The Evolution of a Portrait Shoot

[Benji]

Kelly and angelsfort. Why didn't I use the 1-3-2 posing technique? What is it? (Just kidding.) Why didn't I? I don't know!!! I guess I forgot.

Benji

[c_dwebb@msn.com]

Benji,
Many thanks for the explanation.

C Webb

[Atlas]

Heloo Benji,

I have just started browsing your tutorials, wonderful... Thanks so much, not only for sharing, but taking the time out to actually do it.

[Benji]

Thanks Atlas. I am a "grab the bull by the horns" kind of guy.

My rules tutorial received a lot of negative comments at first but then I think people recognized that rules in portraiture are generally not negative but positive. They help one become a better photographer. Some commented that rules stifle creativity. In reality by following the rules you can become more creative in a positive way instead of making the myriad of stupid mistakes that have already been made by earlier photographers. Lets face it some things simply do not look good in a portrait image, never have and never will.

Benji

[heartseye]

As I remarked before....the creation of a portrait is a work of the heart and the eye and the brain wherein lies the specialised knowledge to accomplish the task. The brain is Flexible.

It appears to me that Benji's method is rigid and inflexable.......A portrait is essentially a creation from love......not a jigsaw puzzle to be assembled.

[Benji]

Originally Posted by heartseye

As I remarked before....the creation of a portrait is a work of the heart and the eye and the brain wherein lies the specialised knowledge to accomplish the task. The brain is Flexible.

It appears to me that Benji's method is rigid and inflexable.......A portrait is essentially a creation from love......not a jigsaw puzzle to be assembled.

OK Bob,

Since you are such a great portrait photographer lets see some of your beautiful portrait creations that you are so fond of pontificating about, but we have yet to see. I have noticed you are quick with the cutting remarks and the negative critique but mighty slow to post any images that show some of your beautiful and creative and awesome work that will just stun all of us when we see it. So please lets see some. I'm sure others would love to see them also.

Benji

P.S. A quick response would be appreciated by all.

[heartseye]

Way to go, Benji........attack the poster rather than answer the issues raised. You try to make the issue about me rather than make intelligent answer to the points raised.

My advice to viewers is this: Study the portraits of the great masters.....not only photographers, but painters as well. If you really look......and maybe even acquaint yourself with some of the reasons behind the creation of the works, you will learn more than I....or Benji... can ever teach you.

One such master to start with might be Josef Karsh......look at his works. Read his thoughts. You do that and you will learn things from within your own mind that no one can teach you.

Jigsaws are fine. But they are a start....not a destination. Bob

[heartseye]

Now, Benji.....here's a few portraits for you....one of them won the Sony award in juried competition just this summer.....you may not like them, but they do show that I know what end to point.....cheers...Bob

[Brooks]

I met Karsh in his studio in Ottawa in the early seventies. He spent about an hour with me showing his work and looking at the very immature and inexperienced work in my portfolio. So embarrassing now when I think of it.

He was very gracious to offer both constructive criticism of my work and to sign one of his books for me, which I have to this day.

Karsh was a very reknowned photographer and a master at his craft but his work was somewhat rigid, or I should say stylized, which made it easy to spot a Karsh Portrait when you saw one. I understand he was also a national treasure in Canada and well known and loved around the world.

In some ways, Benji's portraits are similar in that they adhere to certain stylistic conventions. That doesn't make his portraits good or bad, you either like them or you don't.

I do agree with Benji that it is important to know "the rules", and of course the craft, in order to free yourself to be creative.

BTW Bob, the formal pose makes that baby look a little bit like Winston Churchill. Or maybe all babies at a certain age look like Winston Churchill ?

[micheleg34]

Benji's rules may seem rigid to some, but you have to KNOW the rules before you are able to break them creatively. If I don't know and understand the rules of portraiture, or lighting, etc... and show no effort to learn them, then I am simply stumbling blindly and if a good portrait comes out of it, then it is luck. If I know the rules... If they are second nature to me... Then I can choose to follow or break them to create the look I am after. I can then use my heart AND my head.

Being relatively new to this forum, and to photography in general, I truly appreciate all of Benji's tutorials. Please don't let the negativity keep you from posting them benji. I have learned so much from you, and I'm sure I'm not the only one!

[heartseye]

Brooks.....I used to say that about babies too.....all looked like Winston without the cigar. My wife helped me to see it differently when my daughter was born.......(and how!!)....Bob

[heartseye]

Brooks....Another thought......I had the fortune to attend a weekend seminar with Karsh in the late seventies.......The weekend mostly centered on his method of creation.....that is to say the psychology of his approach and many other details he used to inspire him in the design of the shoot.......the location.....the props, the ambience.... Every work he created was intensly personal to him....and I tend towards that mindset myself....

