I apologise, chapter 12 instead of 13.
Leen
Leen – Thanks for posting the tutorial link. Now I have a better understanding of why some portraits are beautiful and others are, well, just pictures.
I passed the link on to my sister and she had a question I wonder if you could answer. All of photos in Chapter 1 are pretty much color coordinated (which is nice as nothing clashes). Even the dog matched. But all of the reds appear basically the same shade (kind of a redwood color). Actually, all of the reds in ALL of the photos in Chapter 1 appear to use the same basic red. She wondered if the models actually were wearing clothes with the same colors, or whether the photographer used some processing method to color coordinate everything.
My sister has a daughter-in-law who likes to have portraits taken with everyone wearing the same color. One of the portraits has everyone (parents and two children) in the same blue denim clothes. Perhaps it’s modern to dress everyone exactly the same, but to us they looked like members of a chain gang taking a coffee break. The sameness received added emphasis since the family group was surrounded entirely by solid white (looked like the photographer had done a simple selection of the people from the original photo and then just copied/pasted into a white background — no feathering, no soft focus. The previous portrait she sent my sister had everyone in black 🙂 Now that I have "led the witness" would you mind my asking if you find this style of portraiture appealing?
Your own photography is quite lovely. You are certainly deserving of the awards you’ve received.
Marilyn
Marilyn,
Thanks for the compliment about my images.
I don’t really know anything about the reds in these images; everything I might say would be a guess.
About backgrounds and clothing. Everything in commercial portraiture depends usually on trends. A lot of US photographers still today and until recently UK photographers tried to copy the old masters of painting like Van Dycke and Rembrandt. Recently since about 10 years there has been a trend towards white backgrounds, a way of posing against all rules, cross processing films etc. In the UK the "Venture" studio franchise concept with a camera room like a completely white box is quite successful.
The same thing applies to clothing. Everyone in the same colours is a concept that came over from the USA, especially California, and is rather popular with family groups. People are afraid to be oldfashioned and that is why they think they prefer something else. That’s why they all want the same thing; nothing special, but they think it will fit their "contemporary" life style.
Hypes, like white backgrounds, all the same clothing etc. do sell. I produce these images sometimes as well. I am just like van Dyke and Rembrandt: I create whatever my customers prefer, but nevertheless I often try to put something of my own in my portraits.
The majority of people think they want something contemporary. but once confronted with a choice between two images, one traditional and a contemporary one, almost everyone prefers the traditional one. 😉
That is why I show mostly contemporary portraits and wedding images in my window display, mixed with some traditional ones. Customers come in after having seen the "new look" and 75% buys traditional.
There is nothing new under the sun.
Leen
BTW, soon on my website: an image that I consider to be one of my best: a 8 year old young girl as a ballet dancer in the woods. I love this image, an extremely romantic girls dream, thanks to PSE. An image like this wouldnot fit into any marketing concept, but I am convinced every mother would love to see her little girl this way.
If I don’t forget to bring it home I will mail it tomorrow to my webmaster.
Leen
Leen,
Thanks so much for taking the time from your busy day to answer my questions. I will most definitely pass your comments on to my sister as well, who I am sure will be very interested in everything you said, especially your comments about "traditional" and "contemporary" photos.
I went to your website to see the photo of the ballet dancer in the woods, and looked through your Gallery; but I don’t believe I came across the photo you spoke of. Could you tell me where on your site I might see it? One of my favorite submissions to the Elements Challenges was that of my young niece en pointe on a large mushroom in what I hoped was a soft illusion of a fairy forest. I thought perhaps it might have had some similarities to your ballet dancer, so I think I would very much like your photo.
Your description of the "completely white box" certainly fit one of the family photos I described in my previous message. Unlike the romantically soft photo in your Gallery of the lady in a white fur hat which was taken against a solid white background, the white surroundings in my sister’s family photo gave it a very harsh feeling instead. The people looked as though they were glued together and floating in space. The family members were all smiling, but the smile didn’t seem to go beyond the photo, if that makes sense.
I am fond of your Impressionistic photos because they soften the hard realities of life and instead emphasize the love and romance that can also be found there if people would just look with their hearts. I hope you continue to produce these types of photos, even though they may not be considered the latest trend at a given time.
Again, thanks for writing back.
Marilyn
Marilyn, unfortunately the impressionistic photos don’t sell very well. I haven’t made one for over a year.
Nevertheless I produce quite a lot of photos with a more moderate soft focus; in fact about 80% of my portraits have been softed at least slightly.
The white box is higly fashionable at the moment, unfortunately. Often it is something for mediocre photographers in combination with flat lighting. This way they don’t have to bother about correct lighting the subject and background. One can see the poor knowledge as the background often spills unwanted light on the subject from behind.
Unfortunately my webmaster hasn’t included the image in my website yet. I suppose it won’t take long.
Leen
Leen – Although I wish it were otherwise, I do understand that when you make a living with your photography, you certainly have to produce what sells, even if that might not be your particular choice. My brother-in-law is a semi-retired commercial artist, and I’ve seen some of the instructions he gets from people who know nothing about art or composition but they’re paying for the work (e.g., add more people to the picture–even though the faces are almost too small now to make them out; change the horse to a strawberry roan–a most unattractive color for a horse but it has a nice Western sound to it; have everyone in the drawing looking directly at the reader–that was a particularly creepy effect).
