beginner's question

<p>How can i get my subject to, basically, do as I say? I don't want to bully them, but I have some very interesting ideas for shots that are almost too frustrating to accomplish.</p>

<p>We know what's in it for you. What's in it for them?</p>

>>> ... but I have some very interesting ideas for shots that are almost too frustrating to accomplish.

 

What kind of ideas? Please give an example...

<p>Have you tried asking politely?</p>

<p>Start with people you know - family, friends. Then move on to acquaintances - neighbors or coworkers.</p>

<p>After that you may find strangers you meet in public relatively pleasant and cooperative compared with trying to get your teenaged niece to pose without making duckface and incomprehensible finger signs.</p>

A. They have to trust you,

 

B. You have to be commanding enough that they listen.

 

Sounds like a dog.

Hire a model.

<p>Treat it like a dance with a partner you care about and lead, but also remember at times to follow. You'll be fine.</p>

<p>IMO, "get my subject to, basically, do as I say" is not what street/documentary photography is about. Perhaps fashion/studio, but even there your role is not to unilaterally boss around your subjects. It's always a dialogue of some sort.</p>

<p>This is all very vague but I will try a clear answer: don't. If you order people around like untrained actors the photos will look phony becasue they will be phony.</p>

<p>I disagree, Wayne. Hitchcock famously treated his actors as cattle. I saw Tippi Hedren interviewed once and, though she really disliked Hitchcock personally, for a variety of reasons, she couldn't help but "tip" her hat to his artistic genius. Hitchcock's movies are deliberate, planned, and many of the performances are very much coaxed out of the actors by the director. His films are very authentic and genuine, not at all phony. Phony is in the <em>sensibility</em> of how you approach what you do, not in any particular method of doing it. Hitchcock objectified and used his actors (particularly his actresses). That may redound negatively to him as a personality but it doesn't negate the authenticity of his artistic vision, which is often a very IMPOSED and ARTIFICIAL thing, nevertheless bearing significant human truths, not phony at all.</p>

<p>I agree, Fred: 100%. <br>

Hitchcock created rapport - (connection and understanding) - not necessarily 'friendship' but strong rapport. <br>

Rapport between Photographer and Subject can be created in a number of ways, not the least of which is by non-verbal means of communication.<br>

The metaphor of dance partners is a good one.<br>

Still waiting on a response from the OP to:"What kind of ideas? Please give an example..." </p>

<p>WW</p>

>>> Still waiting on a response from the OP to:"What kind of ideas? Please give an example..."

 

Exactly. Without more information it's difficult to speculate on such a huge range of possibilities, and then offer a good recommendation. Which is why I

haven't offered one yet...

Duplicated due to the system. And deleted by me...

<p>Yes, Brad, I think most would take that as obvious.<br>

And with all due respect to the OP: it is diffiuclt to 'engage', or create 'rapport' with a void . . . and it is also frustrating . . . <br>

And this is not the first time, Jason.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

<p>Hitchcock, huh? I photographed him many times. He liked to eat at Chasen's Restaurant. But as far as treating actors like cattle -- how much did he pay them? Are you going to pay fabulous sums of money to your street cows? Maybe you dudes think Cary Grant worked for udder fodder. I think some people live in a dream world and some have a travel trailer parked there.</p>

<p><<<<em>I photographed him many times. He liked to eat at Chasen's Restaurant.</em>>>></p>

<p>Impressive! And with a little gastronomical tidbit to back it up.</p>

<p><<<<em>Maybe you dudes think Cary Grant worked for udder fodder.</em>>>></p>

<p>Did someone suggest that? I'll re-read.</p>

<p><<<<em>I think some people live in a dream world and some have a travel trailer parked there.</em>>>></p>

<p>You may have mistaken "some" of us for people who care. The point was not about monetary exchanges. It was that one can treat people all sorts of ways and get good photos. Ordering people around, if that's what you need to do to get the shot and you've got a plan that includes working that way, is perfectly valid, whether you're paying them or not. I've had many volunteer subjects who loved me telling them what to do, which is not the only way I work, of course, being the multi-dimensional human being I am. There is no standard way to work with subjects. I assume you know that, being the experienced photographer and restaurateur that you are.</p>

<p>:)</p>

 

<p>I don't think it's about getting your subjects to do exactly as you say. You try to build the moment and capture the variations as they come out from the model. I would try doing some <a href="http://internationalstreetphotography.com">street photography</a> to practice capturing the moments rather than forcing something to happen.</p>

I thought we didn't do this for a documentary/street way of shooting.