Portrait photography is everywhere. Our lives usually revolve around other people, so it's no wonder that nearly everyone who picks up a camera will snap a photo of someone else. And that person will probably hate the photo when they see it. It's a fact. At one time I had a newspaper clipping with statistics that claimed the vast majority of people hated to have their photo taken. A surprising number would rather visit the dentist than be a part of a family portrait. We portrait photographers have our work cut out for us. Making other people look good isn't easy. Our subjects are fat, have skin problems, and probably don't even want to be here. Unlike still life photographers, we can't go shopping for that perfect apple, and unlike landscape photographers, we can't drive around the mountains until we find that perfect vista. We have to work with what we've got. That's where this thread comes in. Portrait photographers, rejoice, for here is a repository of knowledge for you. This is a place where you can ask "how can I make this 300lb woman look good", and a place where your peers will give you pointers on how to improve. Over my years as a portrait photographer, I've picked up a ton of tips and tricks on how to make portraits easier and look better. I'll be posting those as I finish writing them. Here's a few of my portraits just to kickstart things. The Only Posing Guide You Will EVER Need The clothing recommendations are a bit dated (the guy was in his prime in the 70s) but this guide is comprehensive, well-explained, and far, far, far better than anything I have been able to write so far. Thanks to Kazy for re-hosting the guide, it went down at some point and I didnt' know! ConfusedUs fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jun 1, 2010 |
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 06:40 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 14:35 |
|
Hey thanks for starting this thread. I have to say though, portraiture is a pain compared to working with models who know what they're doing, and I really respect it when people can pose other people well. Let me know if you think fashion/beauty shouldn't be lumped in. I'm hoping some other fashion people will come out of the woodwork. I think a really important topic is how to interact with your model/person. By making them feel comfortable and beautiful in front of the camera, you can often coax a much better look out of them. Sincere compliments are always best, I've met more than couple photogs who think that by telling the girls how "hot/gorgeous/sexy" the girls are, they're complimenting them. No, you just come off creepy. Also, even men (read as: especially men) need some encouraging words too.
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 06:59 |
|
nonanone posted:I think a really important topic is how to interact with your model/person. By making them feel comfortable and beautiful in front of the camera, you can often coax a much better look out of them. Sincere compliments are always best, I've met more than couple photogs who think that by telling the girls how "hot/gorgeous/sexy" the girls are, they're complimenting them. No, you just come off creepy. Also, even men (read as: especially men) need some encouraging words too. I think part of the problem is that novice models have no idea what they look like when they're posing like this or that so they don't know how to work it well when you tell them to do something. I might say that it would be great to have a mirror behind me so they could see what they look like, but then they'd probably spend all their time staring at the mirror instead of the camera or wherever else they're supposed to be looking.
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 07:36 |
nonanone posted:
I have no problem lumping fashion photography in here--it's basically just portrait photography with an added emphasis on the clothing. More or less. And yes, interacting with your subjects is a major point and one I intended to address.
|
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 08:44 |
|
I had the worst experience recently. I asked a friend if his ex that he's on good terms with would be open to letting me take a few portrait shots. He managed to turn it into a huge deal, he said that "she" demanded that he be there. He also said that he told her that he helps me out on all my shoots, and comes up with ideas for them. Really bizarre, and obvious he was just trying to be there. Ideally I should have just gotten her number, but do you have any tips for dealing with nightmare boyfriends/family/friends. Also, I'm not sure if you're a pro or not but how would you approach someone that you'd want to shoot?
