E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
My observation in reading many posts on this forum is that there is not a resentment of so called "rules" or traditional methods but rather a misunderstanding or misconstrued interpretation of the concept of certain aesthetics and technicalities in portraiture. Whether the portrait is traditional, more contemporary, environmental, casual or formal, made in a studio or on location, out of doors, with artificial or natural light there are certain aesthetics that should apply across the board. Observing good aesthetics in you portraiture is not tantamount to making stiff unnatural images. The art is in making a formal, planned and controlled portrait look entirely natural.
Simply stated, bad posing, lighting, camera positions and use of inappropriate focal lengths cause distortions and misrepresentation of a person's features and physical structure. If hands, arms and limbs are not posed gracefully or naturally, the appear elongated, missing or awkward. If the camera position is too low in relation to the face, the nostrils become a dominant feature of the image. If not posed correctly, hands become “claws” elbows become “stumps” and and facial features are poorly represented. The foremost attribute of a good portrait is a good likeness!
There is all the talk about psychological portraiture, capturing character, telling stories about a person's lifestyle and that is all good. Problem is, sloppy technique causes distractions from all that good stuff so the idea is to study the craft, practice hard, and make some of the so called “rules” second nature so that you CAN concentrate on bringing out expressions, showing character and telling stories. The same idea goes to camera handling and image management- exposure, focus, depth of field, “bokeh” selective focus, and background and foreground management. If you want peak expressions and natural poses, you can't be there messing around with your gear- too much fiddling. You need to standardize certain aspects of your methods and make them second nature as well.
Lighting? Once you understand the basic concepts of formal studio lighting, as boring as some may think it is, you can find effective portrait LIGHT just about anywhere. You can make an award winning masterful portrait with a candle! A simple reflector can do wonders. So many photographers are just too preoccupied with gear! I have seen folks with $10,000 worth of electronic flash gear and they can't make a decent portrait! I can show you how to make a fine portrait with a cheap old photo-flood bulb in a 12 inch parabolic reflector- if they still sell that stuff in the camera stores. Got an old movie or video light in the closet? Any DSLR with n 85- to 105mm lens or zoom setting will do the job- you don't need a $3,000 lens. I can even show you haw to create a great environmental portrait with a wide moderate angle lens. If you know what you are doing, your post processing will me minimal and you can look after softening and such, right at the camera.
My advice...first learn the “BOX” and stay in it until you grasp all the basics and then jump in and out as per your own creativity. Don't mistake sloppy, lazy or inapt work as “out of the box” it's just poor photography. Learn to analyze and criticize you own work. Things like multiple catch-lights in the eyes MAY be an indication of a disunity of lighting- that's how they get in there. Don't get hung up or against impactful compositions- cutting into the top of the head , hat or hair is fine if it places the eyes in a strong position in the composition.
And don't y'all be telling me that you ain't a professionals and you don't do it for the money! I have see masterpiece portraits done by amateurs, brain surgeons, plumbers, auto mechanics, secretaries and pros alike. If you love it, you will do it right for your own edification.
My observation in reading many posts on this forum... (
show quote)
Wonderful post. Thank you.