[Leica] Re: Dehumanizing Portraits

[socphoto at verizon.net (Carl Socolow)]

On Jan 18, 2009, at 11:56 AM, Brian Reid wrote:
> 

> > > The New York Times magazine just ran a set of portraits of "Obama's  
> > > People"
> > >
> > >  http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/magazine/2009-inauguration- 
> > > gallery/index.html
> > >
> > > It feels to me as though the photographer went out of his way to  
> > > make all of his subjects look unnatural and bizarre. They are posed  
> > > awkwardly, the lighting is very peculiar, the camera angles are  
> > > unusual, and the subjects were usually photographed off-guard.
> > >
> > > What does anybody else think? Was the photographer here trying to  
> > > create a negative perception of these people?
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>   


Brian,

You certainly brought up a subject that resonated with a lot of LUGgers and 
engendered a goodly number of responses. And, gratefully, there were hardly 
any having to do with equipment. For my two cents, one of the pursuits of 
art, its holy grails, is the pursuit of the thing itself. As Edward Weston 
wrote: "The camera should be used for a recording of life, for rendering the
very substance and quintessence of the thing itself, whether it be polished 
steel or palpitating flesh." 

These photos may very well indeed be palpitating flesh. But they are direct 
and honest views of the individuals photographed. You have to take note that 
some are framed tight, some loose. I've just finished a large portrait 
session of bank executives, albeit with more dramatic lighting, and the 
framing varies. I think this photographer worked hard. Some of the 
selections may be due to the editing process given that there is a 
difference between pictures and their framing. The use of the direct light 
and plain background give us only the subject as subject; that and their 
universal cues about human emotion. I think this is a pretty tight "shoot" 
and it was well-executed particularly given the variables and logistics of 
schedule and travel. With those limitations, too, you want to have 
simplified set-up and equipment as you know you're only going to get to work 
with the subject for a few mintutes.

I also think that we fall into "canonic" ideas about what a picture/portrait 
should be; conventional ideas; idealized and formulaic notions about 
lighting, positioning, viewpoint. In an image-saturated world these get seen 
and forgotten fast.

While I think it appropriate to question the esthetic values that underly 
the making of these pictures, I don't know that it's appropriate to infer 
that they're of nefarious intent. See Rimbaud quote below.


-- 
Carl Sander Socolow
Socolow Photography
www.carlsandersocolow.com
www.socphoto.com


Inventing the unknown calls for new forms.
   A. Rimbaud


Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this email and 
document(s) attached are for the exclusive use of the addressee and may 
contain confidential, privileged and non-disclosable information. If the 
recipient of this email is not the addressee, such recipient is strictly 
prohibited from reading, photocopying, distributing or otherwise using this 
email or its contents in any way.