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 10:08 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:I have no problem lumping fashion photography in here--it's basically just portrait photography with an added emphasis on the clothing. More or less. I actually prefer working with normal people who claim they aren't photogenic and don't think they're attractive. I think models perform too much, and they bring forth their same attitude/look for every shoot. They also tend to have "samey" features. I normally talk to my subjects the whole time, and I make sure I'm confident, because that bleeds over. Do whatever you can beforehand to ease your own comfort level. Scout the location, do a practice shoot with another friend to get your settings down, etc. The less you worry about, the more you can focus, and the more the subject will see that you're in charge. When you get a good shot, tell them, be happy and excited, it will also bleed over into the subject. I work more on full body portraits that incorporate the environment. This makes body language a lot more important, and you have to focus on wardrobe, background, and lighting, to really tie the scene together. I find it really rewarding, but I think it's the kind of thing you have to go all into to really figure out. People used to doing studio portraits rarely seem able to jump out into the field and work the same magic in an underground garage. I run a lighting blog that often covers dealing with the subjects here: http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/ Here is a particular post where I go into my workflow: http://mr-chompers.blogspot.com/2009/02/helgio.html My general workflow goes: 1. Observe constantly during my daily errands and travels. If I find someplace that looks promising, I plan a research trip. 2. Do the research trip. Guess at what time the light will work well with the location (lots of lights and reflective surfaces = night, open side areas with lots of soft light from the sky = daytime on a cloudy day, lots of interesting shadows and bounce surfaces = direct sunlight, etc) 3. Explore with an eye toward eventual photos. Let my mind chew through what I'm seeing and imagine what kind of subject I'd want, how they should be dressed, colors, lighting, etc. If any of my ideas prompt some further exploration while there, the more the better. I take only my camera and lenses on this trip, no lighting equipment. This is to be a bit more mobile, but also because I am just exploring the location and seeing what's possible with ambient. 4. Edit images at home. I try to bring out the "feel" that I want from them, the same way I would if the subject were there. I tone shadows, white balance, recover highlights, fill shadows, the whole shebang. I want to know if there are any shooting conditions I should be aware of. In some cases I want to let things blow out, and in other cases I want to be careful of the highlights. If I find that I need as much dynamic range as possible because the contrast is so high, that will let me know to keep my ISO as low as possible (cameras lose dynamic range as you bump up ISO) 5. Show images to the subject, and get their feedback. Mostly this is to get them excited about the shoot, but also so they can be thinking about it. It might give them pose ideas, or get them in the right mental state. Mostly I think it helps them pick out their outfits. I normally give a general guide (all black, mostly white, something bright and warm colored, etc) but let them pick outfits they think they look best in. If it's a really involving shoot, I'll do a wardrobe planning session with them at their house. 6. Try to figure out lighting scenarios. I first try to figure out where I wan to place my subject in the frame from what I've picked out. Then I envision how the existing light will light them, and if it needs modifying or amplifying. Lighting normally falls into 3 categories, * no lighting required, just the ambient plus possibly reflectors or subtractors. * using the existing light sources and angles, but either boosting the level by placing a flash in the same place, or by complimenting the existing light with another flash filling in the shadows * providing the lighting completely with the flashes.
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 10:10 |
|
poop, that red dress looks completley see-through. Was that intentional? I'm still an amateur and my portraiture doesn't extend beyond harassing my wife/friends to pose for me if they happen to be around when I've got my camera out. From the reading I've done the "happy place" for portraits is in the 85-100mm range, is that pretty much standard? I posted a similar one to the one below a while ago and was told the angle was all wrong and it made her head look enormous. I was sorting through the wedding photos and came across this one, did a bit of post on it and was pretty happy with the result, even if it was only shot at 28mm.
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 14:16 |
|
Kind of echoing the issues in Paragon8's post, I love the street fashion photography of people like Scott Schuman's The Sartorialist. I would love to take protraits of random people I see that I think look interesting and/or are dressed well - how is it possible to be able to do such a thing with out coming over all ?
