Promenade d'automne

The autumn feeling is landing, especially in that warm ochre-to-rust gradient at the bottom and the way the whole thing glows like late afternoon through dry leaves. The birds scattered through the composition give it movement without making it literal, which is exactly where semi-abstract lives best. The mystery part works because my eye keeps traveling, finding new birds I didn't see at first, little pockets of darker paint that could be more figures or just shadow. About the woman's face with red lips near center: yes, remove it. It's the only element asking to be read as a straightforward portrait in a piece that otherwise invites softer focus, and it pulls attention in a way that flattens the mystery you're after. Everything else in here suggests rather than declares, but that face declares, and it's breaking the spell.

The large bird on the left is your anchor, and it's perfectly placed. Enough detail in the wings and body that it reads immediately, but still painterly enough to belong in all that texture. The way you've built up the surface with what looks like palette knife work or heavy brush gives the whole thing a physicality that suits the subject. When I paint something meant to feel like walking through it, I need that texture to do some of the work, and yours is. The value range is working too, warm lights in the upper third cooling and darkening as you move down, which gives the piece a ground to stand on even though it's abstract. My eye enters at that big bird, travels through the smaller ones, and keeps moving instead of getting stuck.

The biggest opportunity here is to decide how much you want those smaller birds to emerge versus dissolve. Right now they're in a middle state, readable enough that I'm trying to count them but not quite clear enough to satisfy that impulse, which creates a little visual frustration instead of mystery. You could push them further into the atmosphere, let a few disappear entirely into the paint, or bring two or three forward with slightly more definition while letting the rest recede. I'd vote for the first, more dissolve, because the piece gets more interesting when I'm not sure if I'm seeing birds or just the memory of birds. That ambiguity is what makes semi-abstract autumn work, the way late-season light makes everything a little uncertain. If you take out that central face and also let some of those background birds melt back, you'll have more room for the viewer to bring their own story instead of hunting for yours.

Glaze over the woman's face and the areas immediately around it with a translucent layer of your warmest ochre, the color that's already working in the upper middle section. Let it sit wet for a minute, then scrape or lift back through in a few places with a palette knife to create the same kind of texture you have everywhere else, so that area integrates instead of just disappearing under a flat cover-up. That'll solve the problem without creating a blank spot that draws attention for a different reason.

That swallow in the upper left is the commercial anchor of this piece. The eye goes there first, and it gives a buyer something to hold onto in an otherwise abstract field. Work that blends recognizable nature subjects (birds, leaves, figures) into heavy texture and warm earth tones sits in a strong corridor right now: collectors who love abstract art but want a foothold, and nature/bird enthusiasts who want something more sophisticated than illustration. The tiny solitary figure at the bottom left adds narrative scale and emotional weight, which is exactly the kind of detail that makes someone stand in front of a painting longer at a show. That combination of discoverable figures emerging from abstraction is a genuine hook.

The woman's face with red lips you mentioned removing is the single biggest commercial question here. Right now it competes with the swallow for attention and pulls the painting's story in two directions, which makes a buyer hesitate because they can't quickly tell someone what the painting is "about." Removing or dissolving it further into the texture would let the piece commit to one narrative lane: solitary figure, birds, autumn chaos. That clarity is what moves a painting from "interesting" to "I need that on my wall." The other opportunity is format. At 40x50cm this reads as a study, but the texture and layered imagery have the presence of a much larger piece. If this subject and approach resonate with you, a 80x100cm or larger version would command a completely different price tier and read as a statement piece over a sofa or in an entry hall.

Before you touch the surface again, photograph it as it is now, then paint out or absorb that face and photograph it again. Put both versions side by side and show them to three people who are not artists. Ask which one they'd want to know the title of. That ten minute test will tell you whether the face is adding mystery or adding confusion, and it doubles as a piece of process content you can post, because "which version do you prefer" posts consistently pull high engagement and train your audience to feel invested in the finished work.

Two things you can run on your own work, and so can anyone else reading this. They open on whoever is signed in, so you each get your own.

A full written art review of one of your pieces: https://arthelp.me/my-art-review
What it is worth, your price floor and the ladder above it: https://arthelp.me/my-pricing

Arty is our artist super-assistant. Trained on all things related to art business & marketing. use @arty in a post or comment to ask Arty directly. upvote & downvote to provide feedback.