# How do I convince homely looking people that my photos are good?



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

Ok so I recently I had to do about 100 head shots of fellow employees for some system thing. Anyways the photos came out great IMO, well lit, sharp etc.. but apparently about half of the people (women) didn't "like" them so I am doing a second session to redo them and get additional people who didn't make it.

I've asked each one of them to let me know what they didn't like about their photo and we can try to work on it. The top answer was, "I just don't like my picture being taken" or "I am old" or "I just don't like how I look''.

I shot with a soft light to lessen things like wrinkles and even did post to remove zits and lighten teeth. 

I feel frustrated that I can't make these "clients" happy.

p.s. this wasn't a glamour session, more like an assembly line.


----------



## EIngerson (May 8, 2013)

1, Were you payed?

2, Are the things they didn't like their natural features? 

3, Were you payed? 

If they didn't pay, I wouldn't re-do anything.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

EIngerson said:


> 1, Were you payed?
> 
> 2, Are the things they didn't like their natural features?
> 
> ...



1. As a facet of my job I handle all the company's photography needs. Thus making people (some in very high positions) happy is important to the health of my career.

2. Yes. They ugly. Or just didn't want to smile or have anything but a lobotomy look on their faces. 

3. After all this I certainly don't get paid enough.


----------



## ronlane (May 8, 2013)

Bottom line, you can't make everyone happy. If it was a work thing and they were forced to do it, you don't have a chance. If they were coming to you or paying for it, you might please most of them.


----------



## amolitor (May 8, 2013)

Did you have them pose in the approved fashions? Thrust the chin, tongue on the roof of the mouth, loosen/drop the jaw?

Some people just hate their own pictures, though. With 100 people, you're gonna get some unhappy ones.


----------



## TimothyJinx (May 8, 2013)

The title of this thread cracked me up. The simple solution is to photograph only attractive people.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> Ok so I recently I had to do about 100 head shots of fellow employees for some system thing. Anyways the photos came out great IMO, well lit, sharp etc.. but apparently about half of the people (women) didn't "like" them so I am doing a second session to redo them and get additional people who didn't make it.
> 
> I've asked each one of them to let me know what they didn't like about their photo and we can try to work on it. The top answer was, "I just don't like my picture being taken" or "I am old" or "I just don't like how I look''.
> 
> ...




Join the club.  There is no making people happy.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Did you have them pose in the approved fashions? Thrust the chin, tongue on the roof of the mouth, loosen/drop the jaw?
> 
> Some people just hate their own pictures, though. With 100 people, you're gonna get some unhappy ones.



Yup, the whole nine, not sure if anyone followed my direction.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

Sample of yours truly to give you an idea of the lighting.


----------



## amolitor (May 8, 2013)

I suggest bringing props. An awesome hat of some sort, and a medium sized black sack with a good drawstring.


----------



## MartinCrabtree (May 8, 2013)

I was told in school my job would be to make people look better than they actually do. I'm not very good at making plain people look good unless I can engage them in conversation about something they like and get their head away from the image I'm trying to make. Almost a candid shot works-_if you can get it_. In my opinion that situation is not about the technical aspect,more like portraying them as they are when relaxed. Not an easy task if you're not blessed with the gift of gab.

That's all I have. Good luck.


----------



## ronlane (May 8, 2013)

amolitor said:


> I suggest bringing props. An awesome hat of some sort, and a medium sized black sack with a good drawstring.



With 100 people he may need more than one black sack.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 8, 2013)

Use portraiture pro and make their skin look plastic. 

Also, more lens flare... added in post.


----------



## ronlane (May 8, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> Use portraiture pro and make their skin look plastic.
> 
> Also, more lens flare... added in post.



Or just replace their portrait with ones off the list of hottest supermodels.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> Sample of yours truly to give you an idea of the lighting.
> 
> View attachment 44323




The lighting looks fine in this shot...


:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


----------



## ronlane (May 8, 2013)

JW, you gottan love mountain man.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

You're just in awe of my man foliage.


