One of my "rules" when doing this is not to touch or alter anything that's being photographed. If something's askew, even if it may somehow detract from an ideal photo, it remains askew. My feeling is that to touch anything or make an adjustment, other than camera angles or lens choices, is almost an invasion of the subject's personal space. Plus I prefer to photograph my first impression of a scene, so if I come into a room and see something that catches my attention, photographing it as close to how it was first seen gets highest priority. Then I may work around the scene a bit. Often the first impression makes the strongest photo, contains a little more of the subject and a little less of me.
Thanks for looking and for asking. Shel > [Original Message] > From: gibikote > very interesting. > I hadnt heard of the portrait or the photographer (blissful ignorance!) - > thanks for sharing that info. > went on google and found it. The website also mentions this 'rule' which I > hadnt heard either "Always include hands, because they are more expressive > than the face..." > > thats a neat modification of Elliot's style. > did you modify the items on the table - to represent more/less of Linda? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <> > > Over the past few years, ever since seeing Elliott Erwitt's famous > > portrait of the cellist, Cassals, I've been making portraits of people > > by showing something of their environment, trying to capture a bit > > of who they are, their interests, personalities, without including the > > person in the shot. You've seen some of these photos posted here > > before. Here's a recent portrait of my friend Linda. > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~morepix/portrait.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