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 14:55 |
|
I'd imagine if you're polite and just ask nicely it wouldn't be a problem. Or, you could just say you're documenting street fashion and explain yourself. If you were able to hand them over a website, it'll also look much more legit. I really like your writeups, poopinmymouth, as well as your images. I'm a big fan of both environmental images and studio work. They each have their strengths, and environments are important for telling a story, while studio allows the focus to be narrow in on the model or the clothes/props. What are people's opinions on showing the preview LCD? I recently had one girl who kept asking me, and I had to kind of shut her down and say "I'll tell you when it looks really bad, don't worry about what's going on over here." The only time I was really okay with showing was with one model who was trying something new and politely asked to check to see how it was looking from my end.
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 17:19 |
|
GestureSignalThreat posted:I would love to take protraits of random people I see that I think look interesting and/or are dressed well - how is it possible to be able to do such a thing with out coming over all ? 2. Have a girl tag along with you. 3. If you can't do 1 or 2, I'd say having a card you can hand them where they can find the photo would be the next best thing. These days everyone wants a good photo for their facebook/myspace profile so I think people are more willing to have their photo taken if they can get their hands on the results. psylent fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Jul 15, 2009 |
# ? Jul 15, 2009 17:35 |
GestureSignalThreat posted:Kind of echoing the issues in Paragon8's post, I love the street fashion photography of people like Scott Schuman's The Sartorialist. I would love to take protraits of random people I see that I think look interesting and/or are dressed well - how is it possible to be able to do such a thing with out coming over all ? I think you'll be surprised at how many people agree if you look the part, act confident, and just ask. Having a business card or other 'official' documentation will allay most people's remaining fears.
|
|
# ? Jul 15, 2009 17:40 |
|
I have a lot of trouble with posing, and will usually only get lucky with quantity. I'm anxious to hear what others do... Here's two that I think turned out well... Click for larger...
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 03:07 |
|
Acc-Risk posted:I have a lot of trouble with posing, and will usually only get lucky with quantity. I'm anxious to hear what others do... Here's two that I think turned out well... I'll tell you what, you did a stellar job on that first pic minimizing her nose. I think the shardows are a bit harsh and that a secondary light about 1/2 power to the keylight to camera right about 45 would make it perfect.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 12:49 |
|
nonanone posted:What are people's opinions on showing the preview LCD? I recently had one girl who kept asking me, and I had to kind of shut her down and say "I'll tell you when it looks really bad, don't worry about what's going on over here." The only time I was really okay with showing was with one model who was trying something new and politely asked to check to see how it was looking from my end. I don't really care if they ask, I actually show them the photos taken every 30-50 frames or so. They are usually very excited.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 18:06 |
|
LuisX posted:I don't really care if they ask, I actually show them the photos taken every 30-50 frames or so. They are usually very excited. That's usually how I do it. I'm not going to stop constantly to show them, but every so often, I'll give them a peak and how it looks.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 18:12 |
|
rockcity posted:Every so often, I'll give them a peak and how it looks. Same here, I never show them every frame but if we ever stop for a break or if I take something that looks particularly good, I will shoot a few more frames until the "moment" is clearly over then give them a peak. Ive learned to never show them test shots or bad shots, people like when they see themselves looking good and get more confidence in you and themselves, the first sign of them looking bad is going to bring them down like lead weights so pick and choose what frames you show them. Another thing I realized is asking people what they think their strengths are and reenforcing their opinion, then playing off that they get comfortable and confident pretty quickly. If you start with their most comfortable and confident areas they will warm up to you a little easier, as the photographer you are going to know their features as soon as you see them and decide whats best, but by asking them it makes the model think that they are a bit more part of the process and builds their confidence. Obviously you dont want to butter them up so much that they dont do anything different or make it sound insencere but when taking peoples photos they really do get a lot more insecure with themselves and any slight move can make them go positive or negative.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 18:44 |
|
Usually I think of a shoot as a teamwork between a model and a photog. I don't think I am doing all the work or the directing, and neither does the subject. That way if I say or if the subject says "hey let's try this" we do it, if it does not work oh well.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 19:00 |
