Maison Victoire

Thorniest Whisper

TPF Noob!
Joined
Dec 9, 2003
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
Location
Wisconsin
Another from the Poetress series.
The best part about shooting this subject was that she had always hated being photographed. We "1 hour'd" the film and on our way to pick up the prints I suggested to her, "as you look at the prints, view them as if you are seeing a stranger for the first time. You will be less critical of yourself" After sorting though the prints, she turned to me and said. I love these, and that is a huge compliment, because I have never seen a photo of myself that I've liked."

Whether my pics of her were technically good, or artistically acclaimed, I was bolstered by her compliment.



 
Captivating indeed! Maison's well lit face "pops" behind the black, and that mold on the tree or(whatever) finishes out the frame perfectly.


Oh yea, you are golden when the subject likes the photos.
 
excellent contrasting and shadows. I really like how the attitude and emotion from the poet shines through and stands out above the colder / darker part of the image.

Excellent :!: :!: :D
 
I almost forgot to mention that the proportions of the background to the poet and also the placement of the poet could not have been better in this shot.

Once could use this image to argue that the 1/3 rule does in fact work!
 
your comments are appreciated craig and bogleric.

ahhh the third's rule.

I was (am) a member of a camera club in OKC. I joined for obvious reasons, however, the judges were stuck on the rule of thirds. Until recently, I didn't even know about it, it sort of came to me instinctively. As stupid as this may sound, I didn't even think in terms of cropping outside of the camera. Yet there were times when a good centered full frame photo would come up and the judges would give it low points because it was 'centered."

This subject is very intense. I wanted to capture her "follow me..if you dare" quality and the thirds rule just applied.

Thank you again for the positive comments.
 
Thoughts in random order:
1) Pretty lady with petulant expression.
2) Superb lighting of the face.
3) Nice composition and layout.
4) Interesting and different.
 
Thorniest Whisper said:
ahhh the third's rule.

I was (am) a member of a camera club in OKC. I joined for obvious reasons, however, the judges were stuck on the rule of thirds. Until recently, I didn't even know about it, it sort of came to me instinctively. As stupid as this may sound, I didn't even think in terms of cropping outside of the camera. Yet there were times when a good centered full frame photo would come up and the judges would give it low points because it was 'centered."

I sometimes get annoyed with strict adherance to "rules of composition". Placing a subject off center makes it more dynamic. What if it is my intention to make my subject matter more static? One of my styles of portraiture is to create a very static image of a person. The photo is about the person and the place in that very moment. Not a moment before or after. I intentially center my subject to increase the sense that it's capturing a single moment out of their life. I don't want it to increase it's sense of the dynamic. It's not a portrait of their life, it is a flash of a moment long gone by the time anyone even has a chance to look at the photograph.

When I'm teaching about composition, I call the rule of thirds "the suggestion of thirds", and my very last rule of composition is for my students to go out, practice with the "rules of composition" until they understand how they affect their images, and then go back out and intentionally break all the rules.
 
My instructor endeared himself to me early on, by going over all the "rules" of composition, including the rule of thirds, and he showed us his images demonstrating how the rules were applied and made sure we went out and practiced them. Once he was satisfied we got it, he then showed us his series of images where virtally every "rule" was broken - and of course they were very striking, and we understood what "rule" was being "broken", and why.

It was a nifty way of being taught the classical methods, then reinforcing what Matt was saying here - rules are little more than suggestions, but if you are facing a subject that seems to call for breaking the rules - do it with confidence!

This is a beautiful portrait, btw - I'm glad she was pleased. :D
 
Terri
Ksmattfish

It must have been great to have that kind of instruction. I am self taught and I think I could really progress if I took a class. I especially would like more control over the printing (or dark room I guess).
 
Nice use of B&W. On another forum, someone kept saying to me 'why use B&W when you can use colour' - this answers her question!

Aaron
 
altyfc. Thanks for the compliment. I know a person that bristles at b&w. He always quips "Hey folks, the have invented this new thing...it's called color, use it." Consequently, I don't show him much of my b&w stuff.
 
I think it's a desparate shame that some people just don't seem to "get" B&W. It is so much more telling than colour sometimes. Keep up the good work. :)

Aaron
 
I am self taught and I think I could really progress if I took a class. I especially would like more control over the printing (or dark room I guess).

You sound like me about a year ago. I've shot for years with an old Pentax ME, aperture priority and a 50mm lens. I had a pretty good eye for composition and got enough good shots to keep me going, but really, I had no clue what I was doing. My doting husband bought me a gorgeous 35mm system early this year, a Pentax MZ-S with 4 great fixed focal lenses - and I immediately knew I didn't deserve it, but I WANTED to deserve it - so, classes were the next step for me. I had developed a lot of terrible, lazy habits that I had to break, but the money I spent was worth every penny just to gain understanding.

I just love photography but will consider myself a beginner for a l-o-o-ong time yet. :D All I can do now is shoot, shoot, shoot.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top