Constructive Critiques Please!

[wildflower]

Hi everyone! I am so thrilled with your respones to my request for a critique. I can't thank you enough for your critiques, your honesty, suggestions and support. It's exactly what I need and asked for: to have my strengths AND my weaknesses pointed out and suggestions made. That's what good critiquing is about. Otherwise, how am I to learn and improve my skills? You all made very valid points and I will keep coming back to each and every comment taking it into consideration. If any of you think of something else to add please do so.

Doris, thank you for adding the link and for putting so much thought and time into your critique and for all your positive and constructive comments. The foreground branch on the left is very delicate and broke a few times as I was working. The closest tree in the background on the left is the same. The ears however, are very strong with solid wood slanting back on an angle (see note below to Phil). Would you please elaborate on your point re: "false shadow" as I think this is an important aspect of relief carving which I am not fully understanding and I really appreciate you bringing it up. I wondered about this as I was carving and my understanding is that one needs to hollow out behind in order to eliminate the "false shadow" yet I didn't know what to do about it or how to go about it or even if I could considering the small size of the piece. I wasn't even sure where I might be casting false shadows. Which ear were you referring to? Yes, I agree that the horizon line is too steep ~ perhaps if I had left more material room between it and the top of the frame? Thanks for your comment too about the "carving from the "deepest" background to the "shallowest" foreground ~ it's good to know I'm not the only one who felt that way. I think what it suggests however, is to rough-out the various levels before one begins any detailed carving thereby reducing the risk of going too deep with any of the various levels. As I mentioned before, the light shows through at the deepest point in my carving. That's close!!!

The measurements of this piece are:
11" long X 7.5" high X 1 3/4" deep (the elelphants trunk and one foot extends just a bit beyond that depth measurement). I guess that may be considered small considering the overall picture. For the most part I used chisels and gouges because that is my preference. However, I did have to use my power rotory tool to get in between the legs and really tight spots and to create the depth in the leaves of the trees. The large wrinkles in the elephant's skin is done with a V-tool and the small wrinkles are done by drawing and pressing a find dental tool over the wood.

Phil, you made a good point about not seeing it from different angles. That may be my biggest weakness and the deciding factor with the judges. I carved the sides of the elephant on an angle behind the animal back to the deepest point on about a 35-40o angle. It's in a very basic, somewhat curvey V-shape following the basic outline of the front of the animal. The carving is just too small and it was too difficult (or maybe I was too lazy) to get in behind to shape out it's sides, backside and individual legs. I'd like your comments on this. If you go to the link that Doris provided for my gallery pictures and click on the picture twice to enlarge it, the finer detail is pretty visable. There are two pictures and the darker one is much better with less glare.

Paolo59, I hope you are able to click on the link that Doris so kindly provided in one of her comments. Once you get there be sure to click on the picture a second time to enlarge it in order to see the detail. I'd appreciate your input.

Forrest, thanks for your support and creative suggestions. How would I go about making those fine grasses you suggested ~ at the elephant's feet perhaps? ~ definitely food for thought.

Christina, thanks for you support and lovely words...perhaps I'll be able to figure out how to post a picture which includes the other entries.

My gosh, I'm longwinded...sorry 'bout that folks. I look forward to chatting with all in the near future...and I'll try to keep them shorter.

Chimo,

Leslie

[Mark Dellinger]

Leslie,
I cannot offer any expert opinion, I can only say that I think the piece is very nice. I also, just like Christina can't imagine what first and second place looked like. I would be proud and very thrilled with your carving regardless of what it placed in the show. It is very good, especially for your first. Continue the good work.

Sfae Carving and God Bless,

Mark

[wildflower]

Thank you for your kind words and support Mark. I tried to insert an image of my carving with the other entries at the show but it didn't work. I'll try again tomorrow.

Chimo,

Leslie

[doris]

hi leslie, oh yes, that is pretty small for so tiny things you carved. wow, i am more amazed even :-) ... oh, yours actually is not longwinded since you say so much in these lines, so never worry...about the shadows...as said, i am not expert in relief, but here is what was my simple thinking... i mean the shadow under his right ear, the left side of foto. the shadow falls on what is the sandy ground. so one has the feeling it should be the shadow induced by the sun, but then its shape is not right, it should start at the feet solidly since they stand on the ground...the shadows under the trees at the horizon, these trees are far away, as we can tell from their size (very well use of perspective btw), but then, when you see things that far, you cannot see much of shadows, most the time you dont see them, since there is "atmosphere perspective"="the farer away the blurrier, and the farer away the less contrasts", and this implies shadows would be seen, it at all, only very faintly, and not strong and bold... and again, here too, if we would see a shadow of such a far tree, the shape would be different, shadows follow rules of perspective too, and since they are "lying flat on ground" they are much compressed being that far away, and not directly under the branches etc...
good that the ears are strong, so i understand you did consider this point already in this carving. i truely look forward to your next work, keep going, trust your instincts, they tell you safely what is "right" and "wrong"...
yes, it suggests to rough out a relief, like you would a carving in the round, actually i treat my releifs no different than carvings in the round, of course the subjects need be presented "compressed in depth",,,and yes, i carve as deep as necessary too, to the point the light shines through, but this makes me stop ! lol...

