Hey men. How are you doing? About the portraits, I think the better ones are the second, third and nineth. Followed by the seventh and the eighth. Comparing them with the others you'll see that there is a deeper simplification of shapes while making thwm to transmit the form and light anyway. In a short amount of time, the good simplification of shapes is waht will give you the results. Lets see the first and the second one. Looks like in the second you went from big to small in a cleaner way, like without need to make a big stroke at the final like in the forehead of the first one. The problem with the first one, for example, is that you need to show in some way form when you have in the reference the face cut at the midle by the hair shadow. So it is tricky in the value arrangement. I think it would have come out better if you sacrificed the secondary light that comes from down-left. But if your goal is only represent what you see, it is a valid reference and approach. In the sixth I feel like the contrast in value in the cheekbone is too much. There you need to make the same transition than in the shoulder in a compressed way. I would say, also, that in the ones that I took as better ones there is a better and simple composition, in the use of shapes and in the clarity of them. I think you could improve mainly by observing and trying to improve the shapes and their relation from your references. Like trying a realistic one, which has its own shpes to be improved sometimes, and then maybe something a little more stylized. Now, if you got better the better ones by a better undertanding of how to reach it in Time. I mean, just by fast understanding and work. I am not sure but you could try to only get the primaries and some secondaries in the first half. And then you go for some tertiary forms the rest of time, and looking haw to improve the relations of the primaries and secondaries. But it depends on haw you actually work in this sketchy portrait practice. Hope it helps. Good luck and keep it up!