Mean Gene wrote:I can lighten the hen head bottoms a little tomorrow. I've seen lots of pictures, some have a lighter bottom, some do not. The one thing that's consistent with ducks is they're all different. :
What I believe you are seeing is inconsistency in the photos
, not inconsistencies in the ducks themselves. Either that or, immature hens/eclipse drakes vs. mature hens. Unless we're dealing with a hybrid or a bird that has been injured or diseased, all the birds of a specie have the same coloration in the same places.
Mean Gene wrote:
The sides look better as you get away. At 30+ yards they're just right. I can play around with future birds, but I'd much rather have a bird look good at 30 yards and beyond than at arm's length.
All novice carvers take note; it's just as easy to make a bird that looks "just right" in the hand as it is to make one that looks right only from 30 yards away....and the bird that looks good in the hand WILL look good from 30 yards away. All it takes is attention to detail.
I'm not just picking on Gene, here. I see this so much, and I was guilty of it myself when I first started carving; we make a bird based on what we think
it looks like rather than what it actually
looks like. A carver who wants to improve has to learn to look at the bird in "sections", not as a whole. Sometimes we have to literally look at a bird feather-by-feather, if we're going to be 100% accurate in our work.
Will be very interested in seeing that next batch of ringnecks, Gene. My criticisms are meant to be of the constructive type.