|
These were in the PAD thread but now that we have a portrait specific thread I figured this might be a better place. It might be my monitor here at work but overall I feel like it might be a bit too dark/underexposed. I was attempting to take a few test shots to get the exposure correctly. I am one of those people who love taking pictures but hate being in them. So this is quite a gem that I was actually smiling and eyes open without looking drunk, severly retarded, or strung out. I wish I had more time with my step sister and her fam for better positioning/angles because in hindsight, I would have swapped positions of him and her due to their skin color differences and done something so that the baby was closer to them as not to appear like he has a massive marshmallow head. Babies are really hard to photograph. Theres a lot of shaking, noise making, and baby talk required to make them look like they arent making GBS threads themselves into next tuesday.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 20:51 |
|
nonanone posted:What are people's opinions on showing the preview LCD? I recently had one girl who kept asking me, and I had to kind of shut her down and say "I'll tell you when it looks really bad, don't worry about what's going on over here." The only time I was really okay with showing was with one model who was trying something new and politely asked to check to see how it was looking from my end. I think this is an overlooked issue. I share my images with my clients as I shoot because it helps on two fronts. One, they feel more involved with the shoot and helps the model to relax. Second, when the model see's what you want to accomplish on the lcd they visually realize the abstract imagery I may be trying to reproduce. All in all this fits more with the one light/studio scenario during very personal or small production shoots; anything bigger and you should be working with proffessional models that don't require this reassurance.
|
# ? Jul 16, 2009 21:15 |
Important Elements within a Portrait The eyes are the most important element of any portrait. Eye direction should always be deliberate. That does not mean always straight to the camera, or even open, but the positioning of the subject's eyes is critical. A portrait's focus should always be at its sharpest at the eyes, too. Hands are a close second behind the eyes. If the subject's hands are visible in the portrait, pay special attention to them. Keep the fingers together unless the pose requires it. Watch where you crop, too. Avoid chopping people's limbs off at major joints. It gives an amputated look, not good. Also try to avoid just barely touching people with the edge of the frame--it looks like a mistake. Compare these two portraits: The first has some major problems. The focus is on the arms/knees, not on the face (though you may have to view it larger to notice). The eyes lack that critical focus, and the hair is casting shadows across the left eye. The hands look awkward and unattractive. The second image is much stronger for many reasons, not the least of which is that I paid more attention to the subject's eyes and hands. ConfusedUs fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Jul 17, 2009 |
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 02:10 |
I'd typed up several hundred words on posing and was proofreading it when I stumbled up on this link. The Only Posing Guide You Will EVER Need The clothing recommendations are a bit dated (the guy was in his prime in the 70s) but this guide is comprehensive, well-explained, and far, far, far better than anything I have been able to write so far. I've been doing portraits for five years and I learned a few things from this site. Read it. He describes portrait lighting too.
|
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 02:30 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:Compare these two portraits: I agree about the hair in photo one, and the hands are weird, but I didn't notice it until it was pointed out. I think her hands in the second photo look too posed. So lets say you were going to reshoot photo one, what would you do different assuming it was the same pose? Edit: One of the first things I learned while pursuing my graphic design degree was to be aware of "white space" In the design world that means exactly that, white space around the focus of the design. In your first photo the stairs to her right are huge to the composition. I would have done away with the purse as to me, that's a bigger focus than her knees. Does that make sense? I'm not sure what I was trying to say... Acc-Risk fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Jul 17, 2009 |
# ? Jul 17, 2009 03:19 |
Acc-Risk posted:I agree about the hair in photo one, and the hands are weird, but I didn't notice it until it was pointed out. I think her hands in the second photo look too posed. If I chose the same pose, I'd have her lay her arms on top of each other, rather than wrapping around each other, and I'd adjust my main light a bit so that the air did not cast shadows. For an alternate pose, I'd have her lean on her left arm and curl her legs up to the side, and leave the bag in the same place. Otherwise I'm pretty happy with the shot.
|
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 03:26 |
|
It's a great shot. Imagine it without the purse.
