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

There are psychological aspects of portraiture- the message or statement an image contains about the subject.
Different folks will read different messages, stories or statements into the same image.

The position of catch-lights in the eyes is twofold when analyzing a portrait. Theses positions are indicative of lighting position and direction which influence other factors such as modeling, rendition of texture, and approach to facial structure. Certain kinds of lighting can influence the expression in the eyes, which is more psychological on the part of the viewer. Certain lightings can cause the eye to seem manic, a deer-in- the headlights kind look, or can cause the yes to become under-illuminated and have a blank and "dead" appearance. How the photographer relates to the subject also influences the outcome of the portrait.

I am not a fan of the reference to "crazy" and "pain in the ass" commentary but I am reluctant to delete the post because it speaks to a certain aspect of portraiture. There are no personal attacks- just opinions. Some may object to the sexual connotations but those too may be valid aspects of portraiture and photographer/subject relationships- that is how various photographers stimulate expressions in their subjects.

Each photographer SHOULD have their own style. Mine is traditional portraiture and my critiques are usually somewhat biased and based on that style and philosophy, however, I don't blanket condemn other styles. My advice is when folks make criticisms of your work that you disagree with, take it for what it's worth and move on. Yet another approach is to look up the critic's other posts and see what he or she is up to photographically and base your acceptance or rejection on what you see.

dat2ra Loc: Sacramento

Thanks, E.L.