Jump to content

Thinking about Portaiture


Ricochetrider

Recommended Posts

I am gearing up to try my hand at portraiture. I have in mind to work mostly with B&W film, and mostly in whatever existing light there is, finding subjects in their own environment, be it at work, at play, or at home. I'm wondering how to relax in the setting of shooting subjects IE people, up close. The *plan*, such as it is, is to use my Hasselblad 500cm medium format camera and 180mm lens- so I won't exactly be in peoples' faces.

 

So far I've broached the subject with a couple friends, of sitting for portraits- and for whatever reason it just feels more than a little awkward. Funny because in general, I have great people skills and can pretty much talk to anyone about anything. I guess I just need to get over "the hump" on this and get a few sessions under my belt.

 

I have enrolled in a workshop on B&W portraiture on February 15, tho it is not necessarily with film as far as I know. I guess I'll show up with my Olympus M4/3, the 500cm, and the tripod, and see what happens.

 

For those of you who shoot a lot of portraits, whether professionally or just for fun etc-

 

Did it ever feel weird or awkward to approach people (especially strangers or people you never knew) and ask if you can shoot them?

 

How did you get started in portraiture?

 

Thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the beginning, I was excited about making portraits. I approached it from that standpoint. “It would be so much fun to make a portrait of you!” If I was at a friend’s house, I might comment on an interesting room or interesting light in their house and tell them I’d love to take a picture of them sometime while mentioning how well the surroundings would work. By the way, a lot of really good portraits aren’t made when the subject is “sitting” for a portrait. Maybe they do yoga and you could photograph them doing that, or maybe they like to cook, etc. Sometimes, the more casual the approach, the more comfortable it is. If a potential subject senses it’s going to be the kind of stiff experience they had when their high school yearbook pic or driver’s license pic was taken, they might not be as willing as if it sounds fun and creative! All the world’s a stage.
  • Like 2
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with The Shadow's above statement. That's because the "casual" or what I call "documentary" type portrait is all I've done for 50 years now. Whew! Started out with black and white film, of course, available light, shooting at parties, events, back yard barbecues, etc. My subjects have most often been family or people who knew me or at least knew people I know. I don't just go out into the street and photograph strangers, like some people do. My approach is typically to just be in the setting with my camera. I stay aware of people who might be placed in a good spot for a shot. If so, I will gently approach them. They probably already know I am snapping shots of people, so they are not surprised. I usually just greet them, focus the camera on them and quickly take a shot before they start to show signs of self consciousness. This all happens in a few seconds, then its over, I move on. Just check out my "People" and "70's" folders for lots of examples of what I am talking about.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have always seemed to me to be at least two different issues involved.

 

The first, already addressed nicely, is that of feeling comfortable with the person(s) being photographed and having them feel at ease with you.

 

The second is that of technnology, such as lighting, either natural (as some portraitists prefer) or 'artificial' in the sense that the photographer provides and sets up the lighting angles, posing, etc.

 

The photo magazines, in the day, used to run regular articles on portrait lighting, and the internet now has the same sort of thing e.g., (6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know).

 

There is, however, considerable disagreement about what is good and what works.

 

Consider a portraitist like Karsh, who many consider one of the finest portraitists and contrast the opinion of him held by A. D. Coleman.

 

Since the work of Yousuf Karsh has evidenced neither change nor growth over the past quarter-century, a retrospective exhibit like this-whose usual function is to demonstrate the development of an artist's lines of inquiry-only serves to point up the limitation arid monotony of Karsh's uninventive style. The triviality of his body of work is manifest in the fact that there is little to be said about it now that could not easily have been said 20 years ago.

Karsh seems to me perhaps the most overrated photographer of our century, one whose reputation is based on an entirely sterile, repetitive, and banal ....

review in Popular Photography 1973-08

 

De gustibus non est disputandum, eh?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. guys... I guess it's just up to one to pick a style or find something that seems to both work and suit the sensibilities of the photographer... in this case, me!

I haven't done any portraiture but I feel pretty confident that eventually I'll get it sorted out OK.

 

As for finding subjects, some of my younger friends or coworkers aren't used to "actual" cameras, even less aware of the existence of film- the only camera they know is on their phone! :facepalm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to show you an example of one of my early casual portraits. I was in Santa Barbara in 1972. Some of the neighbor kids would come over to play with my roomates's and my cat, Norton. Two young sisters were sitting on the couch with Norton on their lap. The lighting was just coming from the windows. I used 35mm Nikon, 50mm on Tri-X to get a shot of them. After processing, I was immediately drawn to the wonderful expression of one of the girls, and crop the image just to her face. This was an unplanned, spontaneous moment. That's why I love this type of portraiture so much.626573134_11x14girlinsantabarbararetouch3.thumb.jpg.3dcf4e2e1b7ccf31c86ab61cc4715638.jpg
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google Leibovitz MasterClass trailer. It's a 2 minute video (advertisement) with Annie narrating. It sums it up for me. I did the MasterClass a year ago and it was the best thing I have done for my photography in years.