----------



## imagemaker46 (May 8, 2013)

It's a no win situation.  You can't convince people to be anything more than who they are or how they see themselves in a mirror, regardless of how perfect the photo may be.  

The alternative is to just let everyone drink during office hours, they'll all look good come quitting time.


----------



## tirediron (May 8, 2013)

Have you tried sitting down with any of them who seem to REALLY dislike the images and asking them what it is that they dislike, and what they would like you to do to improve them (Not suggesting you need to do all of that, but sometimes it helps the client just to be able to verbalize some of their issues).  Sometimes things are really minor, and if you explain why you've done what you've done, then they're happy, or at least accepting.


----------



## Steve5D (May 8, 2013)

"I can't change your appearance".

Harsh, but true, and many people need to hear it...


----------



## Derrel (May 8, 2013)

If the assembly line-type lighting was left pretty much as the light was in your portrait, then I can understand why about half of the people hated the portraits you shot of them...the lighting you have in your picture is a very masculine lighting pattern.

The women deserved to have a more-feminine,more-flattering lighting pattern set up for their shots. The way you are lighted would make most women look wide-faced and 'rugged'. Unlike "most men", the majority of women are consumers of images of female beauty. They are exposed to a LOT of high-quality images of feminine beauty in magazines, on product boxes, on the web, in TV shows, etc.. They do not want to be photographed like men. Something like a beautiful, well-lighted butterfly lighting pattern would probably have pleased more of them, and narrowed their faces, minimized skin flaws, and made their portraits much closer to the normal, accepted ways of lighting female faces.

Your lighting pattern is sort of a modified split lighting pattern. Very manly. Also...how a person is posed in relation to the main light can make them look "thick", or "thinner". Both the body angle to the light and the head's angle to the main light are positively huge determinants of how the subject will look. Body and head turned the same way and A)into the light or B) away from the light; body turned away, head into the light; head away from the light, body turned into it. 

I would say look at the shots the women do not like, and then try and determine the pattern that was met with such disappointment. My guess is its a combination of same body angle, same face angle, and the masculine modified split lighting, making them not look the way that "women" want to look.

6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know


----------



## DiskoJoe (May 8, 2013)

dont sweat it. Some people are just ugly.


----------



## amolitor (May 8, 2013)

To bastardize a quote about (ant)arctic explorers:

"KmH for scientific method; mishele for flowers and abstraction; but when disaster strikes, all hope is gone, and you find yourself shooting headshots, get down on your knees and pray for Derrel."


----------



## Big Mike (May 8, 2013)

Now that Derrel has pointed it out, yes, a better lighting pattern would help, especially for the ladies.  

Firstly, don't have them post with their face straight toward the camera, this may not be a beauty portrait setting, but they're not mug shot either.  Have them look at least a little toward the main light, thus putting their face into a short lighting pattern.  This will help to make them look slimmer.

Also, I'd suggest putting the light a little higher.  Based on the shot of you, the light was just a tiny bit higher than your face (nose shadow falls across the face).  Try for a 'loop' lighting pattern where the nose shadow falls down diagonally toward the corner of the mouth.  

And while it may be longer and harder for the whole process.  If you can engage them before you snap the shutter, that will likely help.  Maybe ask, "What did you do for the long weekend?" or "Where did you go on your last vacation?"   Just something that will hopefully give them a good memory for a few seconds, that will hopefully put a smile on their face...just be ready to capture it.  

Alternatively (and since this will be a reshoot), have a mirror right next to the camera...that way they will see exactly how they will look and can pose themselves into their best expression.  (trick will be getting them to look back to the lens when you snap).


----------



## Derrel (May 8, 2013)

Steve5D said:


> "I can't change your appearance". Harsh, but true, and many people need to hear it...



That is utter nonsense. That is what skilled portrait shooters do all day long!!!  I used to work as a portrait shooter in a busy studio. If one has any kind of skill and knowledge about lighting, he knows that he CAN, easily, change the "appearance" of a person where it counts...on the printed pictures that they buy and hang on the wall. I regularly made fat people look thinner, old people look younger, and average people look well above average.

