Who am I?

Hello everyone! I have just started my photography courses. It consists of different genres, like a common introductory course. First, I think it would be good to get acquainted with photography in general, different genres and then decide what is more interesting for me. But now I think I would like to work with portraits. So I am hesitating, am I doing everything right?

So I am hesitating, am I doing everything right?

 

- An impossible question to answer given such scant information.

 

I suggest you look at some of the many online galleries, browse some books, visit art galleries. Just generally expose yourself to as many varieties of picture as you can find.

 

However, light is light, and learning to appreciate its properties and nuances is a skill applicable to all genres of the art.

- An impossible question to answer given such scant information.

 

I suggest you look at some of the many online galleries, browse some books, visit art galleries. Just generally expose yourself to as many varieties of picture as you can find.

 

However, light is light, and learning to appreciate its properties and nuances is a skill applicable to all genres of the art.

Thank you for your reply! I am just trying to understand how to make the first step towards photography. Previously, I have visited a lot of different websites about photography, photo forums, watched a lot of videos. Thanks, I appreciate your advice.

First, I would find out the abilities and limitations of your current equipment, probably with the advice of your tutor (or is this an on-line course ?). Then you can decide how best to use it to obtain the results that please you. One piece of advice I was given many years ago is to look at other peoples' images, then decide what approach you would have taken to the same subject - composition, lighting, exposure, shutter speed, even a different lens to isolate detail or to widen the angle of view.

 

You have not said, but I expect you are using digital equipment - the advantage of this over film, in terms of learning, is that every image which does not show what you wanted can be deleted, at no expense - with film, even in the sixties, errors (or 'unanticipated results !') were expensive !

 

HTH

 

Tony

But now I think I would like to work with portraits.

Something led you to say this. Your gut? That could be a key. It’s the only genre you named. Why? What about portraits led you to bring it up? I think it works for a lot of people to go with what they love and the rest will fall into place guided by that. Though your current equipment may provide certain limitations and challenges, I would not let your equipment influence or dictate the overall direction you head in. You can always get new equipment which should follow your passion and interests and not determine what that passion or interest is. Having said that, a concentration on portraits will be helped by appreciating and even involving yourself in other genres as well. People live in the world, so even if you’re going to isolate faces, you still want to bring a sense of the world to that. And many portraits are environmental, where a sense of street photography, landscape photography, still life photography will help a lot.

 

I would also suggest, if they’re accessible to you, going to some museums and galleries. It’s a different kind of inspiration and experience from books and the Internet. Look at paintings as well. They’re visually important to learn from.

First, I would find out the abilities and limitations of your current equipment, probably with the advice of your tutor (or is this an on-line course ?). Then you can decide how best to use it to obtain the results that please you. One piece of advice I was given many years ago is to look at other peoples' images, then decide what approach you would have taken to the same subject - composition, lighting, exposure, shutter speed, even a different lens to isolate detail or to widen the angle of view.

 

You have not said, but I expect you are using digital equipment - the advantage of this over film, in terms of learning, is that every image which does not show what you wanted can be deleted, at no expense - with film, even in the sixties, errors (or 'unanticipated results !') were expensive !

 

HTH

 

Tony

Thank you for your advice! I am using Sony A6300 right now and I want to buy a camera lens Sigma 35mm F1.4.

Something led you to say this. Your gut? That could be a key. It’s the only genre you named. Why? What about portraits led you to bring it up? I think it works for a lot of people to go with what they love and the rest will fall into place guided by that. Though your current equipment may provide certain limitations and challenges, I would not let your equipment influence or dictate the overall direction you head in. You can always get new equipment which should follow your passion and interests and not determine what that passion or interest is. Having said that, a concentration on portraits will be helped by appreciating and even involving yourself in other genres as well. People live in the world, so even if you’re going to isolate faces, you still want to bring a sense of the world to that. And many portraits are environmental, where a sense of street photography, landscape photography, still life photography will help a lot.

 

I would also suggest, if they’re accessible to you, going to some museums and galleries. It’s a different kind of inspiration and experience from books and the Internet. Look at paintings as well. They’re visually important to learn from.