 

Oh, thank you- nice to hear it was worthwhile. I had been looking at that master class when it was announced, but in reading the reviews, which were largely (surprisingly) negative, I held off. Not sure who all signed up for the class initially, and I saw it on faceb00k- which is where I also read whatever reviews I'd seen.

 

Yours is the 2nd recent reference I've seen in relation to the Annie Leibovitz Master Class that was positive. I'd love to know more about it, if you don't mind sharing some of the insights and what you liked about it, feel free to PM me if you don't wish to get into it publicly, I'll take another look at it for sure.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ricochetrider,

 

I read many of the negative reviews, and decided to do the class. It was the best investment in my photography in many years.

 

Annie states clearly she is not a technical photographer. If you take the class, do not expect much information on f/stops, shutter speed, camera brands, ISO, strip box vs soft box discussion, etc. Annie talks about the creative process and bringing out the persona of the subject in the photograph. If you want something equipment-related, do not take this course. If you want to improve your creative expression in portraits, take this course.

 

There are several assignments in the course. One is to take a series of photographs of someone close to you, while the subject is showing the photographer photographs of him/herself. I did this with my father, it was a great assignment.

 

You mention people skills in your original post. This is a big part of portrait photography. If the photographer is fiddling with the camera, lighting and other things, the subject loses interest and the emotion of boredom and disinterest is recorded in the portrait. Alternatively, the subject can feign interest and the result is a portrait with a wooden, feigned emotion.

 

If the photographer has mastered the equipment, and puts emphasis on connecting with the subject, this is how better portraits are created in my view.

  • Like 4

Wilmarco Imaging

Wilmarco Imaging, on Flickr

wilmarcoimaging on Instagram

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good advice, I get that portraiture needs to be more about connecting with the subject, than anything else.

 

I looked again at the class online, and dug around as well to see what people are saying about it. I can't imagine that people would take this expecting a step by step breakdown of exactly how to take a photograph. While I am learning, actually don't know much about the actual mechanics of analog photography, I see the value in Ms Leibovitz' Master Class in just hearing her talk about her experiences and run thru the breakdown as laid out in the "curriculum", the video sessions. Honestly, I'll probably end up signing up for the course. I'll probably pick up some of her books of images too, I've also been looking at Richard Avedon's portraits, especially those of In The American West, and also have Laura Wilson's companion book "Avedon At Work In...."

 

I seek not only education but inspiration, too. Which I see as the primary "value" in viewing others' works, and in these Master Class sessions.

Education, one may simply go get, it can be bought; education is a venture in objectivity.

Inspiration can be found only where one seeks it. It is fleeting and varying from one moment to the next, and totally subjective.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Leibovitz, early on in my portrait making, a photographer friend suggested doing a couple of portraits mimicking or paying homage to a famous photographer as a learning tool. I made this portrait of my friend, Jim, in front of his favorite tree in Golden Gate Park, SF. We just happened on the tree on a walk one day and, when he mentioned his history with it, I asked him if he’d like his photo taken. Natural San Francisco light, whose fog often acts like a soft box! I modeled the photo after a Leibovitz photo of William Burroughs I’ve always loved. While I eventually developed more of my own voice with portraits, I learned a lot by doing this one, about how details bring out character. I think such homages can be good springboards leading to other ideas and approaches. Below is a link to the Burroughs photo followed by my photo of Jim.

 

leibovitz photo of burroughs - Google Search:

 

Jim, by me ...

872F7222-C87F-439E-8BE2-6D14F2E9ADAE.thumb.jpeg.a849942a32b159c3948f1ab12fd5883a.jpeg

  • Like 5
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have absolutely no experience in portraiture (except as part of a 1-year photography course) but I have seen quite a few portrait photos over the years.

 

I may be completely wrong but from your OP, it seems to me that you a) already have very fixed ideas about the technology of the photos (camera, lens, B&W) and b) despite your usual people skills , you are reticent to be a 'fully-fledged photographer'.

 

I fully agree agree with previous posts that 'connecting with people' is much more important than compositional/technical skills. IMHO, the best portraits are a true collaboration between the 'sitter(s)' and the 'photographer. For this to occur, both need to be comfortable with and trust each other. The more mutal comfort and trust there is, the closer you can get and the less you'll need you'll find to avoid 'gettting in people's faces'. The more photos become a collabation, the more subjects will willingly contribute towards the result.

 

As a complete amateur, my only suggestion is to be aware of the options but let any pre-conceived ideas go. Let your subjects 'stories'/preferences inspire you to take different types of portrait shots and select those with which you are both happy with.