Using a nice butterfly lighting set-up with under chin reflector, I can easily "take off" 20 to 30 years' worth of wrinkles in any woman's face....by lighting NOT TO SHOW wrinkles! *appearance=changed*! Women come in with makeup on...you do NOT want to broadly sweep strong side-lighting across their faces. I would suggest that those interested in people photography buy this classic book for 99 cents. I have owned it since 1986,when I bought my first studio lighting setup.

9780817440046: How to Photograph Women--Beautifully - New & Used Books & Textbooks at Alibris Marketplace

Studio portrait work is largely about changing or enhancing the appearance of your customers. That is what it is all about. If you do not know how to do it though, it can seem impossible.


----------



## ronlane (May 8, 2013)

Hey Big Mike. Lindsay Lohan seems to like that mug shot look. I think in the last few years, she's had more of them taken than professional portraits.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

Derrel said:


> If the assembly line-type lighting was left pretty much as the light was in your portrait, then I can understand why about half of the people hated the portraits you shot of them...the lighting you have in your picture is a very masculine lighting pattern.
> 
> The women deserved to have a more-feminine,more-flattering lighting pattern set up for their shots. The way you are lighted would make most women look wide-faced and 'rugged'. Unlike "most men", the majority of women are consumers of images of female beauty. They are exposed to a LOT of high-quality images of feminine beauty in magazines, on product boxes, on the web, in TV shows, etc.. They do not want to be photographed like men. Something like a beautiful, well-lighted butterfly lighting pattern would probably have pleased more of them, and narrowed their faces, minimized skin flaws, and made their portraits much closer to the normal, accepted ways of lighting female faces.
> 
> ...




This makes sense. Would I be better in the future to go for a unisex lighting setup or shoot men and women at different times? Is there one setup that you would recommend given the backdrop and corporate style? I am drawn towards the "Butterfly Style".


----------



## Derrel (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:
			
		

> This makes sense. Would I be better in the future to go for a unisex lighting setup or shoot men and women at different times? Is there one setup that you would recommend given the backdrop and corporate style? I am drawn towards the "Butterfly Style".



It's better to have a more-masculine look for men, with a higher lighting ratio and perhaps a slightly "darker" look. Smaller light sources, like umbrellas, and simple one-light +reflector+separation/hair light+ backround light. Fairly dark vignette or natural light fall-off on the backdrop paper or canvas or wall. That's pretty "corporate".

For women, I like the butterfly pattern set-ups because they minimize texture (aka wrinkles,pores,etc.) and are what most women see in fashion magazines. Loop lighting is also nice if the source is soft. The easiest thing is a softbox above the lens, and a white-painted metal reflector under the chin. Gives beautiful eye catchlights top and bottom, and makes a woman's eyes "pop". Most women also have eye makeup (liner,shadow,lashes) and spent 20 mins on that, so if their eyes look good and there's no crow's feet, you're at 3rd base. A little bit lighter backdrop is nice too, I think...not so severe.

It also depends...some California companies have gone to this really light-bright-white bkgd look for "corporate" looks at many new-agey companies. I would photograph the men first, then the women.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> You're just in awe of my man foliage.




I could stop shaving for a year and not get that hairy.


----------



## Compaq (May 8, 2013)

After reading Derrel's link and looking at examples of rembrandt lighting, I can't stop looking at the little triangle!


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 8, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> > "I can't change your appearance". Harsh, but true, and many people need to hear it...
> ...



^^^  This.

And this:

[video]http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83231257/[/video]


----------



## sm4him (May 8, 2013)

Derrel and others have given some good, solid advice on getting the absolute best, most flattering shot you can. I've made exactly ONE attempt at head shots, so I have no advice whatsoever on that aspect.

