Long Exposures for Portraiture

[b._poetz]

In a 1915 book on photographic portraiture, recommended exposure times were in the

neighborhood of 4 seconds. I'm know this was common practice in the day, but in practical

tems, HOW is this really accomplished without ending up with blur or double image? Please

note that I'm aware of the "neck braces" used to minimize sway, and I understand that a blink is

not actually registered on long exposures, but how much spontinaety is permitted when one

uses long exposures in portraiture? Of course, I know that the best way to learn is simply to try

it myself --- which I will do --- but in the meantime, I just want to get some thoughts on the

subject so I don't reinvent the wheel.

[jonathan_brewer1]

You might be interested in the image I'll be uploading tonight along with the next lighting theme in the lighting forum, it is both a portrait(in a way), and a timed exposure, balancing both strobe and ambient light.

 

The shutter time I used was in excess of 20 seconds, you'll know the reason for the long shutter time when you see the shot.

[richard_cochran]

You rarely see a spontaneous-looking portrait taken before 1915. Slight blur due to subject movement was also common. They did the best they

could with the materials of the day.

[victor_loverro]

And probably much of what you see from that era are contact prints which minimize the unsharpness due to slight movement. A friend photographed me once with an 11x14 camera using a paper negative. I was standing with one foot on a stool and the exposure was 25 seconds. No other support. The print is surprisingly sharp.

[ronald_moravec1]

In times past, head clamps were used. Now I find a posing table will do. If the arms are given a place to rest, the head does not move around so badly.

[b._poetz]

My original question was a bit long winded and perhaps not to the point. I'm wondering... is

there any possible advantage to shooting a long exposure - 2 to 4 min. portrait prodived the

movement issue is addressed by way of pose. (Sorry, still long winded!)

[jason_greenberg_motamedi]

As a "modern" daguerreotypist, I can tell you that a 4 minute exposure for portraiture is

way too long. Some people can sit still for about 90 seconds, but beyond this, forget it.

Even with head clamps (I use them), posing tables and solid chairs, most adults can't go

beyond 60 seconds without significant movement. For what it is worth, in the 19th

century, most studio portraits (daguerreotype or wet-plate) were between 10 and 30

seconds.

 

As for advantages, early in my daguerrian adventures I wrote that "I am using... extremely

long exposures. This changes the act of portraiture, moving expression away from posture

towards something more akin to tranquility or sleep." I suppose I still believe that: it is

after all very difficult to keep a smile, false or otherwise, on your face for 45 seconds...

Personally I see no advantage for going beyond two or three seconds: just long enough to

tell your subject that they have to completely relax to keep a single expression, but

enough to erase the affects of blinking.

[b._poetz]

Jason... will a 2 second exposure "erase" a blink or twitch? What is the exposure time "cut-off"

for not recording small quick movements?

[jason_greenberg_motamedi]

I'm not really sure about minimum times, as my fastest time is 6 seconds. I know that at

6 seconds blinks are not registered, and would guess that the same would go for two to

three seconds, one second might be on the edge. Sounds like some experimentation is in

order.

[bruce_barlow]

It's all in preparation. I rehearse the subject and show them with a practice click of the shutter how long they have to hold still. I tell them to get ready, ask them to take a deep breath, and look at the lens. Then I do exactly as rehearsed. Children can hold still forever. Adults are used to flash and often blink. Nevertheless, my hit rate is pretty high at 1/2 sec to 3 sec. exposure times.

 

Something wonderful often happens -- whoever the person is wells up and comes out during the exposure. So the pictures are often really great, and it ain't the photographer.

 

Bruce

[b._poetz]

Bruce -- could you possibly upload an example of one of your LF long exposure portraits that

you particularly like? I would really enjoy seeiting it! BTW, what do you mean by "children can

hold still almost forever" ? Yeah, maybe when they're asleep...

[quinn_jacobson]

Bruce,

I couldn't agree more. One of the reasons I shoot wet-plate portraiture is for the long exposure time. It reveals more (for me) of the person. The fact that you have them there concentrating on something other than trying to be pretty, or not themselves changes the image a lot! I use a head brace and do dry runs as well.

 

My times range from 10 seconds to 1 minute. You can see some here:

http://www.collodion.com/photography/index.htm

 

Keep in mind, I'm shooting wide open (with a period lens) and strong north light with a reflector.

 

Cheers!

Q<div></div>

[scott_palmer3]

I just stumbled across this thread and it made me curious. A question to you guys

who use head clamps/head braces: where did you get them and what's the set-up?

What are you using to secure the brace? I've used a lot of different techniques, but

shooting close with my 11x14 still produces frequent shots out of focus due to

movement. I've often thought about head braces, but had no idea where to get one.

Do any of you have any thoughts or important methods for their use?

[janet cull]

This thread is so old, I don't know if any of you are still looking in. Quinn, that image is

beautiful.

 

I found a photographer named Chip Forelli who does beautiful long exposure shots (I'm

showing my ignorance. I imagine you all know of him already.) and am searching "long

exposures". That's how I found this interesting thread.

 

Very interesting, all of this!