portraits JONATHAN

Wow! This is really good and proves rules can and should be broken at times. Like the 2/3 one here. You must have knelt down to get this perspective of the owner/chef. Makes him look tall and proud and I also like the reflection in the glass and seeing the two diners on the left. 'Jonathan's' looks like a great place to eat - my son-in-law's name - so yes, I would certainly give it a try. B :)

Thanks. Actually the food here is quite good.

if i ever go to California again, i'll eat there...

Most of Jonathan's world within a single frame... A perfect portrait.

Regards,

David,

 

I think that this documentary that you have embarked on will be a huge success. I'm already loving it and will be watching for more. Congrats and best of luck with the project.

 

 

Dave, this as apposed to the baker, if of a lot more serious nature. Obviously, Jonathan, it seems is pretty intense and takes his work seriously and to a whole other level. Wonderful portrayal of him and his prize posetion. Regards, Lawrence.

I think as well that your project, aside from its photographic side is a great documentation of a surrounding( yours), Has to be seen large! the details on both sides are different on one hand and complementing each other on the second, he is the "connection" of the whole, so his central position has merit and logic! I like the reality of the restaurant( tables, the diner on the L,and the reflected surrounding that is part of your project....The light and subdued colors are adding to the whole.

Dignified, proud and matter of fact, both the photo and the chef. I love this series, for a guy who was once shy to ask people to pose you have come a long way. As Pnina mentioned you need to see this large. The reflections on the window are a nice touch. I particularly like how the late day sun gives a warm glow to the left side reflection which balances so well with the warm tones of the interior as seen in the right side window. The fact that I can see happy patrons at the front of the restaurant is also a nice happenstance.

David...This is one of my favorites...Great portrait and reflections...Marjorie

David...

Classic environmental Portrait. Nice work that says about Jonathan. Neat and strong composition. Colors and images in reflection blend nicely with interior and add on dimentional depth and interest. Excellent choice of Lowered angle works well with your visual description of a person who - no doubt - deserves respect for devotion to his creation.

Classy shot for classy subject

Regards :)

I love the late shift in your genre :)

 

this is great. Good perspective, and I really like the reflection in the shop windows - it almost feels like he's standing between two movie screens. Also the contrast between him and his background is great. An ordinary scene presented in a pleasing way. Hey, here comes a pretty picture. Cheers, Micheal

It's all been said. Nice job.

you started a project and sofar it looks like you're doing a very good job. I think once finished most people and yourself will be proud of what you've achieved and rightly so (at least if you keep it up this way :-) ). Having said that let me on this photo be the first one to disagree (somewhat at least) I like the formal composition and your low point of view while the reflection on the left together with those customers provide a beautiful and needed context (shame about that right table). What bothers me a bit is that he seems ill at ease. It looks like he's there because he has to, not because he wants to. His posture looks more insecure than convincing to me. Simply put he radiates nothing that I can perceive of the chef that he probably is in real life. I don't like to compare photo's but just to make myself clear I'll do it here. Looking at your baker that man belongs there, he's giving you so much in that photo and his posture oozes his obvious pride about his business. Here all of that is missing, at least for me. Maybe he wasn't able to give you more or maybe you should have directed him some more. I've wondered about his distant look. It somehow underlines the above, at least that's my perception here.

Ton has an interesting point about the tense pose. However, he simply looks like a busy man who is eager to get back to work. I suspect those overlapping hands are rarely still. I like how you've used the three-paneled background.

another superb portrait David. you are really getting the hang of this. i don't think he looks so much ill at ease. i think he looks like he would rather be in his kitchen, but i like that. again, i think you are capturing part of who he is. possibly he is a curmudgeon like some of you guys here on PN :-)

Thanks to all of you great folks for commenting. I'd like a little input further on here, so continue down.

 

Marie-Thérèse: If you get here, I shall take you there.

 

Bulent: As a man who operates a small business, you can bet that his whole world is pretty much right here.

 

Drew: Thanks for your comments and your optimism.

 

Lawrence: Thanks for your input. I'm going to touch a bit more on what you said below.

 

Pnina: While these images are more posed, I think there is a relationship to some of your market and other public images.

 

Gord: As always I'm deeply gratified to have your take on an image.

 

Marjorie: Thanks. As much people photography as you have been doing lately, I'm not surprised you find it pleasing.