However, I will say: I suspect only a FEW of the women actually mean, "I don't like the photo you have captured of me." The majority of them mean, "I don't like the way I look." Derrel has made some great suggestions on minimizing a lot of those things we tend to dislike about ourselves...but speaking for me, personally, there have probably been only two, perhaps three, pictures taken of me as an adult that I can even stand to look at. That includes wedding photos, professional portraits, all of it. I hate them all, because...they look like ME. No, that's not precisely true...I dislike them because, when *I* look at them, I see the "me" that *I* think of myself as. When others look at the same picture, they evidently see some OTHER me.

You've probably seen this--I think it was posted here earlier--but THIS is exactly the way I am, and the way, I suspect, many of these "complainers" you've photographed are.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > You're just in awe of my man foliage.
> ...



Sorry that makes me more of a man than you. Please surrender your land and any women you may have on the premise.


----------



## amolitor (May 8, 2013)

ronlane said:


> Hey Big Mike. Lindsay Lohan seems to like that mug shot look. I think in the last few years, she's had more of them taken than professional portraits.



Lindsay looks so damn hot in those. She's very ordinary when she's "done up" but when she's strung out and pissed off, man, she's awesome.


----------



## mishele (May 8, 2013)

Sharon....I've seen that clip a bunch of time on youtube. I thought it was a good story.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

mishele said:


> Sharon....I've seen that clip a bunch of time on youtube. I thought it was a good story.



frankly the state of women's body issues is horrible.

I hope I didn't implying anything negative with my thread.


----------



## Ilovemycam (May 8, 2013)

Just how it is. Can't please em all. Do less assembly work and more private work. You got a good idea, reshoot until you can please em. 

I saw an anorexic old gal at the green grocer. Maybe 70? Big boofed hair. Her legs as thin as my forearms. I wanted to ask her to pose nude with that scrawny body and big hair. But alas, you can't go up to people on the street and tell them why you wnat to shoot them...sometimes anyway. 

Good luck!


----------



## Big Mike (May 8, 2013)

Compaq said:


> After reading Derrel's link and looking at examples of rembrandt lighting, I can't stop looking at the little triangle!


Have you see the TV show 'Vampire Diaries"?  
I don't watch it, but my wife does.  Every scene that I happen to see, every character is lit with Rembrandt lighting and a deep ratio.  I call it 'The Rembrandt Diaries'.


----------



## Big Mike (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> This makes sense. Would I be better in the future to go for a unisex lighting setup or shoot men and women at different times? Is there one setup that you would recommend given the backdrop and corporate style? I am drawn towards the "Butterfly Style".


Hard question to answer.  A good portrait photographer will tailor their lighting to each client.  Some faces just work better with certain lighting styles and don't work with others.  Butterfly / glamor lighting work really well for women who already have a slim face, especially if they have 'high cheek bones'.  With a plum, rounded face, it doesn't work so well and can make then look wide/fat.  

I suggested loop lighting because it's probably the most 'safe' lighting style and it works equally well on men or women.  

So if you have the time, and you want to do a really good job, then be prepared to adjust your lighting patterns for each person.  A big help would be to have your lights on dollys or castors etc. so that they can roll around very easily.  

Keep in mind that this isn't something that you'll pick up by reading a book over a weekend.  Portrait photographers hone their craft over a period of years & decades.


----------



## Derrel (May 8, 2013)

The thing that strikes me the most about the video from ebaum's world is how absolutely critical the placement of the main light really is. There really isn't much else going on except the angle/placement of the main light is constantly being shifted around. And THAT, the precise placement of the main light source, is one of the real keys to lighting people. My mentors stressed,adamantly, that the first thing to do was to 1)evaluate and then 2) position the main light at the optimal height/position for the subject.

The loop lighting that Big Mike mentioned; the shadow placement determines if the light is wrong, or right. The Rembrandt cheek triangle, same thing. Butterfly has the shadow under the nose, but not touching the top lip. ALL of this is easy to do if your light has a modeling lamp in it. ANd all of this can be much harder when using speedlights.

