Now.. I just had a thought the other day about perception and the 'ideal' image or whatever and had a thought; if I was confronted by someone who wanted a full-body portrait of themselves and they (please don't take offence!) were much bigger than the average weight or had distinguishing features like (I'm so sorry..) a big nose, or something like that.. how would I draw them?
Don't get me wrong, I want to be able to draw people of all shapes and sizes if they are truly okay with that, but, I would definitely NOT want to offend anyone; I'd feel really crud if I were to fuel a complex or make people upset and.. I don't know. But at the same time I don't want to lie to my client because I'm an honest person and I want to capture all of their qualities, everyone is beautiful and I embrace diversity, though I understand that with looks, it can be quite a sensitive topic for most, even me sometimes.
Anyway the tl;dr version for artists: Most artists draw people with a similar body frame in their style, whether it be curvy, skinny, muscley.. but if someone comes along and they're completely different from what you usually draw, how would you draw them? How you really see them or how you think they would like to be seen?
tl;dr question for portrait buyers: Would you want the artist to draw you honestly, or how you'd like to be seen/think you look?
I didn't mean in anyway for this to be offensive, I'm just really curious!
I suppose that would depend on how the person came to me. If they made it clear that they want an honest portrait, then I would draw them honestly. But if they hinted that they wanted to look "nice" or "beautiful", then I would very slightly alter the features to what i think they would prefer. Or if it was someone I knew had an issue.. say maybe a slightly heavier (than what society considers "beautiful") woman who has become anorexic. I would choose to slightly alter her feature as to not agitate any complex
I think an artist should draw people as they are. Unless, I guess, if it's one of those commissions where flattery will get you places. But personally, I avoid this and try to capture a person as I see them. Also, there are ways to flatter a person's features without actually changing the way they look, through positioning of the head or body or the use of lighting. Chiaroscuro makes everything look pretty.
The other thing you can do personally is not look at the subjects supposed flaws as flaws, but as interesting features that add character, or as drawing challenges. In one of my nude figure drawing classes, I worked with an obese model who was actually a thrill to draw because of her fat rolls. What might be considered a flaw was actually very beautiful. You just have to reorient your thinking and let go of your assumptions about what's beautiful and what's not. I do find that I still have to resist an urge to idealize faces, which is actually not uncommon.
If you want to understand portraiture (or any form/subject) definitely look at the greats and see how they tackled it. My favorites will always be Rembrandt, Velasquez, and Hals. They painted people with flaws and all, but that's what makes their portraits so beautifully human and compassionate. Albright is another portraitist worth looking at, along with the Expressionists. They did "ugly" but saw the beauty and humanity in it.
Everyone is beautiful. If you dont agree, you will always draw people as being uglier than they are, and it will be seen through your work.
The problem isnt with the subject of your portraiture being less than attractive, its you using pre-conceived opinions of beauty in making aesthetic judgements. Its not so much that the commissioner would find your work insulting, but rather they would find YOU insulting by imagining them the way you had.
If you follow....
As an artist, you have to be true to your subject, and you have to understand that with all our differences and variations, we are all beautiful people. Draw/paint the beauty that you see, and not the opinions you dont.
Generally speaking, unless they ASK you to flatter the subject (which may happen if it's someone commissioning a portrait of a VIP, their boss, or their spouse, or just a paticularly vain person looking for a self portrait), don't flatter them any more than is consistent with the style of your previous work.
There's a big reason not to do it, and that is this; you are not responsible for the self image problems of someone you are in a professional relationship with. If they don't like a painting because it actually looks like them then that's a story for them to tell their therapist, not you.
You can't predict what they will and will not like, or what bodily features they are insecure about unless they choose to tell you. Making that assumption might actually offend someone MORE. For example; if you choose to slim a client down and they notice, you have told that client that you think that they are too fat. If you choose to make the young lady's boobs a big bigger, you have told her that her boobs are too small. That's not your judgement to make.
If they ask you to edit out a blemish or hoist their bust as part of your agreed-upon changes then certainly do it. Just never without being asked.
Also, unless you deliberatley go for a gritty sort of realism that flatters nobody, then good paintings are usually flattering. Good lighting and composition counts for a lot, without having to make any changes to the client's appearance. And if your work is gritty, hyper-honest realism that will make them look grotesque, they have the opportunity to assess whether you are suitable for their needs when they review your portfolio.
Personally I like honest portraiture because it shows off how beautiful honesty really is. Show that old lady that her laughter lines are magnificent. There is no better way to flatter somebody than revealing that there is nothing wrong with them at all.
I would first ask (or require) a photo or pose that was flattering. No need to pick the worst possible lighting or side of their face or whatever. Then I would do some light flattering (the way Bergholtz describes—I think what they've done is an excellent example) and leave it at that. It's absurd and rather insulting to the intelligence of the model to make them look 25 again if they're 60; it's equally absurd to make them look 110 pounds if they're 210. But just a little bit of flattering (along with an already flattering pose) should make the portrait still be recognizable as "them," and anyone looking at the portrait might assume that this was how the person looked on a really good day when the light was perfect, and so forth.
Anatomically, I would draw then how they are. However, when given the freedom, I like to take on a more expressive approach towards the representation, be it colour/brushwork or stressing on some feature that I think it crucial to their image.
Don't get me wrong, I want to be able to draw people of all shapes and sizes if they are truly okay with that, but, I would definitely NOT want to offend anyone; I'd feel really crud if I were to fuel a complex or make people upset and.. I don't know. But at the same time I don't want to lie to my client because I'm an honest person and I want to capture all of their qualities, everyone is beautiful and I embrace diversity, though I understand that with looks, it can be quite a sensitive topic for most, even me sometimes.
Anyway the tl;dr version for artists: Most artists draw people with a similar body frame in their style, whether it be curvy, skinny, muscley.. but if someone comes along and they're completely different from what you usually draw, how would you draw them? How you really see them or how you think they would like to be seen?
tl;dr question for portrait buyers: Would you want the artist to draw you honestly, or how you'd like to be seen/think you look?