 

Janusz: Well, I'll be working on this for the next month, but don't expect the old Dave to die out peacefully. Once this is done, I'm going irony hunting. :)

 

Micheal: Thanks little buddy. Sorry to have to inform you that there is no V8 on the menu here, but some damn good wine.

 

Doug: ditto back at you.

 

Ton: You amaze me. Thanks for the comment and I'm glad you find it worthwhile. I'm going to ask you to help me somewhat further down.

 

Jeff: Thanks. Let's pursue that how he looks thing below.

 

Linda: Hey! Who you calling a curmudgeon. I mean I'm okay with that, but some of those other guys you might be thinking of might take offense. lol

These latest people images have gotten me to wondering how we view portraits and the interpretations we come up with. Several of you have mentioned that this gentleman looks uptight, or dedicated, or serious, or whatever. The man as I know him is a bit of a loose canon. He is not pompous in any way, although I think my asking (forcing) hime to pose might very well have brought out a more formal and rigid appearance than he has in real life. He's the sort of guy who you can sit down with and drink a bottle of his wine and have a great conversation with. Full of jokes and profanity and occasional political incorrectness. I think here he was simply trying to project an image that did not downgrade or diminish his establishment. This is a hardscrabble business in a hardscrabble geographic area. any business that survives more than ten years has accomplished a lot.

 

But what I'm trying to elicit is some commentary on how we can so easily be lead to think something about someone by how we portray them. I've made many many assumptions about the personality of an individual from a portrait based on what I saw. As stupid as this sounds, I have never really delved into the manner in which we are encouraged to make these assessments. Nor into how abysmally wrong they might be. For instance, I have an image of a gentleman who looks as sweet and kind as you could possibly imagine. He is one of a multitude of evangelical Christians that seem to breed unrestrained in my town and this area in general. But, having been in business, and having given credit to hundreds of people over the last twenty five years, I learned a long time ago that those folks (and other less devout types) often don't seem too morally compelled in the way of paying their obligations. I've also heard some of the most mean spirited, racist, and intolerant thoughts from these same folks. Yet, if I show an image of that person, most would draw conclusions that would have no bearing on the ugliness beneath. Is it my obligation to show those people in such a way that it does not portray them as I believe them to be?

 

This really is not leading to any particular place, but I'm just finding myself very curious about the conclusions we draw from our brief and possibly tainted exposure to images.

"But what I'm trying to elicit is some commentary on how we can so easily be lead to think something about someone by how we portray them"

 

the answer to that is partly very easy and partly somewhat complicated. First of all comments on any photo but especially portraits consist of a lot of projection on the viewers part. It's something we all do and that's because we are interactive creatures by definition, we asses everyone we encounter within the context of what and who we are ourselves and more often than not such first impression sticks. That's where subjectivity and bias and even prejudice lives. That's true in real life as much as when evaluating portraits.

 

The nice part about this all is that you as a photographer can guide that by way of the posture of your subject, the composition, the lighting and your framing for instance. Take your baker and Jonathan as an example. Looking at the posture of your baker he has his feet apart and stands firmly on the ground while pointing his chest (well rather his belly) forward while his arms and hands are a strong looking part of his body. It speakes of someone who is proud of who he is and convincingly so. All the more so because he looks directly and smiling in your direction. That makes for a selfassured and proud look. Jonathan on the other hand doesn't stand straight, his right shoulder is a bit lower than his left, his hands are unevenly crossed while he looks away into the distance. It makes for a slightly uncomfortable and defensive posture. By putting him in the middle of your composition against a symmetric (and therefore in this case formal) background this is even further emphasised. The diagonal comosition of your baker on the other hand creates more dynamic in comparison.

 

As we already suspected it belies his true nature but the fact remains that willingly or not you've portrayed him this way while in fact it's only you who knows if what we perceive or interpret is consistent with the truth. Truth in any portrait is a very shaky concept and something to play with. A beauty portrait in the Vogue for instance is just that, it's meaning is immediately clear to anyone. Here there is more leeway for you as a photographer. If you look at the portraits of someone like Mario Testino it's equally clear that for the most part they are a world apart from the portraits of photographers like Richard Avedon or Irving Penn, much for the same reason.

 

Environmental portraits like these are great fun to make although often it looks deceivingly easy which in fact it's not. Looking at Jonathan and your description of him I can imagine that a more close-up portrait against the background of his restaurant of kitchen could lead to some great results. He sure has got the face for it.

