[Ashbys]

This is the first of the Native American women that will be with the mountian trader and the shamen. Had a bit of time to work on it , so at this point it is ready to detail.

I put a finished pic of the Shamen in the gallery to give better photo's

Hope you like her.

As always coment and suggestions welcome .

Ash

[Colin_Partridge]

Nice Job Garry love the set. What are you going to do with her hands is she going to be holding something. Good to see you back carving again that Lazer was taking up all your time.
Colin

[Mottles]

Hey Ash, she's wonderful can't wait to see all these elements come together. I was wondering the same as Colin about the hands?
Kathy

[Anthony Filetti]

Lookin' good Ash!

[Ashbys]

Thanks Tony , Kathy , and Colin .

She will be holding something in them , I tried to give her a look of motion as if she is walking towards the area , slightly turned her head as if she just glanced a bit ahead of her step.

Because of the size she is a bit more fragile than I would like. I think the next one will be mahgony, has the same tone in the wood , but a bit stronger .

Ash

[Irishman]

Should be nice when they are all together as each one looks great on its own. I can see teepees, campfire, canoe, trees and other accessaries going with your scene. The position of her arms appears like she's carrying firewood...or perhaps a blanket or hide.
Patrick

[Irish]

Garry, thanks for letting me know you had a thread going!

As we spoke on the phone problems or areas of the face that catch your attention as having problems may not be the real problem area. That, I think, is the case with your maiden.

My eye does go right for her chin but I think what you need to work on is her jaw line from the chin corners back to the hair line. Right now the bottom edge of her jaw line has little or no angle.

I know that the American Indian face is much more square than a Causation face and often has a strong line to the front area where the chin lies. This usually shows as the side jaw areas in equal length to the chin line area. But for a woman's face, even though these three areas are equal in length the jaw line would angle more sharply toward the ear than that of a man's jaw.

Because her side jaw angles are low right now but she is depicted as female your eye goes directly to the jaw line ... and so the chin because this is the highlighted area.

Before I removed any chin I would angle the jaws up toward the ears a little more and see if that did not correct the 'problem'.

Second you have just a little too much nose for this gal. The American Indian face is square which means that it is as tall as it is wide. Right now you have her face long - about 15-20% extra - and it falls in the nose line from the nose bridge to the tip of the nose ball tip.

I know you can not 'remove' that extra nose length but you can add a v-gouge line under the lower eye lid in the cheek area to increase the look of the eyes. This would imply that the eyes are larger and therefore that the nose line is more appropriate.

Also you can soften the angle along the brow line to make the eyes flow more gently into the forehead area. This would redue the shadow in the eye area and make the eyes look larger.

Third, you forgot Rembrandt's Man!

The human body is eight heads high .... Right now your lady is only around 6 heads which gives her a feeling of being slightly top heavy. In the second image I took your body and stretched it from under her chin to her toes. Notice how she looks more proportional.

Last one ... I know that on my right side her shawl is buckling. But at first impression the lower buckle implies her shoulder. Obviously on second look the should line is the upper smaller buckle. If it were me I would reduce or delete that lower buckle to visually put her should back where it belong around the level of the first braid in her hair.

Susan

[Irish]

Here's the Rembrant version.

Susan

[Treever]

Ash-Looking good so far. I don't know the scale you are working in, but I assume it's kind of small-and that's something I always struggle with-small stuff.

You mentioned that you are implying motion with the step forward and head turned. Definitely-it makes the piece more dynamic by adding that. Your figure reminds me of Egyptian Ka statues or Archaic Greek korous statues. They implied motion by extending a leg forward just like you are doing. Kinda cool to know you are following the path of artists before you, isn't it? Look at late Archaic and early Classical Greek statues for examples of "contrapposto", or counterpoised body positioning. As the leg extends, the hips and shoulders shift, too. Google up "Kritios Boy", a male nude statue, to see what I mean, or I could post a picture up for you.

Might not be able to achieve such motion in this current work, but perhaps an idea for a future piece. Keep up the good work!

[Ashbys]

Treever,

Thanks. I am using combinations, to aquire more motion with weight. All learning processes for me.. The motion in the skirt, shifting forward, , shoulders forward slightly bent, forward foot braced back foot slightly raised. Slightly bent forward . It is not always easy to show motion, when you used fullly clothed figures that are designed to hide the figure. There are no muscles to see, so it has to be seen in other manners. Fun to play with through.

Ash