Feminine vs. Masculine Primary Light Source Orientation

<p>I am reading Doug Box's "Guide to Posing"; a great book, by a highly respected author, and he teaches a

common rule of portrait lighting is: if the subject is male the primary source should be to the front, and if the

subject is female the primary source should be to the rear. Other books like "Light, Science and Magic"

and "Faces" by Hunter, Fuqua, and Biver, or the Wacker's portrait photography books make no mention of such

a rule. <br>

Most of my portrait photography tends to be senior portraits and glam type shots which

border more toward high key, and I position the modeling light (or diffuse sunlight) toward the front of my

subject, regardless if male or female. I like the wider light dynamic range this presents, and really dont

want to shadow the frontal features of my subjects. <br>

So, the question I pose is: how important or

basic is this rule of gender driven primary light orientation in the practice of portrait photography? What

pleases me, the photographer, is really imaterial to what the subject/client finds flattering.<br>

Thanks for

any replies.<br>

Jack</

It's not important at all. Lighting should suit the mood of the photo and how you want to portray your subject.

<p>i agree with Mike, completely.<br>

<br />Think about it, if you shoot a couple, would you really want two different types of lighting in one photo? That's the extreme version.</p>

<p>I just find lighting that works for the subject and that's that.</p>

<p>Every subject is going to be different, therefore every lighting pattern will be different. There are hundreds of resources on the web outlining lighting patterns and/or corrective lighting. For a single female subject, you might try using some short lighting instead of broad lighting. This tends to flatter (improve) curves shall we say. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Short side lighting thins and broad side lighting lets a subject look, well, broader. Therefore, I plan the lighting based on which will flatter the subject the most, rather than anything at all to do with gender. Unless a subject is anorexic, I pretty well leave broad lighting in the back of the bag of tricks.</p>

<p>No idea where Mr. Box came up with such a rule. The only real rule per se is posing. Men should be in a masculine pose. Women can be in either a feminine pose or (e.g. for business portraits) a masculine pose.<br>

Other than that, women will usually be more flattered by soft light, whereas harder lighting makes men look more masculine. But that can be reversed if you know lighting well, especially if you want to achieve more of a fashion photography look.<br>

Finally, there is post-processing. You don't want to go as far with skin smoothing with a male subject as with a female subject.</p>

<p>The source is there, immutable. You don't light the subject: they light themselves by pointing their nose towards or away from the source - according to age or character.</p>

<p>If there is a rule, it is probably knowing what you are trying to accomplish and understand how lighting and posing create it. Then dig into your "bag of tricks" as Tim mentions to execute. With women, you are often trying to bring out the female form. Turning the body away from the light does that by creating shadows. Watch her chest as you turn her in the key's modeling light and see how shadows develop. Remember, shadow next to highlight reveals form. Do you really want 2 dimensional images with no shadow or form? Think drawing a circle on a piece of paper, flat. Shade one side, it has form, a ball. Your shadow highlight positioning is in your control. Only a few women will ask you to make their chest flatter. Also by turning her away from square to the camera where she looks widest( not too many women come to you asking, can you make me look wider?) you are slimming them. With men the body turned towards the light or square to the camera may be desirable. Ever see how a bodybuilder flares the lats square to the judges to look the widest. The head of each may be turned for the facial lighting pattern you are seeking. As Tim points out, short lighting, ie shooting from the shadow side, slims. You are looking at the side of the head in shadow leaving the mask of the face and only part of the illuminated far side of the head visible. It is perceived as narrower. Broad lighting, shooting from the main light side reveals the side of the illuminated head plus the entire mask of the face. Mike is absolutely right, lighting should suit the mood of the photo. If you are going for an assertive, powerful image of a slim woman, you may want her square to the camera. So much for that "rule." You are responsible for everything in the frame and everything, wardrobe, bg, lighting, pose and expression should suit the image, ie be appropriate for the mood, message. Knowing what you are trying to accomplish and then having the bag of tricks or skills to do it in your style is my answer, not simply a gender driven formula. </p>

Thanks for the insightful responses. I guess the bottom line is if you are doing a portrait shoot and call yourself a photographer, amateur or proffesional, you owe the subject a minimal level of knowlege on composition and lighting. I just didnt want to be missing some basic element of artistic composition. Kind of on subject, I was at a high school graduation party a few weeks ago for a full figured girl with the usual litiny of senior portraits on display. They all used broad side lighting; the results were horrible. But without a short side comparison I dont think the client minded. I dont want to fall into that camp of photography.

<p>Jack, armed with that knowledge of short lighting, you have already separated yourself from many others including the person that stamped out the senior portraits you describe. I dont think you will fall in that camp you described. I admire your pursuit of mastering the craft rather than just being satisfied with a sharp, well exposed, recognizable image. It will continue to move your work to the next level. </p>

<p>Christopher Broadbent: "The source is there, immutable. You don't light the subject: they light themselves by pointing their nose towards or away from the source - according to age or character."</p>

<p>A bit of good philosophy like this goes a long way.</p>