now after i have said al that, about the shadows i mean, i start wondering if it is all true in africa, where the elefants live, since the sun there is so much stronger,,,i have never been there, so maybe i am just plain wrong ? so please, consider my saying just as food for thought, not as "rule", i know you understand what i mean

[wildflower]

Hi Doris: Thank you again for being so patient and expaining things to me. I believe what you say about 'false shadows' to be correct. I watched a video some time ago on relief carving and he spoke of 'false shadows'. His solution was to create an opening in the wood behind the object ie: the elephant because his shadow would not fall back to the distant tree line ~ rather the sun would stike the ground behind him and his shadow. I really don't know if that would be possible with this carving because it is compressed into such a small area within the frame. There is only about an inch and a half between the widest point on the elephants side (his left side) to the right side of the frame. I would have to come in from the opposite side to try to carve through three inches of wood in order to let the light through behind him. What do you think? (Sounds like a lot more work that what it's worth. LOL) But I do want to learn from this so I keep racking my brain.

As I am typing this message to you, I am studying my carving here in front of me with a strong lamp light on it simulating the sun. I am also studying my avatar photo. You are right again about the shadow of the middle ground tree which I carved under the trunk and branches (any trees beyond that point are not carved under, they are just flat.) I'm wondering how I would correct that if I were to do it again. Perhaps if the horizon line was much less steep the shadow would then fall away from the base of the tree trunk and become more muted as it recedes...as it is it has created a very steep angle in the centre of the tree's foliage? What do you think, Doris?

Are you an artist/painter? I ask because I am and you are very perceptive when it comes to perspective, atmospheric illusions, etc. Again, I thank you so much for helping me with this. You know what you are talking about and I value your opinion.

Chimo,

Leslie

[doris]

hi leslie,,, hmmm, i never tried this with the openings, or rather, i am doing similar in my recent work for the hair portion, you can look the stage, if you like on my blog, its the delphic sybil, ,,but this is highrelief and different...

yes, the horizon line less steep would help some (but i hope you not plan to change this carving, we discuss this for later carvings right ??, i love your carving as is, and i would not recommend to do anything we talk now here with it, ....) but actualy, i would try to not undercut at all, i never do that for effect, only when shapes demand it naturally,,,and carve the tree farther away more shallow than the trees closer, mimic atmospheric perspective... that is what i have seen on relief panels on the rothenburg altar by riemenschneider. the old masters had a lot good ideas, we only need look and study them... no, i am no artist, i am mathematician, and carve for 3 years, i learned all what i now tell you, by studying as i said, my favourite old masters....oh, yes, i draw too, some are on my homepage,lol, a lot of advertising today,,,

[paolo59]

Hi Leslie,
I haven't look at the forum for a couple of days, and now I have found a very interesting discussion.
Yes, I have seen the enlarged picture. (Doris anticipated me in suggesting how to put a link).
For a beginner (I'm a beginner too) your relief is just fantastic. I understand well the critique about the shadows, but I don't understand the proposed solution.

Doris, I was in Rothenburg last year and I remember the riemenschneider altar; I stayed more than one hour looking at that masterpiece; I also took some pictures, but with a small camera, and the result was not good. Maybe you have some pictures of it to share with us?

Ciao
Paolo

[doris]

hi paolo,,,sadly i also only had a small digital camera, and that day i was there it was rainy so very dark inside the crhuch too. so my fotos are more than poor, ,,,but next time i go there, i try again, and then i will put pictures... did you have seen assumption of the virgin altar of riemenschneider in creglingen too ? its very close to rothenburg, and the altar was over 300 years enclosed in a box and forgotten, now recovered, and the linden wood is still very light, since it was only so short time exposed to the light...

[zolten_sabo]

Hi Leslie!
I just have to say...OMG!! That is BEAUTIFUL work! I'm not one for relief carving(at least not yet), but the overall view of this piece is great! Whatever you did or however you did it doesn't matter, just keep doing it!