# photographing unattractive people



## alliseeisyou (Sep 21, 2009)

I edited this post because I didnt mean to sound judgemental when I wrote "photographing unattractive people" I guess I meant what the 4th person commented on - when someone has flaws/problems - do you just arbitrarily fix them?

For example - my husband has bad scarring on his face but says if I correct it, it doesn't *look* like him anymore. Where as if my 13 year old daughter has a scar on her face and she *wants* it corrected because she doesnt like it there.  So what do you do? How many blemishes appear before you ask someone if they want you to touch up their skin? Or remove a mole or two? Do you just not do anthing unless they say something?

I mean a lot of people I photograph joke around and say things like "can you make it look like I weigh 20 lbs less" and the answer is yes .... and no. Where do you draw the line?


----------



## bhop (Sep 21, 2009)

I don't see why you'd need to light someone or photograph them differently based on their perceived attractiveness.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 21, 2009)

Stop being judgemental. That'll help.


----------



## bigtwinky (Sep 21, 2009)

Do you mean something like if someone has a hooked nose, you should not shoot them profile?  Ears that shoot out the side of someone's head should have their head at a angle and not straight on?

Most of these things are very subjective.  Just because you assume that someone's ears do not look the norm does not mean that they think the same thing.  I wouldn't assume to make someone look different than they are, unless they request it.  

Same goes for photochopping the image after.  While some changes are fine (levels adjustment, saturation and what not) when you get into changing eye colour, removing blemishes...these things might not bother the subject, and in fact, are part of who they are.

I'm sure the first photographer to have Cindy Crawford model for them thought about covering up that mole.


----------



## skieur (Sep 21, 2009)

Like most photographers, I take the opposite point of view. The essence of portraiture is to flatter the subject. There are tons of books and web tutorials on how to do that, from make-up to posing, lighting and camera angles. The biggest mistake of the "natural excuse" photographers is that they often bring visual attention to blemishes in their work, which I would consider insulting the subject.

Now, postprocessing does much of what was previously done in photo labs. If PP is well done, it will not even be noticed by the subject when you show hm/her the prints. Some for example reduce blemishes, so that they are less noticeable, rather than completely eliminating them. Blood shot eyes can be fixed and teeth can be finessed.

So, the fine balance is to flatter the subject without transforming him or her into a permanent totally different person.

skieur


----------



## alliseeisyou (Sep 21, 2009)

skieur said:


> Like most photographers, I take the opposite point of view. The essence of portraiture is to flatter the subject.


 

Exactly.  And I've done my homework and read the books and studied on posing techniques and tried different ones out and adjusted lighting and everything else. What I want to know is the best way to flatter your subject.

I work in an Emergency Dept and (sorry -- 7 years has jaded me in ways that I am sure are unattractive) we get a LOT of people in there who are not phenotypically people that I would CHOOSE to photograph - though I am sure their parents think they are the cutest kids ever.  I try very hard to see some beauty in everyone - especially children. 

I'm one of the most laid back people there is - I'm trying to solicit some advice here. So what do you feel helps? Bright colors? Candid shots?


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Sep 21, 2009)

alliseeisyou said:


> I edited this post because I didnt mean to sound judgemental when I wrote "photographing unattractive people" I guess I meant what the 4th person commented on - when someone has flaws/problems - do you just arbitrarily fix them?
> 
> For example - my husband has bad scarring on his face but says if I correct it, it doesn't *look* like him anymore. Where as if my 13 year old daughter has a scar on her face and she *wants* it corrected because she doesnt like it there.  So what do you do? How many blemishes appear before you ask someone if they want you to touch up their skin? Or remove a mole or two? Do you just not do anthing unless they say something?
> 
> I mean a lot of people I photograph joke around and say things like "can you make it look like I weigh 20 lbs less" and the answer is yes .... and no. Where do you draw the line?



When I do headshots for people, what I do is not COMPLETELY remove blemishes, I just fade them out and make them less noticeable.

Now if it's something like cits from shaving that morning, well duh, of course you take that out. But moles, wrinkles, scars, unless they're really tiny, I always use the patch selection, fade selected area, that way it's not totally gone, it's just not the first thing you look at. 

Then I generally liquefy just a tad, because most people perceive themselves just a wee bit (really, not much) thinner then they really are.


----------



## skieur (Sep 21, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> alliseeisyou said:
> 
> 
> > I edited this post because I didnt mean to sound judgemental when I wrote "photographing unattractive people" I guess I meant what the 4th person commented on - when someone has flaws/problems - do you just arbitrarily fix them?
> ...


 
That is the best approach.  De-emphasize blemishes and scars so that it is not the first thing that you notice or look at when you see the photo.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Sep 21, 2009)

alliseeisyou said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> > Like most photographers, I take the opposite point of view. The essence of portraiture is to flatter the subject.
> ...


----------



## arteest1 (Sep 24, 2009)

I usually de-emphasis blemishes in-camera or in Photoshop, though asking the subject first what they want emphasized and de-emphasized will help as well.


----------



## jbylake (Sep 24, 2009)

I'm not a professional, so I really don't have to worry about it.  But I think if I was confronted with that dilemma, I'd wait for them to bring it up.

