PhotoBanter.com

PhotoBanter.com (http://www.photobanter.com/index.php)
-   Photographing People (http://www.photobanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15)
-   -   B&W kids portrait (http://www.photobanter.com/showthread.php?t=4613)

Martin Francis September 30th 03 11:34 PM

B&W kids portrait
 
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
om...

I hope you all don't mind, only i'm doing a dissertation this year on
"Portrait Psychology" and some of this is interesting... it's also
interesting to see the vehemence of some to stick to these alleged rules,
and the vehemence of others that there are no rules. So i've saved some
posts to a folder.
Conclusions remain to be drawn.

--
Martin
Staring at C:\ prompts since 1993



Michael Scarpitti October 1st 03 02:43 PM

B&W kids portrait
 
"Martin Francis" wrote in message ...
"Michael Scarpitti" wrote in message
om...

I hope you all don't mind, only i'm doing a dissertation this year on
"Portrait Psychology" and some of this is interesting... it's also
interesting to see the vehemence of some to stick to these alleged rules,
and the vehemence of others that there are no rules. So i've saved some
posts to a folder.
Conclusions remain to be drawn.


Did you look at the portraits by these painters?

James Meckley October 1st 03 05:53 PM

B&W kids portrait
 
Martin Francis wrote:

I hope you all don't mind, only i'm doing a dissertation this year on
"Portrait Psychology" and some of this is interesting... it's also
interesting to see the vehemence of some to stick to these alleged rules,
and the vehemence of others that there are no rules. So i've saved some
posts to a folder.



Martin,

Good luck with your dissertation; I'll be most interested to read it
when you're finished. Please advise.

James Meckley

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 09:56 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
SNIP

Almost all Renaissance and later portraiture uses light coming from
the subject's right (viewer's left). It has its origins in the
left-to-right writing sytem used in the West since Greek times.


Hi Mike:

Since I last checked my watch, this is no longer the Renaissance (not since
3:30 PM, atleast ;-)) and no photographer in any age is limited by the habits,
styles, or mannerisms of painters of past ages. Use the lighting direction that
works best with the subject. (Blind following) Rules are for fools. As
photographers we should observe, intuit, reason, feel and make our own best
judgement calls as to lighting direction and how/whether its appropriate for
each and every different subject. This reminds me of some studio photographers
who virtualy, if not literally have their fill lights (and key lights?) nailed
into the floor/ceiling/etc. When you have two eyes and a mind you no longer
need rules - vision "rules".

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 10:00 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
SNIP

3. Light from the viewer's left is conventional and is to be prefered.
I looked at paintings the Columbus Museum of Art a few years ago
precisly on this matter, and confirmed the overwhelming majority of
classical painters (1450-1900±) use light from the left, especially
when people are in the paintings.


Why emulate dead painters and the conventional - we are live photographers,
aren't we? There's no need to fossilize a lighting approach, conventional or
otherwise. "One size doesn't have to fit all" ;-)

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 10:03 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
Whenever I see portraits lit from the viewer's
right, I cringe.


Conditioning. Neither left nor right is "right" - what is right (for lighting
direction) is what works best for the subject being photographed at hand.

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 10:13 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
Subject: B&W kids portrait
From: (Michael Scarpitti)
Date: Tue, Sep 23, 2003 8:52 PM
Message-id:

J C wrote in message

...
On 22 Sep 2003 19:15:27 -0700,
(Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:


Not absolute rules, but the human brain is programmed to see a single
shadow from a single light sourse: the sun. It's inherently
unflattering to see mutiple light sources that cast multiple shadows
of near-equal strength on faces, and that's what I don't like here.

Almost all Renaissance and later portraiture uses light coming from
the subject's right (viewer's left). It has its origins in the
left-to-right writing sytem used in the West since Greek times.


Knowing something about the human brain and cognition, I'd have to say
that the first paragraph above is probably wrong. I doubt that all the
millions of years of evolution would lead to any such "programming" of
the brain to prefer light from one direction over another --
particularly since most of that evolution happened in the absence of
art and writing.


But if we evolved on a planet with two or three suns, it would seem
more natural to us, no?


Which brings up a tangential but related subject, catchlights in the eyes.
Common wisdom says only one catchlight for each eye since we have only one sun.
But we also have windows and water and mirrors and chrome from cars/etc. that
reflect that sun so it seems more logical to me to have as many catchlights as
one wants _provided_ it works with the overall subject and mood of the
photograph. This is especially true for studio fashion photography where it is
obvious that the subject was photographed in a studio (seemless paper in the
background may give it away as a studio ;-)) in which, to me anyway, it would
seem more "natural" to allow each eaye to have as many catchlights as there are
lights being used w/i range/angle of incidence on the subject in the studio -
only changing though amount/type of lights used or later in Photoshop how many
catchlights (reflections of the light source) appear in each eye. This is not
to say that if there was a cafe set in a studio in which the subject sits next
to a mock window (let's say to set a romantic mood or sense of place, ie. a
cafe) that using a rectangular vertical soft box to get a fake'/faux window
light reflection in that person's eyes wouldn't be a good move.

Speaking of moving, whether catchlights or lighting direction, convention(s)
should only be used when it fits the subject/mood of the photograph and
virtually never for their own sake lest you want to emulate a past/conventional
style of lighting for some odd (or even ;-)) reason.

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 10:19 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
Subject: B&W kids portrait
From: J C
Date: Wed, Sep 24, 2003 3:46 PM
Message-id:

On 23 Sep 2003 13:52:39 -0700,
(Michael
Scarpitti) wrote:



But if we evolved on a planet with two or three suns, it would seem
more natural to us, no?


Good question Mike. But in the realm of science you need to test a
hypothesis, collect the data, and report your results. AND your
results need to be testable and repeatable by other observers.

So in this case you'd need to compare two exactly similar organisms
that have envolved on different planets -- one planet with one sun and
the other with multiple suns.


SNIP

First you'd have to invent warp drive, though, and "live long and prosper"
enough in order to have the funds to get there. Then there's the matter of
finding life on other planets, which, if there are doing a quite well job of
avoiding our detection. If they were smart, they'd move to another unkown
planet/star system before all the Earth photographers arrived to test out their
hypotheses. First comes the scientists, then comes marketing, then comes
demographics, bill boards, strip malls and before you know it Alpha Centauri IV
is starting to look a lot like El Paso, Texas but w/ less Chevy dealers.

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply

Lewis Lang October 4th 03 10:22 AM

B&W kids portrait
 
Subject: B&W kids portrait
From: (Michael Scarpitti)
Date: Wed, Sep 24, 2003 9:49 PM
Message-id:

James Meckley wrote in message

...
Michael Scarpitti wrote:

Almost all Renaissance and later portraiture uses light coming from
the subject's right (viewer's left).



This is simply not true. A broad survey of western painting shows only
a slight bias toward portraits lit from the left (about a 55/45 split),
with some painters favoring left, some right and some exhibiting no

preference.

Even more interesting is photographic portraiture, which shows a
virtually even 50/50 distribution of left-right preference in a survey
of fine art and commercial portraiture over the last 100 years. The
only exceptions are certain amateurs and camera-club members who are
unduly influenced by dogmatic rules telling them that the light must
come from the left.

James Meckley



In my review of painings in the museum, I found an overwhelming
preference for left-side lighting.


Perhaps your sample is not representative of the whole of all fine art
paintings from the Renaissance till now? They call New Jersey the Garden State,
but just viewing it in the Northeast section one might think they wrongly named
it and should have called it "The Asphalt Bungle" ;-)

Regards,

Lewis

Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION":

http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm

Remove "nospam" to reply


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com