What Is Not a Portrait?

<p>When, if ever, is a picture of someone not a portrait? Is any picture of a person a portrait?<br>

=====================================<br>

Example: Imagine a photo of two guys in conversation on the street somewhere. One is in focus, facing the camera, but looking somewhere to the side and past the other guy. The other guy is 3/4 facing away from the camera, talking to the first guy, and slightly out of focus. The frame is filled with the two guy's heads and shoulders. The background is cluttered but sufficiently OOF to isolate the main head. Is this a portrait? Something else? Either/Or? What?</p>

<p>The picture I'm describing is here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amjadt/3366378870/</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'd say it is a portrait mainly because it shows <em><strong>intention</strong> </em> ......certainly I feel I have gained some insight into the people portrayed....regards, Bob</p>

<p> I would say it is a portrait because it is about specific individuals whose identity plays a major part in the image. A picture of a model on the runway, or a generic typical shot of street bum is not.</p>

<p>In my book, anything's a portrait that says something true about a specific individual. I could take a picture of a violin makers workbench and call it a portrait because it says many things about the person who uses it. Others will probably disagree :-)</p>

<p>Based on <em>my</em> criteria, the image in question -is- a portrait.</p>

<p>To your question... I think that most commercial photography, where the focus is not on the individual in the image but on a product (or even some of Annie Leibovitz's 'portraits') does not say anything about an individual in the image. Even superficial information is altered in post processing...</p>

<p>As Robert indicated, lots of things that aren't people can also be portraits... there is a tradition of painted art that is intended to serve as an allegoric portrait. Sometimes personal objects like shoes or gloves can indicate a person's presense quite effectively.<br>

I although I doubt many commerical portrait studios would attempt to go that route, since we also have a strong tradition of "likeness" of a person dating from the dageurrotype.</p>

<h2>A Portrait....<br /></h2>

<h2><br /></h2>

<h2>by A. B. "Banjo" Patterson</h2>

<p><img src="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/images/clancy.gif" alt="" /><br>

<br /> I had written him a letter which I had, for want of better</p>

<table border="0">

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>Knowledge, sent to where I met him down the <a onmouseover="showgloss('geog/lachlan.html',300,350)" onmouseout="GlossWin.close()" href="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/geog/overflow.html">Lachlan</a> , years ago,<br /> He was shearing when I knew him, so I sent the letter to him,<br /> Just <em>on spec</em> , addressed as follows, "Clancy, of The Overflow"

<p>And an answer came directed in a writing unexpected,<br /> (And I think the same was written with a thumb-nail dipped in <a onmouseover="showgloss('def/tar.html',300,250)" onmouseout="GlossWin.close()" href="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/geog/overflow.html">tar</a> )<br /> Twas his shearing mate who wrote it, and <em>verbatim</em> I will quote it:<br /> "Clancy's gone to Queensland droving, and we don't know where he are."<br /> * * * * * * * * *<br /> In my wild erratic fancy visions come to me of Clancy<br /> Gone a-droving "down the <a onmouseover="showgloss('geog/cooper.html',300,350)" onmouseout="GlossWin.close()" href="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/geog/overflow.html">Cooper</a> " where the Western drovers go;<br /> As the stock are slowly stringing, Clancy rides behind them singing,<br /> For the drover's life has pleasures that the townsfolk never know.<br /> And the bush hath friends to meet him, and their kindly voices greet him<br /> In the murmur of the breezes and the river on its bars,<br /> And he sees the vision splendid of the sunlit plains extended,<br /> And at night the wond'rous glory of the everlasting stars.<br /> * * * * * * * * *<br /> I am sitting in my dingy little office, where a stingy<br /> Ray of sunlight struggles feebly down between the houses tall,<br /> And the foetid air and gritty of the dusty, dirty city<br /> Through the open window floating, spreads its foulness over all<br /> And in place of lowing cattle, I can hear the fiendish rattle<br /> Of the <a onmouseover="showgloss('def/tramway.html',400,450)" onmouseout="GlossWin.close()" href="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/def/tramway.html">tramways</a> and the <a onmouseover="showgloss('def/tramway.html',400,450)" onmouseout="GlossWin.close()" href="http://www.uq.edu.au/%7Emlwham/banjo/def/tramway.html">buses</a> making hurry down the street,<br /> And the language uninviting of the gutter children fighting,<br /> Comes fitfully and faintly through the ceaseless tramp of feet.<br /> And the hurrying people daunt me, and their pallid faces haunt me<br /> As they shoulder one another in their rush and nervous haste,<br /> With their eager eyes and greedy, and their stunted forms and weedy,<br /> For townsfolk have no time to grow, they have no time to waste.<br /> And I somehow rather fancy that I'd like to change with Clancy,<br /> Like to take a turn at droving where the seasons come and go,<br /> While he faced the round eternal of the cash-book and the journal --<br /> But I doubt he'd suit the office, Clancy, of The Overflow.</p>

<p>...can be made in many ways.</p>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<p>Nice poem. Not sure how it relates to this.</p>

<p>My rule of thumb, authenticated by this image, is that a portrait is a photograph of someone who knows they are being photographed.</p>

<p>These two guys have consciously presented to the camera that which the photographer believes them to be and so this collaboration confirms their self awareness. A portrait could also show an attribute of a person not commonly recognized.</p>

<p>It's this awareness that makes it a portrait and not documentary/ street photography/ surveillance/ voyeurism/ theft/ invasion of privacy ( papparazi ). All of these types of photographs are made at moments when the subjects do not expect to be photographed: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-399648/Val-Kilmer-goes-Batman-fatman.html</p>

<p>Portraits can be made within those context, but only after awareness has become present. Like the picture of Goebbels made by A. Eisenstadt: http://www.schlossberg-cohen.com/work.cfm?ID=866</p>

<p>Sports photography seems in a grey area (in relation to my quasi "rule"). That is, sports action photographed during a performance not *specifically* done for the purpose of being photographed, but with the subconcious knowledge that photographs are constantly being made, like during a tennis match: http://www.topnews.in/sports/files/serena-williams.jpg</p>

<p>I don't think these are portraits, but more documentary in nature... t</p>

<p>Thanks for those responses. They helped me clarify in my mind what is considered a portrait.</p>

<p>How about this one... a wedding couple kissing and toasting with fancy glasses of champagne held out towards the camera; but the focus is on their hands and the glasses and their faces are somewhat blurry. Is that a portrait?</p>

<p>The picture I am talking about is here: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/197/522357634_4873ac440d.jpg</p>

<p>I've seen a somewhat similar shot where an almost macro shot of a rose on the ground filled about 1/3 of the frame of a camera and was in focus, and a wedding couple about 20' away on a small rise were behind and above the rose but very much in bokah. They were just sharp enough to make out it was a wedding couple. The photo was really about the rose(s) at the wedding more than the couple themselves. Is that a portrait? </p>

<p>If the first one is a portrait and the second one isn't, at what point in this kind of OOF person shot does the photo change from being a portrait to being about something else that the person is involved in.</p>