Thank you! For sure, I will follow your advice! I just understood I want to reveal the inner message of a person within a portrait.

Hi Jane, well done for starting courses! Can you share a link? it might tell us a bit more about what's covered and in what depth.

 

You may find your interests just evolving naturally during the course rather having to decide. IMHO portraits are perfect for developing your knowledge and skills in areas like framing/composition, lighting, focal lengths focus, depth of field, color, camera operation, post-processing, etc. Portraits are also a great way of learning to develop good relationships with whoever you're photographing. They're also good for experimenting with different styles (capture and PP) and developing ones that you like.

 

FWIW, I agree with @The Shadow on visiting museums and galleries. Even on-line if you can't get there in person. The UK's National Portrait Gallery's website includes interviews with both sitters and photographers. I also suggest you browse/borrow some photo books from your local library and visit the websites of good photographers. Find the best examples you can, figure out what it is you like about them and learn from these.

I am just trying to understand how to make the first step towards photography.

 

Don't overthink it too much. Start shooting, follow your curiosity and see where it leads you - a bit as above, follow your gut feeling. Try different things (as above, digital has an advantage there), expiriment. You'll make a load of images that don't work, some that will work, and some that will surprise you and may reveal something about your gut to yourself. Frankly, I'd avoid thinking in different genres as different things to try initially. As a start, just try whatever comes your way. Where it fits, in terms of genre, leave that till later when you know better for yourself what you like doing and what not.

 

Not sure what kind of courses you take, but many of them focus on the essential basics of exposure and some post-processing essentials, the better ones add lessons on lighting. Many of them are very thin on composition and basics of design and colour. As a good introduction on those topics, the book "The photographer's eye" helped me a lot. Even less courses will deal with you finding your own (visual) voice, which comes with experience and knowing what works for you, and what not - so, all those shots made experimenting, combined with better insight into composition, light, use of colours etc. will slowly get you there.

 

A lot of the advice above is very sound and definitely worth doing, but I'd never underestimate the value of experiments and the learning you get from failed images (as well as succeeded ones, as well as those from renowned photographers). Try, and try whatever fancies you.

If you've decided on portraits as your genre; a 35mm focal length lens wouldn't really be the best choice. It's what's commonly called a 'normal' angle lens. In other words it gives an apparent view similar to what we perceive the eye to see.

 

You might think that's a great idea, but it takes in more of the background than is usually wanted in a formal portrait. That's without shoving the camera right in someone's face.

 

So a longer lens than 'normal' is usually used for portraiture. This would be around 50mm or slightly more on your a6300, and I'd seriously consider a lens of this focal length if portraiture is to become your 'thing'.

 

The other advantage of a longer lens is that in forcing you to back-off from the subject, it gives a more flattering perspective. Noses, chins, foreheads or any facial part that sticks out toward the camera can look over large if the camera is too close. Phone-camera selfies are typical of this, where faces often get to look quite 'pointy' if the phone is held close.

 

That a6300 is a great camera to learn with BTW. Nice big screen and all the controls you're ever likely to need. The user-interface can be a bit bewildering at first, but stick with it and it'll serve you well!

Edited November 21, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

Don't overthink it too much. Start shooting, follow your curiosity and see where it leads you - a bit as above, follow your gut feeling. Try different things (as above, digital has an advantage there), expiriment. You'll make a load of images that don't work, some that will work, and some that will surprise you and may reveal something about your gut to yourself. Frankly, I'd avoid thinking in different genres as different things to try initially. As a start, just try whatever comes your way. Where it fits, in terms of genre, leave that till later when you know better for yourself what you like doing and what not.

 

Not sure what kind of courses you take, but many of them focus on the essential basics of exposure and some post-processing essentials, the better ones add lessons on lighting. Many of them are very thin on composition and basics of design and colour. As a good introduction on those topics, the book "The photographer's eye" helped me a lot. Even less courses will deal with you finding your own (visual) voice, which comes with experience and knowing what works for you, and what not - so, all those shots made experimenting, combined with better insight into composition, light, use of colours etc. will slowly get you there.

 

A lot of the advice above is very sound and definitely worth doing, but I'd never underestimate the value of experiments and the learning you get from failed images (as well as succeeded ones, as well as those from renowned photographers). Try, and try whatever fancies you.

