What is a portrait (seriously)?
Ralph W. Lambrecht
local camera club competition and he would disqualify every print not
showing head and shoulders or showing any more than that.
Since then I have studied portraits and dictionaries on the subject and
found only 'likeness of a person' as a description. I heard that there
is a famous photo, from Karsh I believe, of Alfred Hitchcock which only
showed his shadow on the wall and no part of the actual person but was a
true likeness of Alfred.
What do you think?
Chuck Hoffman
name. Look for a more perceptive and open judge...one who will evaluate an
image on its merits rather than his arbitrary rules.
zeitgeist
shot, the couple holding hands and you can't see the faces,
the 'madonna' pose where the mom's face is obscured, perhaps
the baby's too.
On the other hand, there are judges who down score a nice
print cause he doesn't like backgrounds in focus, or the
painted scenes where the background image is too obvious.
Its irritating, but waddaya gonna do? I wouldn't worry,
either that judge won't be back, or that camera club will
not have very many members next year.
gi...@lava.net
>I like to start this discussion, because we had a judge recently in a
>local camera club competition and he would disqualify every print not
>showing head and shoulders or showing any more than that.
>Since then I have studied portraits and dictionaries on the subject and
>found only 'likeness of a person' as a description. I heard that there is
>a famous photo, from Karsh I believe, of Alfred Hitchcock which only
>showed his shadow on the wall and no part of the actual person but was a
>true likeness of Alfred.
>What do you think?
Your definition is correct. A portrait is an image of a person. It can be
done in a head and shoulders shot.
Was that a condition of the competition? Was it in the rules?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
gi...@lava.net
What evil lurks in the hearts of men???
The SHADOW knows...
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kirbyko3
cents as well...
When I do an actor's headshot, THAT'S a headshot. When I do someone's portrait,
I may get all or only a tiny part of their face in it, because when I shoot a
portrait, I'm trying to shoot something that captures what I think they're all
about.
I think that judge was silly.
Kerry
C. J. Morgan
: I like to start this discussion, because we had a judge recently in a
: local camera club competition and he would disqualify every print not
: showing head and shoulders or showing any more than that.
: Since then I have studied portraits and dictionaries on the subject and
: found only 'likeness of a person' as a description. I heard that there
: is a famous photo, from Karsh I believe, of Alfred Hitchcock which only
: showed his shadow on the wall and no part of the actual person but was a
: true likeness of Alfred.
: What do you think?
To portray is to describe, or quite literally to draw forth. As such,
when we speak of making a photographic portrait, we are taking about the
kind of image or images which graphically describe someone or something.
It therefore strike me as narrow-minded if someone would disqualify a
descriptive image as not being a portrait simply because it didn't
conform to any stereotype of a head and shoulders shot. A portrait could
just as easily include the entire body of a person. Indeed, in the sense
of describing a person, a portait could quite easily include something
about them beyond their physical body, like where they live, as in the
portraits of people in the livingrooms of their home.
On a larger scale, a portrait might be more than just an individual
person -- a family portrait for example. And even larger -- such as a
photo essay of "portrait of a community".
And what is a landscape image other than a portrait of the land.
And on, and on.
But to think of a portrait as just a head and shoulders shot is simply the
reflection of a petty minded individual who's own image making probably
lacks creative latitude and otherwise gets stifled in cliches.
C.J.
--
C.J. Morgan
ch...@torfree.net
Daniel Hodges
appearance and character
[syn: portrayal, portraiture] 3: any likeness of a person; "the
photographer made excellent portraits"
[syn: portrayal]
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, ©
1997 Princeton University
shouldn't a portrait tell you: who they are, what they do, what they think,
how they feel...etc
Robert Parker
head a base to rest on. Also if you crop thru the neck, it may look like you
have amputated the body. Still depends on the image and the opinion of your
judge.
Ralph W. Lambrecht <lamb...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:38220C...@btinternet.com...
RHofPhotog
qualified to be judging---unless there is more to the requirements of the
competition than you mentioned.
Kevin Krumwiede
says...
> I like to start this discussion, because we had a judge recently in a
> local camera club competition and he would disqualify every print not
> showing head and shoulders or showing any more than that.
The words "anal-retentive" come to mind! I think a portrait is any
photograph where a person is the main subject. It need not even be of
their face... I'd say anything which includes a recognizable
distinguishing feature would constitute a portrait.