How can I improve my composition for portraits?

[andre mueller]

Thanks so much again! Without knowing it I was actually looking for the Greek S-Curve pose. It's perfectly explained on his page.
This is priceless!

Clothes, hair styles and how folks are positioned is from the 1970's!

Things have changed so the position of people, male is sometimes, maybe usually, not in a dominant position. Women have made strides for equality, more is needed, but things are changing, usually for the better. Love seeing the upward mobility women are having attaining leadership roles. Breath of fresh air at GM.

I have more clients looking for this style of portraiture. The classical never becomes obsolete, it ebbs and flows but it was classical societies, especially the Greeks and Romans who studied human body positioning to give a flattering rendition of objects they made by hand.

Interesting story from Monte. When he was married he would go back and forth spending a lot of time with Joe. Monte knew he could make money incorporating his methods into his vision. One time he told his wife, "I'm going to see Joe. Have a couple questions." His wife said, "You're going to be nothing more than a cheap clone of Joe's." Monte said, "I may be a clone of Joe but I'm not going to be cheap!"

 

[helen.HH]

For Me Portraits are All about Capturing that space & magnetic glow
between You and the Subject

Going in closer
Making use of either: Eye contact / body language / or silhouette that draws the Viewer In...
Hi i Contrasts in the play of Light & Shadows

 

[isalan]

There is an app called "Posing App." It sketches out some good starting points for several different situations.

 

[andre mueller]

A follow up

A follow up

So, I haven't been idle in the last two month and I'm much more comfortable now with my compositions than before.

I've studied most of the resources you recommended. Also got some advice from a friend who is a painter and art history teacher. After talking some about Vermeer he said "...don't be too intellectual about the academic rules but rather try to feel if things are right, a good feeling can't be wrong really."
And I have to say he's right.

This is what I was able to come up with since. I'm really happy with it.

 

[Photo_Smith]

They are all really good, keep experimenting, looking at others work and you'll soon find what you like.
The above are all very good much better than the shot in the OP–congratulations!

 

[Richard G]

Great. At our photographic group the other night one of the members gave a talk on lighting. He had been a lighting cameraman for motion pictures. Key light, fill light, back light. I reckon that's your next exploration as it is mine. We have an Edward Steichen exhibition on in Melbourne at the moment. What a portrait lighting genius he was.

 

[andre mueller]

Great. At our photographic group the other night one of the members gave a talk on lighting. He had been a lighting cameraman for motion pictures. Key light, fill light, back light. I reckon that's your next exploration as it is mine. We have an Edward Steichen exhibition on in Melbourne at the moment. What a portrait lighting genius he was.

Spot on! I'm desperately looking for an easy way to add a rim light when shooting indoors. Reflectors and speed lights both haven't worked for me so far. The next thing I want to look into are LEDs with barndoors.

 

[charjohncarter]

Andre, here is one that I have liked for years. It is a record cover, but was taken in or before 1920. The white hat courses down to the black hat from left to right, the seemingly indifferent sidekick of Maria points along the same line to her hand. Her stare at the camera says, 'I know what I'm doing.' His look is, 'yes, she knows what she is doing.' I love this composition and the feeling it projects.

Of course, not taken by me, but wish I had. Here is Maria's song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja0HBp2hL-Q

 

[airfrogusmc]

I just wonder with all the rules available, is there any position in a frame that positioning your subject in would fall outside all of the rules. If yes, where is it?

In my opinion rules can be crippling and can make you miss so much. When you are shooting you will dismiss things that fall outside the rules and it also effects the way you judge work. THere are so many great images that fall outside what many would dismiss and that can be very harmful.

Heres what some of the really great photographers had to say about rules...

"When subject matter is forced to fit into preconceived patterns, there can be no freshness of vision. Following rules of composition can only lead to a tedious repetition of pictorial cliches." - Edward Weston

" “composition” becomes a personal thing, to be developed along with technique, as a personal way of seeing." - Edward Weston

"Photography is not a sport. It has no rules. Everything must be dared and tried!" - Bill Brandt

"There are no rules and regulations for perfect composition. If there were we would be able to put all the information into a computer and would come out with a masterpiece. We know that's impossible. You have to compose by the seat of your pants." - Arnold Newman

"And in not learning the rules, I was free. I always say, you're either defined by the medium or you redefine the medium in terms of your needs." - Duane Michals

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs." - Ansel Adams

 

[hepcat]

Interaction with the subject. Really great artists can bring out something in the person through the image and probably something of themselves as well. Portraiture is more about people than rules.

More specifically, if the portrait is something that YOU are doing OF someone, it's about the eyes (rather than, for example, the composition being dictated by a client or art director.) Humans look for eye contact when we're face to face, and we relate to an image of another human the same way. The eyes tell the story in a portrait. Of course there are a million ways to screw up a portrait, but if the eyes aren't visible and convey feeling then you don't have a portrait. You may have a nice composition and it may have feeling, but it's likely not a portrait in the conventional sense that says anything about the person in it. The photo of the woman on the quay posted earlier in the thread is a perfect example. We know nothing of the woman... because we can't see her face or eyes. She's a nice set of legs perched in front of a boat in the distance.

Study portraits with impact and you'll begin to see that the placement of the eyes, and eye contact or lack of contact are what convey the expression.


PB182386a by chief1120, on Flickr

The funny thing about the rules of composition is that you need to learn them before you can break them. All of the photographers that you claim to eschew the rules simply follow them innately. Without thinking about it. That's where practice comes in.

Karsh's famous portrait of Churchill is a case in point. It's well composed, well lit... but Churchill's expression burns from his eyes. And again referencing Karsh's portrait of Churchill, all of the classic posing axioms are met... but they're all done so well you don't see them. Strong portraits that eschew one or more of the "classic" guidlines are successful because they're different... when they're successful.

 

[airfrogusmc]

The story behind the portrait of Churchill is also interesting. Karsh was not getting anything remotely real until grabbed the cigar out of his mouth and this was the result.

A great thought by Bresson.
"It seems dangerous to be a portrait artist who does commissions for clients because everyone wants to be flattered, so they pose in such a way that there’s nothing left of truth." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

"If the photographer succeeds in reflecting the exterior as well as interior world, his subject appear as “in real life.” In order to achieve this, the photographer must respect the mood, become integrated into the environment, avoid all the tricks that destroy human truth, and also make the subject of the photo forget the camera and the person using it. Complicated equipment and lights get in the way of naïve, unposed subjects. What is more fleeting than the expression on a face?" - Henri Cartier-Bresson

And a couple from the guy that took that portrait of Churchill.

"It should be the aim of every photographer to make a single exposure that shows everything about the subject. I have been told that my portrait of Churchill is an example of this." - Yousuf Karsh

"The revelation, if it comes at all, will come in a small fraction of a second with an unconscious gesture, a gleam of the eye, a brief lifting of the mask that all humans wear to conceal their innermost selves from the world. In that fleeting interval of opportunity the photographer must act or lose his prize." - Yousuf Karsh