Thank you for your advice! I will definitely listen to my heart!

If you've decided on portraits as your genre; a 35mm focal length lens wouldn't really be the best choice. It's what's commonly called a 'normal' angle lens. In other words it gives an apparent view similar to what we perceive the eye to see.

 

You might think that's a great idea, but it takes in more of the background than is usually wanted in a formal portrait. That's without shoving the camera right in someone's face.

 

So a longer lens than 'normal' is usually used for portraiture. This would be around 50mm or slightly more on your a6300, and I'd seriously consider a lens of this focal length if portraiture is to become your 'thing'.

 

The other advantage of a longer lens is that in forcing you to back-off from the subject, it gives a more flattering perspective. Noses, chins, foreheads or any facial part that sticks out toward the camera can look over large if the camera is too close. Phone-camera selfies are typical of this, where faces often get to look quite 'pointy' if the phone is held close.

 

That a6300 is a great camera to learn with BTW. Nice big screen and all the controls you're ever likely to need. The user-interface can be a bit bewildering at first, but stick with it and it'll serve you well!

Thanks, that's what I have been seeking for here, guidance from people who are engaged in photography!

Hi Jane, well done for starting courses! Can you share a link? it might tell us a bit more about what's covered and in what depth.

 

You may find your interests just evolving naturally during the course rather having to decide. IMHO portraits are perfect for developing your knowledge and skills in areas like framing/composition, lighting, focal lengths focus, depth of field, color, camera operation, post-processing, etc. Portraits are also a great way of learning to develop good relationships with whoever you're photographing. They're also good for experimenting with different styles (capture and PP) and developing ones that you like.

 

FWIW, I agree with @The Shadow on visiting museums and galleries. Even on-line if you can't get there in person. The UK's National Portrait Gallery's website includes interviews with both sitters and photographers. I also suggest you browse/borrow some photo books from your local library and visit the websites of good photographers. Find the best examples you can, figure out what it is you like about them and learn from these.

I am taking not online courses, that's something like a photo school, where they give some theory and then we have practical classes. But as to online courses I have been considering those:

Click Photo School - Online Education for Photographers (July 2018) - Click Photo School

Online Photography Courses — The School of Photography

Home - Nikon School Online

Photo School - Online Photography School & Community

 

If you know some more and can share them I would be grateful!

If you're already following a course, then it's generally best to stay focused on that one to get the most out of it. Good courses often suggest (optional) supplemental reading or photographers worth finding out more about. I don't know the courses you link to but they look fine to me. Purely based on the number of videos & pdfs, the school of photography looks good value for money.

 

A very different kind of on-line course (not 'how to take pictures') which I found a couple of weeks back via PN is Seeing through Photographs. The course was developed by the MoMA and is available on Coursera. You need to register but unless you want a certificate, it's free. It's divided up into modules ('weeks') but you can set your own pace. You can go into as much depth as you want. It may not interest you at all but I'm just mentioning it.

 

Mike

 

 

I am taking not online courses, that's something like a photo school, where they give some theory and then we have practical classes. But as to online courses I have been considering those:

Click Photo School - Online Education for Photographers (July 2018) - Click Photo School

Online Photography Courses — The School of Photography

Home - Nikon School Online

Photo School - Online Photography School & Community

 

If you know some more and can share them I would be grateful!

If you're already following a course, then it's generally best to stay focused on that one to get the most out of it. Good courses often suggest (optional) supplemental reading or photographers worth finding out more about. I don't know the courses you link to but they look fine to me. Purely based on the number of videos & pdfs, the school of photography looks good value for money.

 

A very different kind of on-line course (not 'how to take pictures') which I found a couple of weeks back via PN is Seeing through Photographs. The course was developed by the MoMA and is available on Coursera. You need to register but unless you want a certificate, it's free. It's divided up into modules ('weeks') but you can set your own pace. You can go into as much depth as you want. It may not interest you at all but I'm just mentioning it.

 

Mike

Thank you, that's look interesting to me. I think everything will help to dive into photography.

