Has anyone noticed that more and more babies are being painted with less and less contrasting color on their faces??? Maybe it’s just me but it seems like the babies are MUCH less colorful than they were for a while there. I see babies that are almost colorless on the faces which actually may be more representative of a REAL baby but comes across as almost not painted. I know that paint can be exaggerated simply to make a baby look more realistic even if it isn’t really true to life. Does any of this make sense? Just wondering if anyone else is noticing this?
YES…noticed this for a while now. I’m starting to think I work way too hard. LOL
I like my babies to have more realistic skin tones, not overly mottled but still some color to them.
Geez, thanks Karen, I was hoping it wasn’t just me. I feel the same way like those babies don’t have any color on their faces!!! lololol And I know what you mean, you look and think----man, I could do that in 10 minutes!!! (probably couldn’t you know).
I was thinking about this exactly this past week! You are so correct. When I study my favorite artist’s work, some of their rich coloring really isn’t true to life, and yet it’s the way that I see the world. Maybe that’s part of what makes us artists- the ability to put what we feel into what we see, and then what we create! What a beautiful observation. Thanks for mentioning it!
You are welcome, thanks for the input!!
I’ve been using more color lately… Getting braver and going bolder.
I notice this too. I think the babies with a little more color seem to sell for better prices as well. My favorite artist paint with color. Not always what I would consider “bold” but they definitely give more color than what an actual real life baby would have.
I love to see unique work!
I have also noticed some babies lately that are almost barely painted. I have to look hard for any color. I don’t think it looks realistic at all… unless a baby is ill or something most do have plenty of color you can see. I love the details!
My granddaughter was chubby and seemed to be pretty much one colour. When she was screaming she would be deep red all over, when she was peacefully asleep she was peaches and cream. Any blotching was invisible in her screaming mode, and in her peaceful mode any colour variation was so subtle that it was only noticeable if you looked very closely. From 3ft distance her skin looked very evenly coloured. That seems to be the case with all the other babies I keep looking at. They seem to be flushed only when overheated.
It is really beauty in the eye of the beholder I think…When I first started I painted much darker and less realistically because I think it is the inexperience and the perception that exaggerated colour, mottling, veins, etc is 'realistic" when really it isn’t. There are exceptions to the rules of course but most babies after they are a couple of days old do not have heaps and heaps of purple and blue mottling or extreme veins, etc…
Ultimately, it is what a person sees and likes…I always paint how my kids and grands looked and what I perceive as beautiful…as do other ladies I think…
Here is an example…(may not be the best example but anyway…it makes the point I hope…lol)
The first baby I did after about a year and a half of reborning…I over emphasised the colour, veins, mottling…and though some may think it looks ok…if you compare it to the second picture you will see that after another 5+ years of experience, I still get detail, but it is more natural and more realistic…like you would expect to see on a real baby…it is ‘quieter’ colour…so I really think it is a matter of moving forward and learning to keep detail but moderate it to a more natural look based on what you see as beautiful…
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - ALWAYS!
Ludmila is right…I think it depends on what “mode” the baby is in…I know my grandaughter
is fairskinned…and yet…when she has been running and playing she has TONS of color in her cheeks and hands!!
My grandkids have really RED lips…and I know if I painted my babies that way…they would look like they
had lipstick on :+)
I have painted both ways…lots of color all the way down to pale, pale skin…I just go where the mood
and the kit take me!!!
I don’t think there is any “right” or “wrong” way to paint a baby, because gosh…every baby born is different!!!
You’re probably referring to @allhisgrace. Misty does vivid, more intense coloring. I really like her style.
Both babies are beautiful, but personally I think the first one looks more realistic.
I so agree about the different perceptions and styles. I personally have a hard time not doing a warm wash on every baby I make. When I look at my own skin, I can see yellow undertones. I guess it’s the Native American in my ancestry. I struggle with cool tones for this reason, but I’m working on that.
I think each artist has to learn how to build the skintones up so that even babies that don’t have a lot of color other than flesh still have depth. I’m still working on that too.
Both are so sweet but I love the first one!
The first picture (Jody) is one of my favorite artist! I have a new baby coming from her soon!! Yay! She uses color beautifully!
I on the other hand, prefer the 2nd one.
And of course in person and various lighting, they look different again.
I adore Jody’s work. She is one of my faves too. I can hardly wait to get my Thomas twins from her.
I love both of these babies. I wouldnt have thought of it as growth but a different style.
Yes, I’ve been shocked at some of the recent babies that only seem to have a bit of lip color. As discussed in some older threads, real babies that don’t have mottling look real because, well…they ARE real! They move, breathe, cry, etc. The dolls need some help to achieve the “real” look (assuming that’s the artist’s goal). Mottling and veins definitely help to achieve that goal but they can also be overdone, especially the veins. I’ve seen some beautifully painted babies only to be ruined (in my opinion) by the veins that just stand out and don’t blend in at all.