Jewel Cover Rant: Faith Hill's "Breathe"
Kirk
examples of modern portrait work.
But one I've been seeing a lot of lately is really bugging me. It's
the portrait of Faith Hill on her latest album "Breathe." It shows
her with her arms raised for an inexplicable reason over her head.
She's very pretty and the picture is competently lighted and exposed.
But the border cuts her arms off at the elbows.
One of the basic rules of portraiture (in both photography and
painting) is not to cut off limbs at the joints. It almost always
gives an impression of the limb being amputated rather than
"continuing" beyond the frame.
Certainly, rules are made to be broken, but I can't see any reason to
have broken this rule for this photograph, and for some reason it bugs
me a lot.
Just ranting.
--
Kirk
"Leap boldly. You can't cross a chasm in two easy steps."--RAH
<I really am at home if you want to reply by e-mail>
andre
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00002SSRE.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Pat Jerina
image, not a portrait-wedding guy. In commercial photography there are no
set "rules", except for one, make the client happy. That is one of the joys
of the commercial world. The others being a bigger check and larger
exposure (that is another thread entirely, though). You also have to
remember that there may have been more to the image than what is shown. The
designer may have cropped the image down to fit on the cover. The elbows
don't bug me at all. The slight gripe I have about the image is that if she
had a long sleeve shirt on it would work better. My eye tends to go o her
arms because they are as briht as her face. If she was wearing a long
sleave shirt my eye would stay on her face and not wonder around to her
arms.
pat jerina photography
214.893.0458 phone
http://www.patjerina.com
dallas, tx
Kirk
says...
Ah, but the combination of the short sleeves with the amputated arms
does bug you. Same difference--you'd only fail to be bugged by the
amputated arms if you could avoid noticing them.
The designer may have done the cropping as you say, but then, shame on
the designer (who should know just as much about composition).
As I said the first time, rules are made to be broken--the the
thematic or compositional reason should be apparent to the eye.
Kirk
says...
> One must remember that this is a commerical photographer shooting the
> image, not a portrait-wedding guy. In commercial photography there are no
> set "rules", except for one, make the client happy. That is one of the joys
> of the commercial world. The others being a bigger check and larger
> exposure (that is another thread entirely, though). You also have to
> remember that there may have been more to the image than what is shown. The
> designer may have cropped the image down to fit on the cover. The elbows
> don't bug me at all. The slight gripe I have about the image is that if she
> had a long sleeve shirt on it would work better. My eye tends to go o her
> arms because they are as briht as her face. If she was wearing a long
> sleave shirt my eye would stay on her face and not wonder around to her
> arms.
>
>
>
Actually, looking at it once more, I'm inclined to imagine she's being
hung by her thumbs from a medieval torture rack.
Richard Knight
Richard
--
Email at the above address or theblind...@hotmail.com .
It has taken me a lifetime to recognize when I should NOT feel obligated to
make a photograph (Ansel Adams).
Kirk <kirkdarlin...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.13964cf9e...@news.mindspring.com...
zeitgeist
Kirk wrote:
>
> I've long enjoyed observing record album and jewelcase covers as
> examples of modern portrait work.
>
> But one I've been seeing a lot of lately is really bugging me. It's
> the portrait of Faith Hill on her latest album "Breathe." It shows
> her with her arms raised for an inexplicable reason over her head.
> She's very pretty and the picture is competently lighted and exposed.
> But the border cuts her arms off at the elbows.
>
> One of the basic rules of portraiture (in both photography and
> painting) is not to cut off limbs at the joints. It almost always
> gives an impression of the limb being amputated rather than
> "continuing" beyond the frame.
>
> Certainly, rules are made to be broken, but I can't see any reason to
> have broken this rule for this photograph, and for some reason it bugs
> me a lot.
>
> Here's a link to the picture
>
> http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00002SSRE.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif
>
Advertisers often deliberately go anti-rule.
Keep in mind the cacophony of stuff to look at in a record
store, even a rack in a grocery store, hundreds of images,
advertising signs, large 3-D displays. The competition to
catch your eye, to instantly induce a buy me responce, it is
much intense than magazine ads which at least have you pass
over each page at a time.
So they try all kinds of tricks. I mean, how many times can
you bare a belly button and show cleavage, I'd bet this is
marketed to women and a psychologist could write a
dissertation on the meaning of her stance. I think of
circumstances that would place a girl in such a position,
holding on to an overhead tree branch, a closet door, what
is she thinking about, it is very introspective, she's
thinking about...a boy.