 

You've set yourself quite some goal but to be honest you're doing a good job and even when your project is over you should keep at it.

 

Lastly, in what way did I amaze you? Now you've got me curious ;-)

A point to think about , especially in portraiture is how the model feels and behaves in front of a camera. Some will feel like " fish in water"... comfortable and coopertive. others will feel stiff and just wait for it to end......

 

I think that it portrays the baker and Jonatahan (in front of the camera), and I know that portrait photographers are using all kind of technics for helping their models to feel comfortable before the photo is taken, even though it is not always helpful....;-))

Dave, I agree with you about that looks can be deceptive.Your present series is interesting from historical and socio-economic point of view. I like the image for very good composition,exposure,reflection.

A classy portrait that suggests everything we need to know about Jonathan and his passion. I love the low point-of-view, Jonathan's erect posture, the warm golds, and the people dining in the left window. Excellent photograph, Dave.

The nuances of body language are no less complicated that the nuances of written language. Just as any number of people can walk away from the same line of poetry with an equal number of interpretation, the same seems to go for physical communication. I can read Ton's careful analysis of this mans posture and register it on an intellectual level. I can even concede that Ton is likely more proficient at reading human signals than I will ever be. Goodness knows I am more apt to photograph scenes devoid of humanity or capture the detritus left behind by people more so than the actual people. However no considerations that I apply in a logical fashion, shake my gut conviction about what this guys stance implies. He remains dignified, proud and matter of fact.

 

I always enjoy reading the fascinating comments which your images so often garner. That in itself speaks volumes about your photography.

You are shooting more people in your vernacular shots. I like it. This is certainly well composed, and has some gravity as well.

 

This looks like it was out of yoru comfort zone,... thats what makes it such a great shot for you. Kudso Boss. Many Kudos.

Interesting question you pose. Thanks to everyone who's participated in the thread.

 

I don't think ethics are always involved although they sometimes are. My own ethic is that, if someone whose portrait I took asked me not to show it to others, I wouldn't.

 

Sometimes, the person I photograph will put out something that I really want to capture and then I feel it is mostly about them.

 

On the other hand, my portraits may be guided by the personality of or even something simply visual about the individual. Often, that something will lead me to an unexpected place. I may capture something that many of us can relate to, expressionwise (with the help of angle and lighting), but that would not "accurately" characterize the way people that know the individual would characterize him/her.

 

Truth comes in many forms. If we capture a genuine tidbit in a photo, does the objective relationship between the thing photographed and the photo much matter? In photojournalism and documentary, sure. Otherwise, for me, not.

 

If a portrait is accurate to the subject's personality, there is correspondence to the world. If it taps into something universal and not terribly specific to the individual subject, it can be very much understood and related to. This kind of coherence is also a Truth.

 

It may be a lie or complete fabrication and still be significant. Art can be by nature artificial. There's no ethical dilemma in that (except in the idiotic forums on PN about accuracy of representation in photography). Aesthetics can be but is not necessarily about ethics.

 

Often, what a photo "means" for me will not be about how it actually relates to the "real world." What it "means" will be more about what it makes me feel and how that is accomplished, about what signifiers and symbols are employed to get me there.

 

When I look at this photo, I am struck by how the man seems to fit into the environment created both by the restaurant and your shooting of it, the classic tablecloths and tastefully framed wall posters, the neutral colors inside, the geometry of the fence you included in the foreground. There's harmony for me. The lighting adds to a depth of expression here, echoing in both the man and the overall mood.

 

I think "comfort" (spoken about above) can be more about good snapshots than good portraits. Some of my portraits come precisely because I work with the discomfort of the people I shoot. Discomfort and vulnerability often go hand in hand and vulnerability, on the part of both the subject and the photographer, can be a great tool in creating a significant portrait. Life is sometimes extremely uncomfortable, and capturing that in a portrait or any other photo can be important. Even better is capturing the tension between comfort and discomfort.

 

Finally, great photography and art, for me, is a lot about transcendence. Just as symbols transcend their more mundane meanings while depending on those meanings for their extra universality, I think most good photography and most great art is about what it is about but also transcends that and becomes about something else. If something is "merely" accurate, it will often not be transcendent. Creating may be as simple as getting us to look or see with different eyes. That will often require stirring something in the viewer, which will often go beyond the "reality" of the situation.