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 03:31 |
Acc-Risk posted:It's a great shot. Imagine it without the purse. Fashion shoot. The purse was mandatory. The hands-on-hips pose is actually a crop of a full length with the bag.
|
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 03:32 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:If I chose the same pose, I'd have her lay her arms on top of each other, rather than wrapping around each other, and I'd adjust my main light a bit so that the air did not cast shadows. I agree with these pretty much exact changes, the first one is not nearly as good as the second. The only thing is if it's for the bag, I would make it more prominent instead of so separated. I feel like there should be an interaction/a focus. As an overall thing, it very rarely looks good with joints pointing towards the camera, and her body language is insecure in the first one. I like your stuff ConfusedUs, it's all so wholesome and natural
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 04:59 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:I'd typed up several hundred words on posing and was proofreading it when I stumbled up on this link. Wicked. Bookmarked.
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 05:13 |
nonanone posted:
You say that like two of my last three self portraits didn't involve knives, somehow.
|
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 05:23 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:The Only Posing Guide You Will EVER Need
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 06:14 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:The Only Posing Guide You Will EVER Need
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 06:36 |
|
Verman posted:Another thing I realized is asking people what they think their strengths are and reenforcing their opinion, then playing off that they get comfortable and confident pretty quickly. If you start with their most comfortable and confident areas they will warm up to you a little easier, as the photographer you are going to know their features as soon as you see them and decide whats best, but by asking them it makes the model think that they are a bit more part of the process and builds their confidence. Obviously you dont want to butter them up so much that they dont do anything different or make it sound insencere but when taking peoples photos they really do get a lot more insecure with themselves and any slight move can make them go positive or negative. On that note: When I'm "done" I ask the subject, "Do you have any way you'd like to be photographed that we haven't done?" And I almost always get one or two more shots I enjoy. Sometimes I've even gotten my favorite shot that way. While Verman uses it to warm up the model, which is a great idea, by doing it at the end, you already have a warmed up model, and they might be willing to try an idea they wouldn't have been confident enough to ask for at the beginning. ConfusedUs posted:Important Elements within a Portrait On this note, pay attention to how much of the eye shows. As a general rule, you should have a bit of white on either side of the pupil. If it's a 3/4, don't let them be so far turned you lose sight of the inner white because the nose cuts it off. Also don't let the farthest eye actually be along the silhouette. There should be a bit of skin to "hold in" the eye. There is basically a dead area from 3/4 to full profile you should never photograph unless you have a very good reason to. Either show all of the far eye while including the skin on the far edge to hold it in, or none of the far eye and let the bridge of the nose be the edge of the silhouette. Also make sure your eyes are lit evenly. Don't let one eye be much darker, and don't let the catchlights missmatch. Make sure your light strikes both evenly and you get the specular hotspot on both. Again, GENERAL RULE. If you're being artsy fartsy and know what you're doing, you can break this, but for 90% of generic portraits, it's tried and tested for a reason. poopinmymouth fucked around with this message at 09:29 on Jul 17, 2009 |
# ? Jul 17, 2009 09:25 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:You say that like two of my last three self portraits didn't involve knives, somehow. You can't say it's not natural? Besides, your kid pictures are always so cute (yes, even the child labour ones)
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 15:53 |
|
poopinmymouth posted:On this note, pay attention to how much of the eye shows. As a general rule, you should have a bit of white on either side of the pupil. If it's a 3/4, don't let them be so far turned you lose sight of the inner white because the nose cuts it off. Also don't let the farthest eye actually be along the silhouette. There should be a bit of skin to "hold in" the eye. There is basically a dead area from 3/4 to full profile you should never photograph unless you have a very good reason to. Either show all of the far eye while including the skin on the far edge to hold it in, or none of the far eye and let the bridge of the nose be the edge of the silhouette. I mean this in the nicest way possible, but it would be amazing to me if anyone could keep all these rules and guidelines straight in their head during a shoot. Jesus. brad industry fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Jul 17, 2009 |
# ? Jul 17, 2009 19:54 |
|
brad industry posted:I mean this in the nicest way possible, but it would be amazing to me if anyone could keep all these rules and guidelines straight in their head during a shoot. Jesus. I second this. That's why i shoot up to 1k frames and I feel happy if I get like 10 decent ones.
