|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/06/2010 02:21:20 PM · #51 |
Calm down. "Formal portrait" is not really all that clear and simple. There are various conventions for formal portraits, and some formal portraits are more formal than others. I was, however, a little intimidated by the word "formal" in the description, but figured it was not so important an element in the challenge as the actual engaging with the subject; and indeed from there - from that engagement - we go to letting the portrayal speak on its own terms.
I do think it is just a matter of common sense NOT to expect street portraits to follow the conventions of studio portraits, but to allow the conventions to be redefined as needed.
eta: if it's not clear I stole tnun's post because he put it perfectly.
Message edited by author 2010-07-06 14:29:36. |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 02:22:57 PM · #52 |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 04:32:34 PM · #53 |
Wow! There is indeed alot to think about here. I've never even thought of some of this stuff. This kind of shooting comes pretty intuitively for me but the type of picture I end up with totally depends on the personality of the stranger. Engaging them and somewhat getting a sense of their personality is the key to taking a portrait of them that conveys their essense and moves the viewer. I agree that in some faces, it is the LACK of expression that tells the story best. In some, an expression thru pained eyes says it best. And in some, a jovial expression thru a face that's obviously been thru alot -- or not -- tells it best. But the age, the expression, the pose -- it all has to be specific to that particular person, and I think a good street photographer isn't going to have a rigid set of rules or perameters, but rather will feel the subject and take a picture that represents them. And the viewer will feel it, with or without an expression if it is done well.
That's my 2-cents for whatever it's worth.
Message edited by author 2010-07-06 16:35:46. |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 04:36:10 PM · #54 |
Since it was supposed to be a formal portrait, I went with the shot that had less expression. I had a cute shot where my subject had a bit of a cute smirk, but that didn't seem like a formal portrait. Obviously it would have done better, but it didn't fit the description, imo. I can live with it, but people's reactions to things definitely surprised me.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2010 04:44:39 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Since it was supposed to be a formal portrait, I went with the shot that had less expression. I had a cute shot where my subject had a bit of a cute smirk, but that didn't seem like a formal portrait. Obviously it would have done better, but it didn't fit the description, imo. I can live with it, but people's reactions to things definitely surprised me. |
I did the opposite. :)
Although I felt that one of my shots had a more "formal" feel, I went with one that was less formal but more interesting to me. I figured that if I get dinged for that, then so be it. The challenge for me was to just get the shot...so if voters hate it, that's ok with me (this challenge).
I'm just excited to have completed this exercise! I'll let everyone else squabble over semantics. :)
|
|
|
|
07/06/2010 05:44:30 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by SandyP:
Wow! There is indeed alot to think about here. I've never even thought of some of this stuff. This kind of shooting comes pretty intuitively for me but the type of picture I end up with totally depends on the personality of the stranger. Engaging them and somewhat getting a sense of their personality is the key to taking a portrait of them that conveys their essense and moves the viewer. I agree that in some faces, it is the LACK of expression that tells the story best. In some, an expression thru pained eyes says it best. And in some, a jovial expression thru a face that's obviously been thru alot -- or not -- tells it best. But the age, the expression, the pose -- it all has to be specific to that particular person, and I think a good street photographer isn't going to have a rigid set of rules or perameters, but rather will feel the subject and take a picture that represents them. And the viewer will feel it, with or without an expression if it is done well. |
excellent post Sandy, could not agree more. as I mentioned earlier, the choice of the word "formal" in the challenge description was unfortunate, but what you described is exactly how I interpreted this challenge, and how I approach street shooting in general. |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 07:21:09 PM · #57 |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 07:29:15 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by SandyP:
Wow! There is indeed alot to think about here. I've never even thought of some of this stuff. This kind of shooting comes pretty intuitively for me but the type of picture I end up with totally depends on the personality of the stranger. Engaging them and somewhat getting a sense of their personality is the key to taking a portrait of them that conveys their essense and moves the viewer. I agree that in some faces, it is the LACK of expression that tells the story best. In some, an expression thru pained eyes says it best. And in some, a jovial expression thru a face that's obviously been thru alot -- or not -- tells it best. But the age, the expression, the pose -- it all has to be specific to that particular person, and I think a good street photographer isn't going to have a rigid set of rules or perameters, but rather will feel the subject and take a picture that represents them. And the viewer will feel it, with or without an expression if it is done well. |
Originally posted by LevT:
excellent post Sandy, could not agree more. as I mentioned earlier, the choice of the word "formal" in the challenge description was unfortunate, but what you described is exactly how I interpreted this challenge, and how I approach street shooting in general. |
Yes, well stated indeed, Sandy. I took "formal" more to mean in a sense of the engagement, and there would be an obvious connection with the camera as to intent with the subject. Whether that would be happy, sad, looking even slightly reluctant......any of that, along with obvious eye contact to define the "formal" acquiescence to being shot, is what I was looking for in the entry.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2010 07:43:58 PM · #59 |
Just in case some may not have noticed, the 2 words in parenthesis after the word formal in the challenge description may have been intended to clarify the word "formal".
Originally posted by Challenge Description:
Take a formal (non-candid) natural light portrait of a complete and total stranger(s). Any location will do... the street, a coffee shop, a bowling alley, the subway, the park, a pool hall, etc. |
So the word formal, in this context, may or may not hold the same definition you would ordinarily attribute to it, as in formal dress, formal wear, formal invitation.
Just my 2 cents.
I really dislike parsing challenge descriptions.
Does the shot look like a Street Portrait or not?
If so, then is it good or not?
How good? Score.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2010 08:12:29 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by shanksware:
Just in case some may not have noticed, the 2 words in parenthesis after the word formal in the challenge description may have been intended to clarify the word "formal".
Originally posted by Challenge Description:
Take a formal (non-candid) natural light portrait of a complete and total stranger(s). Any location will do... the street, a coffee shop, a bowling alley, the subway, the park, a pool hall, etc. |
So the word formal, in this context, may or may not hold the same definition you would ordinarily attribute to it, as in formal dress, formal wear, formal invitation. |
Thanks for pointing that out because I did add it to the description and placed it where it is to act as a qualifier for the "formal", exactly as you noted - Cheers! |
|
|
|
07/06/2010 09:13:37 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by SandyP:
Wow! There is indeed alot to think about here. I've never even thought of some of this stuff. This kind of shooting comes pretty intuitively for me but the type of picture I end up with totally depends on the personality of the stranger. Engaging them and somewhat getting a sense of their personality is the key to taking a portrait of them that conveys their essense and moves the viewer. I agree that in some faces, it is the LACK of expression that tells the story best. In some, an expression thru pained eyes says it best. And in some, a jovial expression thru a face that's obviously been thru alot -- or not -- tells it best. But the age, the expression, the pose -- it all has to be specific to that particular person, and I think a good street photographer isn't going to have a rigid set of rules or perameters, but rather will feel the subject and take a picture that represents them. And the viewer will feel it, with or without an expression if it is done well. |
Originally posted by LevT:
excellent post Sandy, could not agree more. as I mentioned earlier, the choice of the word "formal" in the challenge description was unfortunate, but what you described is exactly how I interpreted this challenge, and how I approach street shooting in general. |
Yes, well stated indeed, Sandy. I took "formal" more to mean in a sense of the engagement, and there would be an obvious connection with the camera as to intent with the subject. Whether that would be happy, sad, looking even slightly reluctant......any of that, along with obvious eye contact to define the "formal" acquiescence to being shot, is what I was looking for in the entry. |
I agree with these thoughts on the challenge. Not necessarily a studio type, somewhat stiff pose and expression. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 07/31/2025 04:45:35 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/31/2025 04:45:35 PM EDT.
|