As an image, the dark bands of her arms are a kind of frame,
the cut off elbows do attract your attention, you sorta have
to stop and think about what is wrong here. However the way
of cropping so the bright of the elbows makes your eye seek
out the graphic balance, the name below. Appearantly, the
image did it's job, it got your attention.
It reminds me of those AT&T ads long ago, when they would
show these folks talking about how great the sound was, and
each 'interview' was shoot completely off center, one person
was imaged in the upper left corner looking up and out to
the upper left, and it just drove you nuts, but the idea
caused you to remain fixed looking at the screen trying to
fix it in your mind.
z-ProPhoto <z-Pro...@onelist.com>
Jim
Richard Knight <adream...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:OxHYMyfx$GA.303@cpmsnbbsa09...
> That was my impression also (being hung from something).
Ahh so! Ever wonder what Whistler's Mother was thinking? Maybe the guy
wanted everyone to wonder what she's doin up there where you can't see? She
does look way too relaxed to be doing pullups:)
Shoot'em up, no matter what it looks like, Agfa, Fuji, Kodak and all the
rest will love you for it!!
Jim
Don Wallace
to bug me so I downloaded the pic and fixed the image so that she has long
sleeves. Pat is right: it isn't the elbows, it is the light of the arms
competing
with the face. Try it. With the sleeves painted in black, it is a much
more interesting and arresting picture.
Don Wallace
Pat Jerina wrote in message ...
Phil
>
> That was my impression also (being hung from something).
>
>
> --
Nope. I think she's wielding an axe.
Phil
Phil
with PHOTOGRAPHY!!!!!!
(Know what I mean???)
Phil
Pat Jerina
> Well, it looked fine to me until Pat put in his two cents :>) The it started
> to bug me so I downloaded the pic and fixed the image so that she has long
> sleeves. Pat is right: it isn't the elbows, it is the light of the arms
> competing
> with the face. Try it. With the sleeves painted in black, it is a much
> more interesting and arresting picture.
Ahem.. *breathing on knuckles and rubbing on shirt*
Glenn Sweet
guys.... to be honest... I NEVER even looked in that direction...
Fotoguy
never noticed the arms and now all I see is the arms and wonder, "What the
heck is she hanging on?" LOL.
Eric
andre
browser to set up her Troll Filter !!
HOLLIS6475
>Date: 5/24/00 5:28 PM Pacific
> One must remember that this is a commerical photographer shooting the
>image
Pat,
I think he was trying to "breathe" the photo... sort of make the photo say
"breathe"......
maybe the photo says..... "flop".
This may be a great reason for a impartial third party opinion, one who not
part of the project. One can get 'caught up" in the project.... that they see
what they want/wish to see. It is too obvious to them that the pic says,
"Breathe".....but with the aid of a impartial third party comments, this
"mistake" could have been corrected prior release.
H.
Does your photo says, what you want it to say?
Kirk
holli...@aol.comnoants says...
> I think he was trying to "breathe" the photo... sort of make the photo say
> "breathe"......
>
> maybe the photo says..... "flop".
>
> This may be a great reason for a impartial third party opinion, one who not
> part of the project. One can get 'caught up" in the project.... that they see
> what they want/wish to see. It is too obvious to them that the pic says,
> "Breathe".....but with the aid of a impartial third party comments, this
> "mistake" could have been corrected prior release.
>
I kept trying to make it say that myself. Like she's raising her arms
to take deep breaths (like the old-fashioned drowning resuscitation
technique), but that didn't work. I still kept seeing those truncated
elbows as distractingly odd.
Bad thing is that this image is on a billboard near my house that I
pass at least once a day.
HOLLIS6475
>I kept trying to make it say that myself. Like she's raising her arms
>to take deep breaths (like the old-fashioned drowning resuscitation
>technique)
Same here. I think it would be a better under arm deoderant shot....... or
look ma, no hairy arm pits.............<g>
H.
I make shadows
<<
I've long enjoyed observing record album and jewelcase covers as
examples of modern portrait work.
But one I've been seeing a lot of lately is really bugging me. It's
the portrait of Faith Hill on her latest album "Breathe." It shows
her with her arms raised for an inexplicable reason over her head.
She's very pretty and the picture is competently lighted and exposed.
But the border cuts her arms off at the elbows.
One of the basic rules of portraiture (in both photography and
painting) is not to cut off limbs at the joints. It almost always
gives an impression of the limb being amputated rather than
"continuing" beyond the frame.
Certainly, rules are made to be broken, but I can't see any reason to
have broken this rule for this photograph, and for some reason it bugs
me a lot.
Just ranting.
I Make Shadows
Eric took that shot
Brian