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 21:36 |
|
brad industry posted:I mean this in the nicest way possible, but it would be amazing to me if anyone could keep all these rules and guidelines straight in their head during a shoot. Jesus. At first, I was thinking the same thing, but then realized that it's simply a cumulative learning process. You don't have to keep all of the rules straight all of the time; rather, the more you shoot while trying to think about them, the more you know when to follow them. It's the same thing as juggling shutter speed, aperture, flash power, light size, background visual noise, composition, colors, etc. You continually gain more control of each photographic element, and add it in as you learn. At least, that's my take on it.
|
# ? Jul 17, 2009 23:20 |
dakana posted:At first, I was thinking the same thing, but then realized that it's simply a cumulative learning process. You don't have to keep all of the rules straight all of the time; rather, the more you shoot while trying to think about them, the more you know when to follow them. It's the same thing as juggling shutter speed, aperture, flash power, light size, background visual noise, composition, colors, etc. You continually gain more control of each photographic element, and add it in as you learn. Pretty much. I don't even really think about a lot of stuff any more. I always (and without thinking about it) make a quick scan of the subject looking for creased clothing, necklace clasps, curled collars, upside down rings, bra straps, and other things that take away from the portrait. It's instinctive at this point. I do the same thing with posing. I check the eyes to see if they're visible and lit, check the hands to make sure they're posed in an attractive manner, check the subject's posture (more on this in a second), and then arrange the subject to shift their weight and make minor adjustments until they look nice. Again, I don't really run this list in my head, I just do it. Warning: subject change Posture can make or break a portrait. In most cases you want the subject to sit or stand to their fullest height. It's more attractive by a long shot. You know the phrase "the camera adds twenty pounds", right? It's not the camera. It's posture. A slouched figure looks much heavier.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2009 03:03 |
brad industry posted:I mean this in the nicest way possible, but it would be amazing to me if anyone could keep all these rules and guidelines straight in their head during a shoot. Jesus. And I mean this in the nicest way possible: the ability to remember these rules (and to know when to break them) is the difference between some guy with a camera and a master portrait photographer. Any amateur can pick up a camera and take a good portrait through trial and error, or luck. Any professional can get a good portrait with minimal fuss and bother. But a true master can take any subject and make a compelling portrait. This is the difference between me and, say, Annie Liebowitz. Look at this Liebowitz group portrait. I can take a flattering picture of just about anyone, but there's no way I could have put this portrait together, even given her budget and crew. Her grasp of the rules of portraiture (lighting, posing, & composition) is leaps and bounds ahead of mine. Any individual person in that picture is posed and lit in a way that tells a story, gives the subject a personality, and that compliments the others in the scene. I couldn't do that. Not yet, anyway. The attention to detail in this picture is astounding, and you can bet that all of it is deliberate--and that much of it was done without thinking.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2009 03:24 |
|
yeah, except thats probably 5 different portraits comped into one not to derail, but I'm liking her stuff less and less these days.
|
# ? Jul 18, 2009 03:41 |
Bottom Liner posted:yeah, except thats probably 5 different portraits comped into one Well yeah, but even if they're comped, that's still a level of attention to detail that I just don't reach yet. Details are everything.
|
|
# ? Jul 18, 2009 03:45 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 14:35 |
|
ConfusedUs posted:Any amateur can pick up a camera and take a good portrait through trial and error, or luck. That's exactly where I'm at now. I know what I like and not, but not really "why"
|
# ? Jul 18, 2009 21:15 |