Grisaille layer with corrections in Underpainting layer

In order to try and recover from the mistakes, I had to rebuild the film of paint from scratch. I decided not to try and recover the Imprimatura (it would take far too much time to allow for the drying time of both the Imprimatura, then Underpainting, then the Grisaille layers before I can proceed with the painting); so I went straight in and filled in the blanks directly with the Underpainting (see below for medium used).
As both corrections had to ultimately belong to brightly lit areas, I've used only Raw Sienna. The result is here for record only, as at the moment it does look ugly enough.
I have all my hopes set on the Grisaille layer correction bit.
I might have to uniform the Grisaille layer afterwards, as a simple filling-of-the-blanks mightn't do the trick.
I'm confident the overall modification wont' be visible in the finished painting. It all depends on the next Second Grisaille layer.
This second layering isn't described in all the sources, but I believe the sources would describe the general technique applied, and I'm not the only one that makes such a correction.
In reality, when studying Rembrant and Vermeer, one does come across some stages in their painting where the corrections seem to be made between layers, without such a drastic maneuver as here.
Those corrections are made visible today in two ways: either by x-raying the paintings with special techniques (there are instances of a painting were the fingers on a piano are entirely adjusted after Rembrant spoke with a pianist that was able to give him indications on the correct hand posture on the keyboard), or in such cases where the White (Lead white was used at the time) had become so translucent with time to show the layer beneath, and therefore showing the correction that was made.
Now, I'm a beginner painter and most certainly don't believe I have anything more in me than those masters.
However, there is a thing I have as an advantage. The knowledge of the descendants.
In those times, the fact that white would have become so translucent as to show the layer underneath wasn't a known concept. This because this style of painting began exactly in that century.
Nowadays though, we can benefit from the fact that we can view and analyze those Rembrands at a couple of centuries distance - this is what allows us to know that corrections made with layers will eventually show.
Regardless on whether I will ever paint well enough so that my paintings will last more than my lifetime, I am however attempting to paint in the best possible manner - if I don't do it in this way, where is the passion?
One has to attempt to do something at one's best. There is no alternative, no middle ground here.
I'm doing this for my own pleasure only. I wish one day I would have a life entirely dedicated to painting, but I'm far too logical and practical to see this as anything different than a desire.
Nothing stops me, though, to play and have fun in the only way in which it is meaningful to me: putting into it my one hundred percent. Not talent, of course, not technique, of course, but the only thing I know how to do: intensive, passionate research and the necessary patience to attempt the unthinkable.
With these thoughts in mind, this second attempt makes absolute sense to me :-)

Grisaille Layer with mistakes scraped out

Three weeks ago I did the Grisaille layer. This increases the fat of the paint, as there's 1 part Stand Oil to 5 parts of Turpentine. To the Raw Sienna and Burnt Umber, I've added Titanium White to the palette.
The objective here is to finalize the details - which in this painting mainly consist in adjusting and correcting the shadows - and achieve an overall effect of a moonlit monochrome picture.
I believe this effect was achieved, but there was something so wrong about the whole figure and I couldn't figure out what it was.
I let it to dry, as a couple of weeks are needed to pass the simply dry-to-the-touch stage to a good dryness of the film of paint.
In the meantime I kept looking at it, and comparing it with the drawing.
Finally it dawned on me that the wrong thing about it was that the left part of the figure was way too narrow, compared to the right part.
It wasn't that visible from the figure itself (at least to mine not-well-trained eyes) but became rather apparent when looking at the margins: the left margin, even accounting for the halo, was way too wide compared to the right margin.
Given, however, that I took great care to align the neck, the spine and the line between the cheeks to the exact middle of the picture (had a string-hook pasted at the back to allow for hanging and drying safely out of ZeeBee's reach), this difference in margins shouldn't have been there.
So I took some tracing paper and placed it over it, drawing the middle line first, and then tracing all the right contour.
At that stage, I cut out the paper following the contour, and simply reversed it, placing it therefore on the left side.
The difference between the two parts was enormous.
I traced directly on the painting with a pencil the correct contour, and then I scraped very delicately with the spatula all the film of paint that was between the newly drawn line and the edge of the painted figure.
It wasn't that easy, as I didn't want to loose the gesso layer of the background. Unfortunately the Underpainting Layer got lost as well, but at least I kept the white gesso ground.
So here it is the Grisaille layer with the scraped contours.