How can I improve my composition for portraits?

andre mueller

andre mueller

Member
Local time
4:09 PM
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
27
So far my portraits are mostly head and shoulders but I really would like to get better at wider, more environmental compositions.

In the last days I learned about Fibonacci and the golden ratio.
Do you know of any good resources on composition, especially for portraits?

A great inspiration on this for me is Jan Scholz' work.


11 by micmojo, on Flickr
 
This is one time when coffee table books are useful, if you can't get to an exhibition as the eminently sensible Roger suggests. Nice big, high-quality prints of a variety of different practitioners of the genre.

Disclaimer: I don't like doing portraits.
 
If you like someone's work, then ask yourself why. If you are sincere enough, then you will find out all the hidden rules by yourself.

I believe nothing is more important than developing your own taste. Inspiration can come from anywhere, really, but most easily, from other people's pictures.

I, for example, don't like the boring picture above at all.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Look at as many portraits as possible, ideally at real exhibitions. That's all there is to it. There are no rules.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

…and don't forget your local library. Most have large photography sections. Also look at art as well as photography - e.g. Vermeer, Hockney. Ideas are everywhere.
 
Take a look here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoLlA1wMYuI

In this short video Monte discusses the basics for lighting portraits and then posing and composition are two other important ingredients, Monte briefly touches in this video.

Those are threee basic rules to learn by heart, posing, composition, lighting.

Some believe there aren't any rules. I don't believe that. My business is making business, couples and family portraits. And I still stay very busy, even at my age. I have business portraits scheduled until December 30th and will do over 200 in 2013. How about dat!

Smiles!
 
Bill Clark said:
Some believe there aren't any rules.
Click to expand...

Yea--not to get tangential--but that always seems to be a contentious issue.

I think it has to do with a semantic issue concerning the word "rules," itself. When people reject the idea of "rules of composition," it comes off a bit like an equivocation fallacy (where multiple meanings of a word are not recognized).

I mean, Da Vinci wrote an entire treatise on painting ( http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...QfOxYDoDw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false ), which is a set of propositional "rules" that he intended his students to follow.

Perhaps, a better term is principles of composition. I mean, these concepts exist (e.g., golden ratio, "rule" of thirds, "rule" of odds, etc.), and in light of that, it's a bit like denying reality when a person says "there are no rules." Within a certain context, yes, there are "rules"; however, no one is compelled to follow them; they aren't "laws."
 
andre mueller said:
So far my portraits are mostly head and shoulders but I really would like to get better at wider, more environmental compositions.

In the last days I learned about Fibonacci and the golden ratio.
Do you know of any good resources on composition, especially for portraits?

A great inspiration on this for me is Jan Scholz' work.


11 by micmojo, on Flickr
Click to expand...

The things I take from Jan Scholz are:

1) Beautiful models
2) Beautiful lighting
3) Classical composition
4) Very nice cameras
5) Use film
 
lynnb said:
…and don't forget your local library. Most have large photography sections. Also look at art as well as photography - e.g. Vermeer, Hockney. Ideas are everywhere.
Click to expand...

+1

My local library has three our four books by Karsh (one of my personal favourites), and a few others (including a book of 1000 favourite portraits as selected by Time Magazine, I think, I haven't taken it out yet).

When I last did a portrait shoot, I brought one of the Karsh coffee table books. While I setup lights, I had my subject look throughthe book for photos that caught his eye. We spent some time talking about which ones he liked and why. I then had those things sitting in the back of my mind during the shoot. We came away with a couple of great shots.
 
ulrich.von.lich said:
If you like someone's work, then ask yourself why. If you are sincere enough, then you will find out all the hidden rules by yourself.

I believe nothing is more important than developing your own taste. Inspiration can come from anywhere, really, but most easily, from other people's pictures.

I, for example, don't like the boring picture above at all.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first two sentences wholeheartedly but disagree wholeheartedly with the last.

That photography is fantastic. Those legs are stunning!
 
I think the important thing is that you are aware of a desire to branch out and are willing to do so. Just trying different things, making a conscious effort to do it differently from how you have always done it, will allow you to grow. Also, experiment with lighting, not just composition - Lighting has a profound impact on portraiture.
 
wilonstott said:
Yea--not to get tangential--but that always seems to be a contentious issue.

I think it has to do with a semantic issue concerning the word "rules," itself. When people reject the idea of "rules of composition," it comes off a bit like an equivocation fallacy (where multiple meanings of a word are not recognized).

I mean, Da Vinci wrote an entire treatise on painting ( http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...QfOxYDoDw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false ), which is a set of propositional "rules" that he intended his students to follow.

Perhaps, a better term is principles of composition. I mean, these concepts exist (e.g., golden ratio, "rule" of thirds, "rule" of odds, etc.), and in light of that, it's a bit like denying reality when a person says "there are no rules." Within a certain context, yes, there are "rules"; however, no one is compelled to follow them; they aren't "laws."
Click to expand...
Perhaps the most useful phrase is "rules of thumb, for when you can't think of anything better." For example, Monte Zucker (not your post, I know) was a lovely guy, and great company, and did a particular style of portrait very well, but I can easily think of others whose styles I prefer: Bill Brandt, Jane Bown, David Bailey... I don't think any of Monte's ideas would have helped any of them much. Commercial portraiture is often more about delivering what people want, than about delivering pictures that will be remembered by anyone other than the subjects.

Cheers,

R.
 
After you looked a few dozen books and droned through the hundreds of Micmojo short focus portraits of sleepy eyed women.... you have to get off your butt and go make photos yourself.

Nothing beats practice. Actually do it.
 
I liked David Vestal's "rule" the best: put the camera up to your eye, move it around until you see something you like, and press the button, and I've been following it for nearly 40 years since hearing it from him in a workshop. If you get into composition rules, do yourself a favor and figure out what percentage of the photos you like follow those rules. For me it's 0%. If followed, the "rule" of thirds, for instance, places things in almost but not quite a nice place. Use your eyes, not your ruler.

For me, for what it's worth, it's about balance, not placement. Dark things don't weigh the same as light things, for instance. You can't easily calculate balance based on tonality; you have to feel it.
 
The best way of learning, is through doing. Looking at other people's work is very important, so that:
- you know what has been done
- you know what has not been done
It is also handy to understand the impact of lighting, focal length, dof, etc. Nowadays, the digital technology comes conveniently to the rescue. I would recommend you to use an Ipad exclusively for some time, and take the photos only when what you see on screen from half a meter away looks right to you. It will be like looking at paintings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom