Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Get the new ON1 Photo 10 and Save $100 Today. Use Code: GetPhoto10 View Offer

The Death of Photographic Portraiture

david_h 11 181
24 Jun 2005 11:21AM
This is where your all hiding... I really need some help and advise with my currant series of pics if thats ok!?!

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

magda_indigo 12 418 England
24 Jun 2005 1:26PM
what flash or light source do you use and how?(*:*)
david_h 11 181
24 Jun 2005 2:28PM
Hi Magda, all shot with available light.
sugarbird 11 223 South Africa
24 Jun 2005 11:41PM
I just agree with ALL keiths comments, particularly the first one, I do use P shop to a certain degree, mainly to resize my images, I definitely rely on my eye though, I am best a people shots, so will remain doing them, not suddenly decide to do glossy landscapes etc as I do not have an eye for them, there are plenty of people doing excellent portraiture on the site, Keith, Rab, Wallace Rollins, K, noseprints, Darrin J, Paul Indigo, funkledink ...and others I forget, just look for them...and try to see beyond the popular trends. Thanks folks, good thread...please note I am an AMATEUR photographer, not a pro..
keith selmes 12 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
25 Jun 2005 1:47AM

Quote:if you use the camera metering when shooting in manual mode then you are still allowing the camera metering to determine exposure. Might just as well shoot in an auto mode.

Not really Jas.
The meter is a bargraph, in manual mode I can adjust exposure for each frame as I want it, using the graph as a guide. (The meter is usually set to spot if the camera has it, or the nearest equivalent.)

Using a separate meter, I normally do incident readings, and it normally works as well as using in camera meters, although I don't do anything scientific and theres probably room for improvement.

Where the computer does come in is when exposure is not ideal, if its not too far out, tweaking is very easy.

The real problem with wholly manual photography is forgetting that I changed to a different ISO film, or getting compensation for bellows extension wrong.

And sometimes malfunctionms with very old shutters.
(Use the lenshood, its more accurate!)
keith selmes 12 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
25 Jun 2005 1:54AM

Quote:far more important, a good portrait depends on my ability to communicate with the subject, my rapport.

yes! thats it, in a nutshell.

Quote:This does not come easy to me, because I?m a shy person.

oh. gosh. never would have thought it. I have assumed I would never do portraits at all - perhaps that was wrong.
keithh Plus
11 24.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
25 Jun 2005 2:16AM
Magda maybe naturally shy, but she has a smile that would make the most nervous 'sitter' relax....instant winner with any portrait work...if you enjoy, they enjoy.
Keith S

Quote:The meter is a bargraph, in manual mode I can adjust exposure for each frame as I want it, using the graph as a guide. (The meter is usually set to spot if the camera has it, or the nearest equivalent.)

I agree. In this case case you are assessing the meter reading and making a knowledgeable judgement in modifying the nominal exposure the meter recommends to suit your purpose.

Not quite what I meant - I meant if you religiously stick to the nominal reading of 'correct' exposure given by the camera metering. (Metering modes aside, which vary from one camera make to another).

If I were actually taking portraits, as my main line of interest, I would probably use MF where I could see the the results of composition, lighting and effect on a reasonably sized ground glass screen.

I would certainly use a separate meter to assess and judge exposure.

And yes, I would use tungsten lighting!

I would use monochrome exclusively and develop and enlarge all my own prints.

patters 11 1.8k 1 United Kingdom
25 Jun 2005 4:58AM
keithh and magda up a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G ! !
Gosh! The Kraken awakes!
paul_indigo 12 259 United Kingdom
25 Jun 2005 5:46AM
Just catching up on this thread. I see Patters has used his full intellect to come up with a valuable contribution to the discussion.
Probably stupified by frequent nappy changes! (Juniors, not his!)

Aw! I dunno tho' LOL!
User_Removed 10 4.9k England
25 Jun 2005 6:05AM
I haven't been here for long, don't know that many names, or how you feel about photography. Spotted the word Portraiture and the name Magda... whose portrait gallery I'd just visited. I liked Magda's 'Mothermachine' portrait very much. It was such a natural pose, of the pride and joy the mother showed, to be carrying a child. I couldn't drag my attention from the look on her face, and in her eyes. Tremendous portrait which I'm sure was highly appreciated.
I've read a few other posts as well, my opinions on all things photographic are just that .....imo. I've been involved in the Photographic/image/publishing business, all my working life (now retired), newspaper graphics/repro.
Once it was technically difficult to take a photo, now you can do it with a phone. Its made photgraphy/image making, explode, everyone's doing it. Without any technical ability whatsoever, the pics shot, are of each other...... potraits!!!!. Potraits as we older ones know it will never be as it was.
I would use the term Image, for everything produced digitally. Photograph for everything produce using film, and printed directly through it.
There isn't any photos on the web.. they're all images..... manipulated or not. imo
magda_indigo 12 418 England
25 Jun 2005 6:12AM
thanx Col, but I do consider most of my images to be photos, I use different cameras, but virtually nothing but film, so, do you mean because they are scanned and being viewed on screen they all become 'images'? (*?*)

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.