sboerup wrote:
This was a shot by Greenberg for "The Atlantic" magazine. Extremely talented photographer and this is one of the shots she decides to post on her blog:
He looks more "Presidential" in that shot than any other I have seen. Now just don't ask me what "Presidential" is. Well, I have to say, it has gravitas and a serenity that speaks of a man in control. It isn't intended to flatter and it does not, in the usual sort of way, but in the end perhaps it does.
Interesting. Far be it from me to agree with the right wing blogosphere, but really... chin-on, face square to the camera... the image is unflattering. I'd never have sent something like this to a client.
sboerup wrote:
This was a shot by Greenberg for "The Atlantic" magazine. Extremely talented photographer and this is one of the shots she decides to post on her blog:
I don't think this is the place for politics but, having said that, this is another example of the publication tipping its hand on their attitudes. Given the 11 fps of many DSLR's, they probably have shots of all the important people with eyes half closed, appearing to drool, doze off or just scary. Which one they select is based on their political leaning.
I haven't posted in a the FM forums for a long time but I had to reply to this thread.
I thought the photograph captured the true essence of her being.
EYES ARE THE MIRROR (MIRRORS) OF THE SOUL -- "A person's thoughts can be ascertained by looking in his or her eyes. The proverb has been traced back in English to 'Regiment of Life' . But the proverb was known much earlier. Cicero (106-43 B.C.) is quoted as saying, 'Ut imago est animi voltus sic indices oculi' (The face is a picture of the mind as the eyes are its interpreter).
I would expect that her campaign *did* approve of this image. She has savvy political advisors, and I'm sure that they would view this as a win-win situation: the image will surely get a lot more attention than a "boring" image, and as a politician knows, "Any publicity is good publicity." Her campaign should have paid Newsweek for the free extra media hits (huge).
According to Tina brown from newsweek they, like any other legitimate news outlet don't ask get approval from politicians for photos.
To me the picture looks like she normally does, the woman doesn't relax, unlike Sarah Palin who knows how to look good for the camera.
it's an obvious slant to the photo. For a "news" organization, it's too apparent what their agenda is. That's why it's causing a stir.
Even though anyone who's paying any sort of attention knows newsweek is *heavily* slanted to the left, this is so blatant an attack, as to be somewhat offensive. Both the Ms. Bachman, and to the reader, who should be offended that Newsweek thinks we're dumb enough not to know this is visual attack on her and an attempt to discredit her ideas, through use of a crappy image of her.
I can make almost anyone look pretty good, and I can also make almost anyone, no matter how beautiful, look pretty bad. And picking a bad picture like that is just the same as distorting their message.
First off it's disturbing and humbling to hear the conjecture spawned by a photo. She's obviously not crazed or maniacal or she would not be a contender for the Presidency. Secondly it's even MORE disturbing that the folks espousing these conjectures are for the most part serious photographers and should be inured and jaded to the manipulative side of the art. Make no mistake - this image was carefully selected for a message to be inferred
My take is she's like an inexperienced model - she desperately *wants* to project a certain "look" but she lacks the chops to pull it off. The photo looks forced and artificial because it is.
Edit: The perfect counterpoint was made just above in comparing Palin who was a beauty queen. She has the chops AND the looks. You'd be hard pressed to get a bad shot of her.
BubbaJon, I sure don't consider her to be a "contender." She's running for president, but there have been loonies and fringe types "running" in every election I can remember. Since she and her husband can "pray away the gay", perhaps they can also pray away my skepticism.
Uber Goober wrote:
BubbaJon, I sure don't consider her to be a "contender." She's running for president, but there have been loonies and fringe types "running" in every election I can remember. Since she and her husband can "pray away the gay", perhaps they can also pray away my skepticism.
Please sir - you will note I avoided politics - I was making comment from a photographic/perceptive point of view. I could care less what your leanings are.
Micky Bill wrote:
According to Tina brown from newsweek they, like any other legitimate news outlet don't ask get approval from politicians for photos.
To me the picture looks like she normally does, the woman doesn't relax, unlike Sarah Palin who knows how to look good for the camera.
When I say "approval," I meant the political team were happy with it, not they had any actual leverage to choose which photos were published...
she AND Palin combined...are still short of a full deck 
