. But in all honesty, it's the smaller part of the reason.

I could have blended the skin tones, but had I gone to that effort, I probably would have incorporated light, shadow, color, and contrast- since they all have an effect on blending. That would have meant adding detail to areas I wanted to de-emphasize.

Hmm.. I don't really know how the tablet is when using it, but I do know you can add detail and still de-emphasize certain places therefore driving your view towards something.
Anyways, I'm starting to like this effect. It's got a warm feeling to it

So I guess the only thing I don't like on this picture would be the eyebrow.
How much time did you use on this picture anwyays?

[rk]

"The fact that you saw this as a photo is a compliment of the highest order. Thank you."

My "fact" is from "File -> File Info".

"Camera Data 1"
Make: Minolta Ca., Ltd
Model: DiMAGE 7
Date Time: 2003-10-13T12:19:04-07:00
etc...

[Medley]

Some of my initial sketches were done by hand. At the time, I didn't have a decent scanner, so captured them digitally to get them into my computer. I have a camera form set up, as I do a lot of archiving, and some things just can't be run through a scanner.

Though basically none of the initial sketch remains, it was the original file that I worked from, so it makes sense the data would still be present.

And just so you know, I resent the implication. You could have simply asked.

- Medley.

[rk]

And I'm pleased. Have a nice day.