Why have you decided on portraiture? It is an interesting and challenging genre. To do portriture you must be able to inteact with people and find people with a certain charisma and be able to reveal it.

As for 35 mm lens on APS - it is a very good choice for intimate portrait. One of the best portrait photographers of the world Alexander Vinogradov who I know, uses 50 mm on full frame. Get to know his works. There are numerous examples when 40 mm and ever 35 mm on full frame take just stunning portraits.

Edited November 23, 2018 by ruslan

As far as this oldie is concerned, there's really no way to do it wrong unless you don't do it at all.

 

Portraiture, as much as any other branch of photography, requires knowledge of lighting. Study portraits by the masters, and learn from them.

Otherwise, the skills required are shared with most branches of photographic practice.

 

In addition to the 50mm on APS-C format, a 75-90mm has its use in that format too (especially if your subject has a big nose ;)). A really good fast (f/2.8 or wider) zoom can do well, but avoid the extremes.

@janedragon, I really am not stalking you on PN, but this previous post might interest you. The Outlander TV series presents IMHO a wide range of excellent 'portrait shots'

I am just trying to understand how to make the first step towards photography

Get hold of something camera & lens. Download & semi-digest a manual, charge batteries insert memory card, go out and shoot.

there's really no way to do it wrong unless you don't do it at all

+1

 

I am using Sony A6300 right now and I want to buy a camera lens Sigma 35mm F1.4

Sounds a bit odd to me if your focus is on portraiture especially. - For all the reasons [uSER=2403817]@rodeo_joe|1[/uSER] mentioned above. - I am not sure how you imagine

I want to reveal the inner message of a person within a portrait

My gear shopping advice would be Sigma 60mm f2.8 macro as "the good prime" for compliant subjects + also a long zoom in the 50-100(+x...)mm range. - I am not familiar with the Sony catering market but there tends to be "a long counter part to the kit zoom" everywhere. In doubt a light comparably inexpensive but stabilized zoom can't be entirely wrong. - It might not become your professional go to lens but it 'll remain a great semi casual companion. (There will be a significantly more expensive alternative like a 70-200/4 or even 2.8 too. Make up your mind if you'll fancy to carry those around before you ponder buying them and take your time doing so.)

35 mm lens on APS - it is a very good choice for intimate(!) portrait.

- I can't stress "intimate" enough in there and see problems connected to that. - Do you wish to get your picture's spectator that close to your subject? Are you comfortable that close or feeling to be invading somebody's privacy bubble framing a headshot with a standard lens or even something slightly longer? - Personally I like having something like a 135mm in my APS bag to do headshots with. - A 60mm is a good choice to shoot fashion full length without invading. - Another reason to buy a long zoom first: Use it & your kit zoom, to find out what focal lengths you'll really like, before you start spending on primes.

 

 

Content: There are various ways to do portraiture. The easier one is to stalk your otherwise occupied subject with your camera until it drops the "I'm getting photographed"-mask and nail the expression you are after. For this approach a bit of zoom reach can be handy. - It works quite well during family gatherings and similar (at least if your AF is playing along indoors with flash and dim zooms).

 

The other approach is formal portraiture. There you have to work with your subjects; i.e. direct them how to pose, try to provoke the expressions you are after.

This takes compliant subjects who are hard to get / wear out over time. For that reason a lot of photographers seem to own a mannequin head as a dummy to test their lighting on.

 

What kind of subjects do you have in mind? - Kind of family? or photogenic strangers?

 

IDK much about learning from courses. - They have their place. I recommend getting the basic camera operation drill into muscle memory on your own; i.e. practice getting auto ISO toggled on and off, read up how to select your various AF modes, how to notice that you dialed in some exposure compensation how to put it back on +/- zero, Selecting a preset white balance or setting a custom one, ... and such things.

Where courses really shine is: Introduction into post processing images and everything else digital darkroom related. After you got started that way YouTube tutorials might do the same job.

Not sure what might be there, to take home from shooting lessons. Maybe they raise awareness what kind of subjects you were overlooking during a photo walk?

The important thing is to practise, make mistakes, learn from them. - If being given a homework assignment helps doing so: Go ahead!

Do you wish to get your picture's spectator that close to your subject?