It’s nice, though, that you’ve included a variety of styles on your website for all of us to enjoy. The world would be a sadder place, indeed, if everyone took pictures only inside white boxes 🙂
Thanks, again, and I’ll keep checking back on your website for the ballet dancer.
Marilyn
Leen – Is the ballet dancer photo the one that appears on your June 2004 Newsbrief at the top of the picture column on the right? That one is truly lovely! I’m hoping that’s the one so I can see it in a larger view when it appears on your website. Of course, I also wish the pictures on your website were larger so I could see them better. They’re not very big on my little 15" flat panel. But then folks would probably steal them, so I’ll settle for the medium-sized ones 🙂
Marilyn
The ‘white box’ concept reminds me a little of the ‘ethnographic’ portrait series done by Irving Penn. He used simple white and grey backgrounds, presumably to take these people (native chiefs and others in full regalia) completely out of their natural environment. In the Penn series, the technique served to focus attention completely upon the person, with no distracting elements. And the results were visually stunning. But they were stunning because of Penn’s mastery of lighting and printing, and because the subjects were interesting in themselves, and very different from the viewing audience. In short, Penn was not really taking these pictures for the sitter, but for himself and an audience who had never met the person.
To me, a family portrait has a different purpose, and I find it hard to imagine how this setup works for most sitters.
Leen
Not sure how I missed this thread but I did. Thank you very much for this most wonderful tutorial. It sure brought back many memories. When I was a young wipper snapper I fancied myself as a photographer. The tutorials I used back then were all put out by Kodak Professional labs and the whole thrust was in the same direction. In fact the photographs used are almost clones of these, same time same ideas. The four light system became second nature to me and in the beginning it was great fun. I managed to buy all sorts of equipment and make a very modest living off of tripping my shutter.
In those days there was a big push into a more natural or casual approach to photography. You know the type, the young lady standing next to a window contemplating, lit by natural light and of course one reflector. In ever sitting I would shoot 24 exposures (2" 1/4) of them 18 would be classical and the last six would be more contemporary. Almost every person raved about how great the contemporary were and then selected a classical pose. In those days I suspected that classical had the "LOOK" of professional so they would not have to explain why they spent money on a sitting. On occasions they would buy a contemporary as an extra for someone special. This bothered me because the contemporary had more of me in it while the classical was a series of rule I had learned.
In the end I decided not to enter professional photography for a number of reasons. My work sold so that was not a problem. But … I am my own worst critic and I was never satisfied with my work and it bothered me selling stuff I felt was shite to people that worked hard for their money. My nerves were torn to shreds doing weddings, while I never failed at a wedding it was always in the back of my mind that I could and how important an event this was in these peoples lives. While I love the people and enjoyed the sittings I dreaded the presenting of the images. They would go on about how great they were and then spend the rest of the time saying how ugly they looked. I concentrated on the "how ugly they looked" as if it were my fault. I was not taking photographs that I liked and the love of the art was being eroded because it was becoming a job.
I often wonder if I had stuck with it would I have gotten over all the short coming. I really did like working with the public and loved photography. The result was that I gave up on photography and didn’t even hold a camera for over 30 years. In fact I have only been back taking photographs for 4 years of these only two of them seriously and less than one year with a driving obsession. As luck would have it I an still not satisfied with my work. 😉
Grant
Marilyn, it is the same image indeed. I’m pretty proud of it, although, I printed it at 12×16 and it is on my desk now for about a week and slowly it is losing some of its attraction.
Of course I produce images the way my customers prefer, but there are limits to what extend I will follow their guidelines. My signature is on the image and I refuse to do things that aren’t acceptable to me. Sometimes I tell people to look for another photographer and it is extremely funny to see the look on heir faces. They want to spend money and I don’t accept it….
This happens several times a year, especially when they want me to cover their wedding and I notice their intention is to impress other people with the amount of money they are able to spend instead of regarding a marriage as a confirmation of mutual love.
Money is important, but satisfaction is more important. Sometimes I accept marriages like this, just only if I can rip them off considerably. 😉
John, I know these portrait series by Penn. He converts these people into majestic icons of the dignity of their ethnic group. They are not individuals any more; they testify of the beauty of their culture.
Leen
Grant, whatever you told is still there. People keep complaining about how ugly they look. I don’t listen, I always tell them they are right and then I look into their eyes. Once more iI confirm they are really ugly and I don’t understand how they dare to have their picture taken. Usually that’s the end of their complaining as the only thing they want to hear is me telling they are not that ugly as they are just only uncertain about themselves. Then they pay me back with a smile. 😉
Customers indeed almost always want something contemporary and choose traditional. they are afraid to choose something that isn’t extremely familiar, but lve to see someone else having their portrait on the wall in acontemporary style. So that is what they want and afterwards they hesitate for the unknown and choose for the safe way. Just like in a restaurant, 98% of the visitors choose something on the menu they know..
I don’t care, because I like to do both styles.
Leen
Leen, just an aside: we are truly blessed to have you participating in this forum. I sincerely hope your move to Photoshop CS won’t make you a stranger here. Thanks for sharing your incredible knowledge and experience with us!
Chuck
Chuck, it is always nice to fee such a pat on the shoulder. Thank you. Moving to CS will not influence my being around here. It is just like growing up. At a certain point in time one has to leave the parental home, but that doesnot mean you don’t love your parents any more. On the contrary, you start to understand them better and love often deepens.
This forum is like a second family; often better than family in law. I chose this family deliberately and family in law usually comes as an extra bonus. 😉
Leen
