cgardner
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #9 · BRAINS behind the Camera | |
Mostly I ask myself:
"What is the goal / message for this photo?"
"What impression / emotional reaction do I expect / desire in the mind of the viewer?"
"What is most important in delivering that message?"
"How can I make it contrast with everything else in the photo?"
"Where do I want the viewer's to go next in the photo?
"Where do I want the viewer's eye to come to rest in the photo?"
Once I have a clear goal what I want the photo to say, and what is most important in it, experience kicks in and the most effective strategies to accomplish the goals get weighed until the best one surfaces.
Usually in a studio portrait the clothing guides background and lighting choices for me because the most important thing in a portrait is the front of the face making it contrast the most required making the clothing contrast less with the background. If the clothing can't be changed to blend with the background, the background needs to be changed so the clothing does not distract against it. Shape of the face determines which camera angle will be most effective and that combined with the background tone will determine which lighting pattern will most effectively contrast the FRONT of the face most effectively. The same thought process applies to an outdoor portrait: finding a non-distracting background which the clothing will blend with, but there is the additional aspects of deciding how best to use the ambient light and how much background detail is desired for context. A fashion shot, were I to take one, would have different goals and strategies based around making the clothing, not the front of the face the main center of interest.
Once the goal is clear and best strategy worked, out the tools and techniques needed to accomplish them are usually obvious because I do a lot of testing to understand the characteristics of any tool I use. Its a bit like learning to use a hammer. A hammer swings in an arc so the best technique for pounding a nail straight in the fewest blows is to angle the nail a bit towards the hammer. You might need to bend quite a few nails before that cause and effect is discovered, but once its understood and practiced you don't need to think "now how should I place the nail in the wood before whacking it?" The process becomes sub-conscious and instead you can focus on what you are building. That conscious/ practice to perfection / sub-conscious learning curve occurs with everything we learn: be it how to tie our shoes, or a complex motor skill like hitting a golf ball with a pre-planned flight path and target 180 yards away; or taking a photo which is effectively composed, well lit and in focus.
Knowing how to pose someone effectively starts with the goal: what message you want the body language to evoke in the mind of the viewer. Do you want the model to look disengaged and distracted or attentive and inviting, sexy or demure? Those impressions are created in our minds sub-consciously every waking minute of the day. Learning to pose effectively simply requires understanding consciously what positions of feet, legs, hip/shoulder/head angles trigger those different reactions. Its much easier to communicate a desired body language by demonstrating it rather than explaining it verbally. It also helps a great deal to practice poses yourself in front of a mirror it understand how they feel to the subject or model.
The more you practice the more the technical stuff becomes instinctive. I meet a subject, take a few minutes during casual conversation to evaluate the face and clothing and develop a strategy. Then while the person combs their hair, etc. and relaxes I set up for what I've decided is the most effective strategy for flattering them, using and exposure target where the face will be to set exposure precisely. When the person steps in front of the lights I don't need to think about 90% of the stuff on your list because they have been worked out in advance and made instinctive with practice and testing.
No need to think about the nail or the hammer, just the goal of what the desired reaction is in the mind of the viewer seeing the photograph. The list becomes a very short one like Liam's 
After we get the shots using what seemed to be the most effective strategy I try everything else to see if the results are better, using the first strategy as a baseline to evaluate whether it is or not. Its very difficult to know if a goal has been achieved or not if there is not some means to measure results. That's why a football field has goal lines and goal posts and is marked off in 10 yard increments. Shooting a flattering portrait of someone isn't any different. Its easier to evaluate whether one view or lighting pattern is more flattering than the other in a photo if you have some criteria of what you think, in general terms for all faces, makes them attractive. My short list of flattering criteria are:
1) Facial angle to camera which is most flattering (I look at them all before shooting to find it)
2) Front of face contrasts most strongly with background so attention is drawn there.
3) Light in the eyes and mouth to allow strong connection with viewer and emotional reaction
4) Lighting pattern which naturally models the shape of the face without distracting shadows
5) A net effect of facial angle and lighting pattern which makes the face look slim and symmetrical.
So while shooting and trying different angles or lighting patterns those five things are my conscious thoughts. Is this angle more flattering than others? Is full face view centered and symmetrical? Are there any distracting bits of ear / eye / hair / jewelry hanging out past profile in oblique and profile views? Does the far side of the face contrast with the background? Is there good balance between the shape of the face right/left and eye to chin? Is there anything contrasting more than the FRONT of the face and distracting from it? Do I have light in BOTH eyes? Where is the nose shadow? How does model the shape of the nose? Is it too dark and distracting from the eyes and mouth?
My conscious thoughts are all GOAL ORIENTED not technique oriented.
In my view if one needs to consciously think about technique when shooting they just haven't practiced enough. Photography is much like golf in that respect. The place to work on golf technique is the range. When standing over the ball on the course you need to be thinking about where you want the ball to land and which way you want it to bounce and know how far it will roll. An experienced golfer just visualizes the desired flight path of the ball and the set-up for either a draw or a fade is instinctive and the swing is sub-conscious because the movements have been ingrained from conscious "where do put my feet/hands/etc." to sub-conscious "Just do it" by hitting hundreds of balls and seeing their path, bounce and roll until hitting a fade or draw at will on the range is instinctive. Taking that game to the course effectively is more a about blocking out conscious thought and distractions than anything else. Getting a good lie for the golf shot helps too, as does having a very attractive subject when making a portrait.
The analogy in photography to the path of a golf ball well struck is understanding where in the photo the viewer's eye will be attracted first, and where it will go next: eye movement. We instinctively make eye contract with strangers. Once you consciously realize that the viewer of your photo will do the same thing the cause and effect importance of putting light in the eyes on their emotional reaction to the becomes obvious and remembering to notice whether there is good light in the eyes becomes, with a bit of practice, totally sub-conscious and instinctive. You don't think about it, you just move the face into the light. But that instinct starts with the conscious realization of the cause and effect of eye contact. You might discover it with trial and error or by reading it here, trying it and seeing that it works. Knowing the importance of eye contact on emotional reaction informs the choice of whether to put light in the eyes or not in a photo. Light in the eyes and direct eye contact sends the message a person is willing to engage. Eyes in shadow in a photo is the same as a person avoiding eye contact in person, it sends the opposite message.
The conscious thought isn't "should there be light in the eyes" because that's already been determined as part of the strategy in selecting the lighting pattern most effective on the background tone which makes the clothing blend in. Instead, my eyes and brain are engaged in trying to spot what distracting thing might pull attention off the front of the face: where the attention of the view might be distracted. The difference between a poorly executed and well executed creative statement is mostly eliminating the distractions which dilute the impact of the message. If your mind is churning thinking about technical minutia you will not be able to take a step back, litererally and figuratively, to see the bigger picture of the goals and spot the distractions which work against them.
There are no rules, just cause and effect. Every coin has two sides. The difference between trial and error and training is knowing how it will land before you flip it. So if you are thinking too much about technique when shooting its an indication you need to practice technique more
Chuck
Edited on Nov 08, 2008 at 03:01 PM · View previous versions
|