Yes. Have a look at Maxim Guselnikov 45 mm on FF portraits (Tamron 45/1.8).

I told about Alexander Vinogradov also.

Also, a lot of TIME cover (Putin, Zuckerberg) portraits. I have them (magazines) at home. :cool:

 

Though a good 50 mm (Nikkor 50/1.2 Ai-s) will work just fine also for Sony APS.

If you use 135 on APS, this is your choice, I used to use 100 mm Kaleinar on Olympus 4/3 and it worked also.

Edited November 24, 2018 by ruslan

This is a portrait taken by me with 25 lens.

 

True, you can point a lens of any focal length at a person. Will you get a 'portrait'? Maybe, maybe not.

 

Portraits fall into various categories, and environmental portraits attempt to show the subject in their (hopefully meaningful) surroundings. A normal, or even wideangle lens is great for this.

 

More formal or 'character' portraits tend to want to isolate the subject's face from the background, and this is where using a longer lens comes into its own. The narrower angle of view gives a shallower depth-of-field for a given aperture, and takes in a smaller area of background behind the subject. Meaning you don't need to hunt around for a plain and undistracting background quite so much. Or need an expansive background in a studio setting.

 

Incidentally, it's not the lens that creates the perspective, but the distance between camera and subject.

 

Alexander Vinogradov's work relies heavily on lighting, and not the lens used. He appears to favour 3/4 frontal Rembrandt lighting with a strong diffuse fill.

 

There are 3 or 4 classic lighting patterns used for formal (studio) portraits:

Butterfly, characterised by a butterfly-shaped shadow under the nose.

Loop, where the nose shadow falls on the cheek and forms a loop shape.

Rembrandt, where the light casts a nose shadow that merges with the upper lip to one side.

Split, where the light divides the face into two halves.

 

These basic patterns can be varied almost infinitely by a slightly different placement of the key light, and by varying its hardness. Then the depth of shadow can be altered by the brightness of any fill light.

 

Further drama or mood can be created by a hairlight, backlight or kicker.

 

So you see there's a lot to get your teeth into with portraits. It's not just a case of finding an attractive or interesting model and pointing your camera at them.

Edited November 24, 2018 by rodeo_joe|1

Portraits are not just about pointing your camera at a face and also not just about the camera or lens you use or about perspective and lighting. Though those are all important to getting the job done, portraits are about character and personality, connection and humanity. Don’t mistake technique for portraiture. As you look through portrait portfolios, you’ll quickly get a sense of those that begin with technique and those that end with it, those that are beautifully lit, perfectly posed, shot with sublime background bokeh but void of your feeling connected or feeling as if you’ve gained a sense of the character of the sitter. And you’ll get a sense with other portraits of intimacy, that you’ve been let in on a secret. Your passion should be for the people, characters, and personalities as opposed to lenses, lights, and tripods. Good lenses, lighting, and tripods will support your passion for what’s really of significance here.

As you look through portrait portfolios, you’ll quickly get a sense of those that begin with technique and those that end with it, those that are beautifully lit, perfectly posed, shot with sublime background bokeh but void of your feeling connected or feeling as if you’ve gained a sense of the character of the sitter.

 

- I'm glad that was said! I didn't want to be the first to remark on a certain 'deadness behind the eyes' of anyone's work.

Have a look at Maxim Guselnikov 45 mm on FF portraits (Tamron 45/1.8).

My image search spotted some great pictures, but: Not everybody is growing & wearing beautiful hair down their chest. - What tiny percentage of the sensor gets used for the essential headshot in those images? - Sometimes maybe half, more frequently a quarter and in those situations longer lenses would be nice to have to shoot an average person instead of the model (from exactly the same distance).

"Fill your frame!" is some essential and good advice to give a beginner. Yes, there are creative workarounds but not every picture dominated by a person in it is really what I'd call a portrait.

There are multiple ways to skin a rabbit. If the OP is happy with the 35mm setting on her kit zoom and only needs more background blur, a 35/1.4 should provide that. But a 140 or 135mm at f5.6 framing a face tightly would render the background as blurry as a 35mm at f1.4 that captures more of the person and environment.