cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

Posed that doesn't look posed is best. Sounds oxymoronic, doesn't it? Have your subject look at something other than you/camera. Have them doing something distracting - watching TV (out of shot), studying a picture (out of shot) - you get the idea. If they are concentrating on something else, they can't be concentrating on you or the camera. And never say "cheese." Except for conversation, mouths are generally closed. Keep them that way.

Randyfrieder Loc: Long Island, New York

One of my clients always assumes a particular pose, covering her chin, with her hand.
I try to get candid shots of her, because of that
She loves the candids, but continues the same way, with the hand, for posed photos

MJPerini

Well your question is "Which Style is easier"
If your question had been "Which style is easier to do WELL", my answer would have been neither.
In my opinion, getting good pictures of ANY kind has a considerable degree of difficulty, Good pictures of People is harder still. Good pictures can be posed or unposed (or candid).
If we discount for the moment the candid snapshots we all make of every day events or Birthdays or holidays which have their own value to our families and make the assumption you are asking about more formal photographic intent of getting better pictures of people in general, I would say first it is not one or the other, you need to be able to do both. We have all seen lots of bad examples of both types, consistently good pictures of people is a skill that can be learned. In "posed pictures' you have some control of Location, where and how a person appears in that location, and where You position yourself relative to both, and When/if you press the button.
In Candid pictures you only have the latter, your position relative to the subject and weather or not you press the button. Great pictures have been made both ways. Neither is easy.
Learning to pose and light people is a little like learning to play the violin--- you are going to get a lot of ugly stuff before you get good stuff. ....and no one even questions that with the violin
If you look at great art or great photographs, you will see that humans look better in certain positions than others.
But if you force that, it will look forced. Good People photographers can often direct in very subtle ways, 'take a step towards me', They stand mostly where they want people to look. They make lots of eye contact, they engage in real conversation.
None of this is about 'which is easier'
Notice we have not spoken about Portraits, which is a slightly different skill and best done as a collaboration.
It only stands to reason, that if you read an article about posing and try it, you will likely get a bunch of bad pictures, BUT you will learn something from it, and, if you persist you will get better pictures. But what is more, over time you begin to recognize when people fall into these positions naturally, and you will get better "Unposed" pictures too.
The more consciously you work at this the better you get.
Get Books of great People photographers, Karsh, Penn, Newman, Avedon, Liebovitz, Heisler and just let them sink in.
I sincerely mean this as encouragement, being good at anything requires work, but Getting Good is very satisfying.
One of the previous comments mentioned Malcom Gladwell and his 10,000 hour book (Outliers??)
But the actual photographic quote is from Henri Cartier-Bresson and was "Your first 10,000 Photographs are your worst" Which does not mean that there are not lots good pictures among them, what it really means is that it takes a significant amount of work to be more consistently Good
Good luck
Take pictures

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

I have been photographing PEOPLE for a very long time and for a good percentage of my professional experience, portraiture accounts for half of my business and still is a significant part of my work. I did a stint as a press photographer so I photographed people in all kinds of circumstances- happy, sad, tragic, elegant awkward. , in peace and combat- as is! Most of my career, however, is as a "hired gun" which means I have customers- clients who always want to look good in their images. I always joke that am a professional photographer and an amateur psychologist. I have to find out waht folks want- how they perceive their self-image. I do not stereotype people. Years ago, executive portraits, used to be stern, and authoritative in character. Nowadays some folks and their ad agencies, account executives and art directors want them to look casual and approachable. Brides want their wedding photographs to look elegant even if the reception takes place in a "junkyard"- yoy gotta be creative.

At the end of the day, you have to know waht you are doing and bea able to work quickly and efficiently to capture expressions and attitudes, however, all the technical skills in the world won't do you any good if you don't like photographing PEOPLE and have good people skills. Some folks do very nicely in front of a camera- they are relaxed and natural. Some folks would rather have the appendix removed without anesthesia than pose for a portrait- they as much as tell me so. And...there is every other kind of personality in between. I have to contend with all of them and come up with something acceptable to them and/or their publicity people.