"Rules" Yes, everyone needs to know them....but they rapidly stifle any creative or art training you may have had. Production line studios use rigid rule of camera/light/people placement to create the product they do. I know more people get a portrait by WalMart than by me.....or any other high end studio in town. But the portraits are much like McDonald burgers......they are good value, the same everywhere, and everyone is treated the same.
So.....if your desire is to produce repeatable assembly line portraits, then approaching it rule book in hand is the way to go.
I've looked at most of Benji's posts with images and find them to all be well excecuted, well processed, well presented wooden clones of people. No passion....nothing individual or individualistic.....nothing insightful or emotional. Thats not really a shot at Benji.....many photographers approach their craft in the same manner.
But....if you want something more then study the acknowledged masters.....there is SO much to reach for....so why not reach for it.
Cheers....respects, even......Bob

[c_dwebb@msn.com]

Some comments about "Rules"
Quote:
My advice to viewers is this: Study the portraits of the great masters.....not only photographers, but painters as well. If you really look......and maybe even acquaint yourself with some of the reasons behind the creation of the works, you will learn more than I....or Benji... can ever teach you.

An excellent statement, and that is the exact sort of thinking that gave birth to the "rules". Those who created the "rules" Jo Karsh was one of them who studied the art work you mention, he was not the only one who did so. Some 60 years ago a few members of the PPofA and other professionals recognized the need for a method to as you say "aquaint themselves" with the thought process used and background as to why the masters did what they did. They saw and understood that this information should be made available consolidated and passed on to beginning and wannabee photographers. I my self stumbled around in the dark trying to learn how to make pictures. There was simply no where to go to learn photography. A few of the luckier guys lucked out and like my self were accepted as apprentices and thus bagan our journey. Most picture makers, studio owners, camera shop operators etc. would not tell you anything about photography everything was their secret and they wouldent share a thing. They felt that to share their hard earned knowledge of how the achieved their images would cut into their profits.

Most every beginning photographer today finds it difficult to learn to use and see light. They learn by the seat of their pants and believe what they are doing is fresh and new and of course creative. In reality it is the exact oposite. An example is the photos posted as Quality Photographs, In my day not one in the bunch would have "Hung" even in state (local) competition unless there were no other entrys. The work shown is ok and part of it is nice but in no way exceptional. Creativity is in no way present, these same images have been copied from thousands of other so, so images. Each one of the posted images can be seen replicated on any forum you choose to visit. I don't mean this as a slam or to be unkind, but simply make a point, take a look!

By studying the old masters works a pattern was clearly seen that all of the artists followed a basic set of rules when rendering a portraitor other work of art. A portrait is not just a copy of a persons anatomy, it is an opportunity to reveal a bit of the real person, not just a copy of his image. Knowing what those old masters knew has filtered down to us through this wonderful set of guiding rules. By not understanding the "Why"and not following those rules to learn your craft you do yourself a great un justice.

Bob, the rules were never intended to be the destination. If you believe that, your are simply wrong. The "rules" as Don Peterson intended them to be was place to begin! Develop your own style from there.

You cannot help but be a better picture maker if you know the "rules" understand and use them. Perhaps even "break them".

Bob, you stated your opinion, I have now stated mine.
Cwebb

[Benji]

Originally Posted by heartseye

Now, Benji.....here's a few portraits for you....one of them won the Sony award in juried competition just this summer.....you may not like them, but they do show that I know what end to point.....cheers...Bob

Bob,

They are nice, but I'm sorry, I don't see your creation of love in any of them. They all look pretty much like well posed well lit portraits, like mine or about a hundred million other well lit well posed portraits hanging in hundreds of millions of homes throughout the world.

It would appear that Mr. Brooks, micheleg34 and C_Webb has quite eloquently stated the rest of my thoughts.

Thank you for posting your excellent images and your quick response.

Benji

[Brooks]

Here's a portrait of a girl friend, taken many years ago in the early seventies. Shot with a single umbrella and Ascorlite 800ws strobe.

There are several less than correct techniques used in making this portrait: such as the low camera position, the turning of the body too far to camera right, the dim model lamp which caused the very dilated pupils, the lack of separation/hair light, no background light, etc.

I could say that these were rules that were broken for creative effect but that wasn't the case. They were simply "rules" that I wasn't aware of at the time this portrait was made.

For me this photo was about the light and singular beauty of the subject. I think I just got lucky on this one.