 

 

 

I am gearing up to try my hand at portraiture. I have in mind to work mostly with B&W film, and mostly in whatever existing light there is, finding subjects in their own environment, be it at work, at play, or at home. I'm wondering how to relax in the setting of shooting subjects IE people, up close. The *plan*, such as it is, is to use my Hasselblad 500cm medium format camera and 180mm lens- so I won't exactly be in peoples' faces.

 

So far I've broached the subject with a couple friends, of sitting for portraits- and for whatever reason it just feels more than a little awkward. Funny because in general, I have great people skills and can pretty much talk to anyone about anything. I guess I just need to get over "the hump" on this and get a few sessions under my belt.

 

I have enrolled in a workshop on B&W portraiture on February 15, tho it is not necessarily with film as far as I know. I guess I'll show up with my Olympus M4/3, the 500cm, and the tripod, and see what happens.

 

For those of you who shoot a lot of portraits, whether professionally or just for fun etc-

 

Did it ever feel weird or awkward to approach people (especially strangers or people you never knew) and ask if you can shoot them?

 

How did you get started in portraiture?

 

Thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully agree agree with previous posts that 'connecting with people' is much more important than compositional/technical skills. IMHO, the best portraits are a true collaboration between the 'sitter(s)' and the 'photographer. For this to occur, both need to be comfortable with and trust each other. The more mutal comfort and trust there is, the closer you can get and the less you'll need you'll find to avoid 'gettting in people's faces'. The more photos become a collabation, the more subjects will willingly contribute towards the result.

I think this is well said and for the most part true.

 

Nevertheless, I’ve not always found it effective to seek comfort with some subjects. You can’t force it and there are times when it’s better to accept and work with discomfort, which can produce a portrait every bit as compelling as those born of comfort. And, though most of my portraits seem to me collaborations, sometimes a good portrait can result from alienation. I don’t currently have access to all my photos so I can’t post an example, but I do have some that I like that are more born of discomfort and separation.

  • Like 1
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. My post was in reply to the OP's question (starting out). I agree that if it doesn't happen, you can't force it. But you can sometimes provoke a response (see examples below). Some of the most interesting portraits are of subjects out of their 'comfort zone.' And many great portait photos are shot before/after any 'pose'. I think that there is a difference between feeling comfortable with (=having a degree of trust/confidence in) the photographer and being in the 'personal comfort zone' when the shots are taken. But the two are probably interrelated. My guess is that more trust/confidence the subject has in the photographer, the more prepared he/she will be to go along with ideas that the photographer has - even if it means stepping outside his/her comfort zone.

 

I've been browsing through some my photography books lately and one them is 'Celebrity and Performance (2009)': a series of interviews with portrait photographers of (then) famous people, with some examples of their work. For many of the portraits, photographers had enough time to establish some rapport and - where necessary - for location, make-up, background, etc. But there are exceptions. Photographer James Cheadle who had scheduled a 30-minute portrait session with tennis player Boris Becker actually got just 3 minutes - no rapport, just enough for 20 quick shots. When Andy Gotts had a scheduled photoshoot with Gwyneth Paltrow at a film studio, she'd had a long day filming and felt tired and unwell. The last thing she felt like doing was being photographed. Gott says that she sat stiffly without much expression, wanting to get it over with as quickly as possible. Again, little rapport. Gotts says that changed only when he started to be really rude to her. She then started to smile and laugh at his rudeness! Michael Grecco, faced with an utterly exhausted and blanky staring Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller at the end of a long 'press day' got his best shots only when they agreed to start telling each other jokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you can sometimes provoke a response

stepping outside his/her comfort zone.

One can, indeed, provoke, as Karsh did when he grabbed Churchill’s cigar, changing his expression for the photo from one of discomfort to one of belligerence, then heralded for representing both Curchill’s and Britain’s defiance in light of the world situation. And, as you say, Mike, a good photographer and willing or at least malleable subject can move out of both or one of their comfort zones. There are also some great photographers who simply captured or sought out discomfort in some very real situations. While I think Model and Arbus tended to capture discomfort somewhat naturally, Woodward seemed often to pose it (hers are mostly self portraits), though I think her poses eerily show and foreshadow a reality as evidenced by her eventual suicide at a rather young age.

 

Lisette Model

 

Francesca Woodman

 

Diane Arbus

  • Like 1
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again, guys.

 

Reading Avedon At Work In The American West, it seems he almost intimidated his subjects at times, standing beside his camera staring them down until they "revealed" whatever it was he thought he had found in them to begin with. Or until something in them that he liked well enough came out... Not sure I read it in the book, but later, after seeing some of the images, pretty sure I'd read that not everyone was happy about their photo and how it went down? As I r recall, somebody asked why nobody is smiling in the portraits and at least one person said, "Because he never asked me to smile" or words to that effect.... Of course, it was also pointed out that his massive camera was also perhaps a bit intimidating, or certainly impressive at the very least.