Gotta admit it- for me it's fun! When folks SEE that you are relaxed, enjoying the experience, and realize that you are workg on their behalf to produce something good- they will relax, cooperate, and forget about their self-consciousness or hangups. If you would rather be shooting wildlife, sports, landscapes, bugs, flowers, or inanimate objects- they will pick up and that as well and YOUR negative attitude or impatience will show up in their expressions and body language.

brentrh Loc: Deltona, FL

Rolex 24 2024

User ID

Those are not really candids. Youre covering performers at their performance, even if its amatuer level.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Depends on what you call candid.

Personally, I think of portraits as either posed or candid. To me, candid is anything that isn't posed. If they're posing for a performance, that's a grey area.

Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

This is patiently untrue. Perhaps you need to brush up on photographic history.

A vast amount of great "people photography" by the masters of photography was done in the so called candid mode.

Henri Cartier Bresson who personified the technique he called "The Decisive Moment" and numerous others like him were "humanist photographers that defined photography of the human condition using the unique characteristics of still photography (i.e., capturing a nano second of time in a frozen moment).

Classical photographic portraiture with a still subject that is an aware participant is a technological evolution of the artistic traditions ranging back 1000s of years. Many of our lighting techniques for traditional photographic portraits come from paintings.

One of the Modern Masters of still portrait photography is Arnold Newman who often used the subjects environment to help define their substance. I owned a signed Newman image of Igor Stravinsky sitting at a grand piano that looks like a giant music note.

Decisive moment candid work is a matter of timing. That requires focus and patience. I owned a print of Bresson's portrait of Matisse working in his studio, and an amusing image by Robert Doisneau of Picasso with "bread" hands.

I made a excellent amount of money photographing weddings in the candid manner ... I frequently hired a second shooter to do the "formal family portraiture" which bored me to tears, but I DID retain shooting the Bridal portraits and couple pics myself.

Posing direction can be learned, however not all subjects are extroverted enough to act out your directions ... between the stilted ideas of many photographers, and the inability of the subjects to respond naturally, there is a LOT of barely mediocre work floating around out there.

Candid work can be somewhat fun ... of course you do not shoot them with their backs to you unless there is a reason. Most are captured in-Situ, with natural expressions of their life ... photographing children in this manner is priceless.

Both have value and a portrait photographer should be versed in both in my opinion.

JBuckley

While in college, I found it less intimidating to (photo shoot) subjects when they were reading a book or deeply concerned with a person that they were talking to. Now days, people spend so much time talking and texting that it would be much easier to catch them with their attentions turned elsewhere, instead of looking at a camera.

There was no such thing as cell phones in 1966. (I took some shots of people laughing while using a payphone). People are so interesting when they are laughing.

After taking a photo, I usually (bribed them), by saying that I'd bring them an 8x10 b/w the next day.

Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

Nicely put.

Lukabulla

I would say its down to the situation the portrait is taken in ..
EG .. I do a lot of Stranger shots in the street / events /etc .
I find when I aks to take a shot , they are usually surprised that I should take an interest in them ..
so the pose / expression / can reflect that .. After all , a portrait should Portray the person .
Hope this makes sense ..lol Cheers to everyone .

keywest305 Loc: Baltimore Md.

Candids are tough if you get noticed. They start posing or woman adjusting their hair.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

First of all it is "Patently" not Patiently, so maybe you should brush up on the English language. Then as you pontificate about history, perhaps if you had read the thread history you would know that my statement was referring to groups of people, where it is much more difficult to get a good candid shot. The reason for that was expounded upon earlier, but in your haste to pontificate your vast knowledge, you skipped the accumulated knowledge available to the UHH base. Good luck.

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

If I can get an attractive candid, I do, otherwise, it is try to interact with the subject on a pleasant level, with minimal "direction",or few "suggestions". Lighting, etc, are secondary matters.
I remember an old timey TV show, can't remember the name, with the actor...I think it was Robert Cummings...as a Daddy Cool photog. His usual comment was "You are gonna love this!"
During my stint as a College Yearbook portrait photog, I found that cool was the best approach. A small minority of the girls were "Karens", and nothing worked, but that's LIFE!

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

Robert Cummings had two shows. One was called "Love That Bob" I wish they were shown on tv now, as he was a really cool dude!