J.:mrgreen:


----------



## CSR Studio (Sep 24, 2009)

I use lighting when I can. I also use a cross star on some portraits to soften them. I always have women jut out their chin so that they don't have a double chin. I also sit with my clients and explain what I can do in PS. I explain that I can take reflections out of glasses, remove blemishes and that sort of thing. Then I ask if there is anything that they would like to have done. If you present it that way people understand and will thank you for it.


----------



## Big (Sep 24, 2009)

Believe me, when you grow up with bad acne in high school, it's pretty awesome to get the school photos back and see a clear face.


----------



## skieur (Sep 24, 2009)

jbylake said:


> I'm not a professional, so I really don't have to worry about it. But I think if I was confronted with that dilemma, I'd wait for them to bring it up.
> 
> J.:mrgreen:


 
Doesn't work.  Not a lot of people: men or women wish to discuss their blemishes with a photographer.

skieur


----------



## skieur (Sep 24, 2009)

arteest1 said:


> I usually de-emphasis blemishes in-camera or in Photoshop, though asking the subject first what they want emphasized and de-emphasized will help as well.


 
Again, this only works with some personality-types.  Some would not feel sufficiently confident to openly say that they want their "big nose" de-emphasized, for example.  How many of you, would openly say this type of thing to a photographer?

skieur


----------



## KmH (Sep 24, 2009)

skieur said:


> Like most photographers, I take the opposite point of view. The essence of portraiture is to flatter the subject. There are tons of books and web tutorials on how to do that, from make-up to posing, lighting and camera angles. The biggest mistake of the "natural excuse" photographers is that they often bring visual attention to blemishes in their work, which I would consider insulting the subject.
> 
> Now, postprocessing does much of what was previously done in photo labs. If PP is well done, it will not even be noticed by the subject when you show hm/her the prints. Some for example reduce blemishes, so that they are less noticeable, rather than completely eliminating them. Blood shot eyes can be fixed and teeth can be finessed.
> 
> ...


+1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

It's a major part of a portrait photographers job to recognise problem areas and manage the pose to minimise them. Nothing needs to be discussed with the client about the problems, unless they bring it up. Most times they will understand exactly what it is you are doing and they will love you for doing it without mention.


----------



## kwik (Sep 25, 2009)

Good thread and good information so far.  

I myself have HUGE scars on my stomach and left side with one rib removed on my left side.  skieur you are right! It would be very hard for me to bring up my scars and say "what can you do with these" However if a photographer used lighting and positioning to hide them or minimize them I'd be happy.  Now I'm not out of shape or anything like that.  In fact I am quite the opposite.  6'4" 212 and very well built.  But I have the scars.  And as I said.  They are big and there are lots of them.  So skieur I'd have to agree with you. If they were in the photo's I'd be okay with that.  As long as they aren't the first thing that your eye catches.  I'd kind of be insulted to be honest with you if someone made them the center of attention becuase I have a lot better features to look at then my scars.  Skieur I'd like to thank you for what you said and you'd be the type of photographer that I'd like to work with!


----------



## jbylake (Sep 25, 2009)

skieur said:


> jbylake said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not a professional, so I really don't have to worry about it. But I think if I was confronted with that dilemma, I'd wait for them to bring it up.
> ...


Yeah, I see your point.  I'm just glad I haven't had to deal with that issue.  In fact, everyone in this thread have offered pretty good points of view.
I hope I never have too (face this dilemma).
J.:mrgreen:


----------



## Derrel (Sep 25, 2009)

Around 20 years ago, I shot portraits every day at a busy studio,and made my entire living at it. We had a lot of regular people come in,and occasionally a person would mention they had a problem area,and would just matter of factly ask if we could make their glasses not look weird (Coke bottle bottom lenses), or make their nose look not crooked (no profile or semi-profile poses), and make them look better if they were heavy set. Many older women in their late 60's to 80's would ask for, "the special filter", knowing full well that we had diffusion filters available, just like the ones used for Hollywood actresses in some of those oh-so-very 1940's films.

One of the simplest things is to NEVER show a person's nose outside the outline of their face; many people think they have a big or unattractive nose,and as soon as the outline of the nose breaks past the cheekline, they HATE the portrait. So don't do that! Always angle a heavy set person's body to the camera,and never show a heavy set woman straight-shouldered to the camera--the broad shouldered look is for linebackers and lumberjacks. Never use broad lighting on a person with a fat or broad face. Set the main light a bit higher on a chubby-faced, jowly person and have them lean forward a slight bit and raise the camera two inches higher than normal and a triple chin magically goes AWAY. All done without saying anything even remotely offensive.

A good code method is to is to help them get posed,with specific posing instructions, and then ask them to look directly at the lens, and then say, "Please look right at the lens, while I adjust the main light so it is 'just so'. I want to get my main light set just perfectly." Let them know that you want to get the lighting "just right, not too high,and not too low," and it's almost like code-speak--they realize what you are doing--minimizing their double chins or bulbous nose or chubby tummy,etc.

It's really a matter of using light and sound posing fundamentals in the right way, and of reassuring your subject that you are taking "steps" to make them look good. In family group shots, if a person is very heavy, you can often angle them appropriately at the shoulders and position another person in font of their tummy,and in general pose the group so as to put everybody into a good position. People are paying you to make them look good,and you do what works in each situation.


----------