 

I think I simply need to get some work under my belt to see how it goes and to find a bit of a groove with it. As suggested, I plan to begin with some friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I simply need to get some work under my belt to see how it goes

Yes. I think often your own process and experience will develop organically and in a way that will suit you or work for you individually. It’s fun letting it all unfold for yourself even as you may incorporate or at least experiment with some tips you get along the way. Best of luck. Keep us posted about your experience and, if you feel comfortable doing so, share some of the photos with us!

  • Like 1
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks for the links to Lisette Model and Francesca Woodman, @The Shadow, both of whom I'd never previously heard of! One of the great benefits of your posts (and those by others too) on PN is that they help me and others expand our knowledge of photography.

 

From the few photo's I've seen, I agree that many well-known photo's by Woodman and Arbus are of 'natural discomfort' in real situations. But more in the style of street/documentary portraits than an agreement up front to take a 'portait photo' of someone. And many of Model's intruiging photo's in her short life are indeed self-portaits.I like the story about Karsh/Churchill! I know the photo but I didn't know the background story - it's a great example of 'deliberate discomfort'!

 

Just to repeat (with which you agreed works best most times), the easiest way to get started in portrait photography seems to me to establish some kind of relationship as best you can and make it a 'joint effort' as far as possible. For example, by finding out what the subject's interests ( golf? painting? stamp collecting?, ...) are and any favorite locations (golf courses/club? art studios?, home stamp library?, ...) and use these as a baseline. Any interst/ location provides opportunties for innovative shots.

 

I suspect that many clients would be quite happy with good quality, staid and pretty boring portrait photos. Depending on 1) the balance between the photographer's commercial and artistic ambitions, 2) the client's openness to trying something different and 3) the experience and creativity of the photographer, portrait photos could become less staid and less boring. I guess it boils down to how much risk the photographer and client (together) are willing to take. Again, with no experience, I suspect that this is where the question of trust/confidence comes in. It seems to me that when the photographer makes a suggestion (or gives a direction), the willingness of the subject to comply (or not) is proportionate to the degree of trust/confidence that the subject has in the photographer. I suspect that the better the relationship (mutual understanding/confidence/trust) is, the more compliant subjects may be. I may well be completely wrong!

 

For established portrait photographers, the subjects' confidence/trust is inspired by their portfolio and reputation. I assume that this is very different when first starting out: you have no portfolio and no rep. So you're dependent on satisfied clients to gradually build up a portfoloio and reputation. I may be wrong but I can well imagine that for many photographers in this early career stage, their prioity is to take good but 'low-risk' portrait photos. Staid and boring portrait photos at least (hopefully) pay the bills.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found portraiture to be challenging, to say the least. I'm not a pro, and generally I prefer to photograph people in their "preferred" environment, rather than staged portraiture. Sometimes I just take the background/scene I've got and do my best to engage the viewer's eye on my subject, other times I love to use the available light to achieve where the viewer's eye goes.183526894_Drivingthemotorboat.jpg.b47f4f403cc1422e43d0105ce195f15f.jpg DSC_9955.thumb.JPG.940cbf2d26118475030216c4285be351.JPG
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I am as much into the end result as I am into relationships between photographer and subject (for the time being). For now, it’s the iphone.

I suspect a lot of us are as into the photo as the various possible relationships. I sense the reason many have talked about the relationship of photographer and subject is that’s what the OP asked about ... “Did it ever feel weird or awkward to approach people.”

That being said, your photos stand out as often personal and intimate as well as being well crafted, so I think your emphasis on the finished product pays off.

 

Also, speaking for myself, the relationship of photographer and subject and care for the photo itself aren’t mutually exclusive. I find working with those relationships, in all the forms and varieties they can take, is both something in itself and a means to an end, which is the photo. That relationship is often what drives and helps determine the finished product.

Edited by The Shadow
  • Like 3
There’s always something new under the sun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope in my comment I haven’t dismissed the inter-relationship because in a portrait it’s always there even if it’s only eye contact

Not at all, you've contributed something of value to the discussion. I'd say the "end product" is what we all look to, whatever the photographic subject or endeavor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any course you take by successful photographers can not be that bad. One usually learns something from everyone. One thing is for sure you will need to master both connection with client and technical lighting skills if you plan on being successful. You can not have or do one without the other.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I hope in my comment I haven’t dismissed the inter-relationship because in a portrait it’s always there even if it’s only eye contact

Not a bit! As Brother Ricochet says, you've contributed something very valuable, and I think it wasn't so much your comment as the beautifully relaxed and comfortable subject in your lovely photo. An example to be proud of!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...