Jeez. I really need to put some effort into this, because I can see how much effort you put into painting this.

The figure.
First of all, nice effort in using dynamic perspective. It isn't completely effective, but it is extremely ambitious and I respect that. It loses some impact because of the length of his limbs - his far arm seems long. Another issue is that his fist is perfectly horizontal - it seems forced and unnatural.

Aside from a long arm and some very shallow/slightly misplaced collarbones, the anatomy is solid until you move up to the neck and face. He has no adam's apple. I can tell you worked really hard on his face, but your failure to emphasize the lips sensibly makes it seem that he has the mouth of a concept art monster - a black hole with some teeth in it. This is something you could fix fairly easily.

The ears and the angle of his nose imply that he is supposed to be looking down at you, but the angle of the rest of his face says otherwise. I am not sure whether to tell you the position of his ears is too low, or if it's just the rest of his head that is at the wrong angle.

This may just be a stylistic preference, but I believe the cloth blowing out behind him is too linear.

Painting stuff.
I think you did a good job on all the reflective surfaces. The gold looks really nice, even if it's more of a stylistic representation and not an accurate reflection of the environment - the light source is coming from the opposite direction of the highlights, for instance.

The cloth looks nice, though I would have loved to see you provide contrast with a color that isn't black. The detail of the texture and the sparse pattern is cool when you notice it. People like little touches like that.

I see that you recognize that reflective light casts color onto other objects - the petal casting light onto the far arm is an example of that, though maybe it's a bit strong.

The skin is probably the part of this piece that drags it down. It's very muddy - shading skintones with dark browns and blacks without throwing in other undertones tends to do that. I might suggest more reds or purples in the future, given the lighting situation. The black area in the far hand looks out of place and unfinished. The veins in the arms are a nice touch, as is the body hair.

I understand the symbolism of the cherry blossom petals here, though I think they do lend a bit of a strange, gay vibe to the picture.

My favorite parts of this are probably the near arm (nice!) the ring (very nice!) the pose of the far hand (very accurate!), and the hair. I am really bad at hair, that's probably better than what I could do. I just don't get hair.

--
Check out my Guide to Effective DeviantART Critiques.

The head is pulled back a little so the chin is very close to the neck. This hides the adam's apple along with the wrinkles in the shadow of the jaw. This is what I was thinking. I could be wrong. Light is of course the main issue in every drawing, and I decided there are two main light sources for this image. The one from the background lightening, and another, more general/ambient but weak light coming almost against the dude. This second light source changed a lot in my head, from being general, to being caused by another lightning in front of him (therefore the reflections on the hilt and ring) to a certain mix between the two.

The angle of the face is problematic and it's given me a hard time until I couldn't think anymore. I almost fell asleep while working on this yesterday, and I eventually had to quit on it. I realize it could use a lot more toning and shade-editing, but the very idea of sitting on that computer chair gives me a backache. I'm not sure I'm gonna do it, and that is why it's on the gallery already.

You are right in that the cloth is a preference. No real skirt extends that long.

At home, it looks very close to what I want it to be, but here on this LCD screen it looks generally darker, and the background does look sort of black.. It's blue/bluish. The skin's a little livelier despite the cold-night-ish atmosphere, but overall, I don't want it to be vibrant/lively like artists tend to do and has become eye-standard.

The petal reflected light isn't my doing. The petal is too close, the arm is too far. I never thought it would reflect light noticeably that far. That was supposed to be more of the general light + scattering from the background light, but maybe it's fail?

The neck is too long for it to appear that the chin is close to the neck. It's true that it would hide the adam's apple if that were the case, but you would also see more of the top of his head and you probably wouldn't see the inside of his nostrils.

In reference to the black, I don't mean that the background is a bad color - it's fine, really. The problem lies in using black as a color to shade. It's a big art no-no when you're trying to paint, much like leaving huge white areas in the canvas, or using white to highlight/lighten colors. I understand your worry about overly vibrant colors, but it is sensible to have some concern for what is aesthetically pleasing; IE, your goal is noble, but the execution is aesthetically displeasing.

The length of the skirt is not something I questioned, moreso the fact that it is pin-straight extending out from behind him. It doesn't look quite right to me, but it could very well be a conscious stylistic choice.

You could excuse the reflected light on the underside of the far arm as coming from the petals, if you really wanted to. It doesn't look as if it's just general light, though. It's too strong.

--
Check out my Guide to Effective DeviantART Critiques.

I guess leaving the body and head where the are and editing the angle of the neck would fix that. Along with some shortening.

The background IS blue. I memorized some of its visual aspects on this LCD screen at work, and then went home and checked it there. It looked very different! It really does look black here!!! I HATE LCDs!!!!

My monitor does give a bit more of a red tint to everything, but I tuned it down and the colors still looked better on my CRT. Sometimes I think I only draw for myself; only I see my drawings the way they should be. I've asked for monitor tips before, but didn't get any help. I never used black in this image. The only thing dark enough to be black is the mouth cavity. I admit that the far arm is darker than is supposed to be but it's NOT black. If it seems that way, maybe you should try to view this on a CRT monitor? I want to know the difference it makes so that I locate the problem. Is my monitor wrong, or is LCD?

Do you us Photoshop? You can use Adobe Gamma to adjust your monitor settings.

I use a laptop, but I have a fancy screen on it. It may be an LCD with some sort of coating, but it doesn't look like a normal LCD. I would note that a lot of people's stuff looks dark on my monitor, but even on my husband's computer the skintones are still muddy.

--
Check out my Guide to Effective DeviantART Critiques.

I use Photoshop and obviously there is something called Adobe Gamma Loader or something installed with it. Should I edit something?

What is your husbands's monitor? Mine is a 15" flat CTX, electron gun by Sony, so the colors are better than anything else I've ever seen. It is a bit old but still beats others. It is also likely that I am merely used to what it shows me. Many won't agree, but I think LG's are some of the worst monitors ever made. I wonder how they sell so well.

The issue here is not so much with darkness or brightness as the colors used.

--
Check out my Guide to Effective DeviantART Critiques.

This is what I mean. Even the colors differ. The sky looks either black or dark blue on LCD. On my monitor, it's an obvious shade of blue. The skin and cloth look more vibrant despite my tuning them down. How well can you see his armpit hair? it looks detailed on my monitor. Here it looks almost like a black hole. I need this cleared not for this image, but to ensure my work is viewed in the best way possible by the extreme majority. Monitor tips!!!

I have a cat in my lap...!

Well, I was about to write a book about this picture, but I think that it's mostly been covered.

As is often the case with your work, there are no horrible errors, but there are an array of small strangenesses that come together for bizarre effect.

The angle implied by the background doesn't mesh with anything else in the picture. The figure looks as if the viewer is angled slightly down (far nipple and hip are higher than the close ones), and the column's shaft is ruler straight while the top implies a low angle looking up.

Combined with the small but visible anatomical quirks, the overall picture comes off more surreal than dramatic.

Overall I'd say that this is a commendable effort but you may have put a lot of finishing work into a piece that needed more attention to the foundation.

--
Like a knife to my very soul,
but it wasn't a knife.
It was a knife LOBSTER