Here's a nifty video about how people can go from looking frumpy to "WOW!" "It's All ABout the Jaw"


----------



## jowensphoto (May 8, 2013)

amolitor said:


> ronlane said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Big Mike. Lindsay Lohan seems to like that mug shot look. I think in the last few years, she's had more of them taken than professional portraits.
> ...



I'd love to shoot her Kate Moss heroine chic style. I've posted casting calls so many times on local boards for someone of similar features, and even asked directly, no one seems to be interested. One day...


----------



## amolitor (May 8, 2013)

Derrel said:


> ALL of this is easy to do if your light has a modeling lamp in it. ANd all of this can be much harder when using speedlights.



OR: you can set the light up once, and then place the models on a jack, and jack them up to the proper height.


----------



## vintagesnaps (May 8, 2013)

You said you hope you didn't imply anything negative, but it did make me think if you're on here calling them homely and ugly that attitude might unintentionally have come thru when dealing with them. It sounds like a situation where the subjects may have been less than enthused about having to do this, and an assembly line seems to be far from ideal conditions. 

I think some of working with people is making them feel comfortable as much as possible; sometimes a smile or quick funny comment could be enough to help lighten the mood and help them feel more at ease (at least with some of them, some may not respond and still be unhappy about being there). I think part of photographing people is the interactions and engaging with them.


----------



## TimothyJinx (May 8, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> I could stop shaving for a year and not get that hairy.



Same here. I tried once for a few weeks to grow a full beard and my nephew told me I looked like a hostage.


----------



## kathyt (May 8, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> You said you hope you didn't imply anything negative, but it did make me think if you're on here calling them homely and ugly that attitude might unintentionally have come thru when dealing with them. It sounds like a situation where the subjects may have been less than enthused about having to do this, and an assembly line seems to be far from ideal conditions.
> 
> I think some of working with people is making them feel comfortable as much as possible; sometimes a smile or quick funny comment could be enough to help lighten the mood and help them feel more at ease (at least with some of them, some may not respond and still be unhappy about being there). I think part of photographing people is the interactions and engaging with them.



I can assure you runnah added humor and quick funny comments to his sessions. Have you read any of his threads?


----------



## kathyt (May 8, 2013)

Do you have any software for skin runnah? I would get Portraiture ASAP. It is amaze-balls!


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> Do you have any software for skin runnah? I would get Portraiture ASAP. It is amaze-balls!



I did do some skin smoothing for some people that I knew were going to be fussy about it.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 8, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> Do you have any software for skin runnah? I would get Portraiture ASAP. It is amaze-balls!



I sort of suggested it in a way that negatively portrayed it earlier, does that count?


----------



## kathyt (May 8, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> kathythorson said:
> 
> 
> > Do you have any software for skin runnah? I would get Portraiture ASAP. It is amaze-balls!
> ...


Sorry Tyler. I didn't see that.


----------



## bentcountershaft (May 8, 2013)

I'm shocked I actually found useful things in this thread.  Derrel to the rescue.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

bentcountershaft said:


> I'm shocked I actually found useful things in this thread.  Derrel to the rescue.



That was my intent.

I found a willing model to try more feminine lighting styles upon.


----------



## mishele (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> I found a willing model to try more feminine lighting styles upon.


Oh?! hehe


----------



## Tiller (May 8, 2013)

Am I the only one who thought calling someone homely was a compliment? I need to go have some discussions with my fiancé...


----------



## mishele (May 8, 2013)

Never, ever, call a female homely!! God!!! hehe


----------



## o hey tyler (May 8, 2013)

mishele said:


> Never, ever, call a female homely!! God!!! hehe



Can I call you my homie, guuuurl?


----------



## mishele (May 8, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > Never, ever, call a female homely!! God!!! hehe
> ...


Yo, dawg!! Fo realz!!


----------



## Tiller (May 8, 2013)

mishele said:


> Never, ever, call a female homely!! God!!! hehe



Too late.


----------



## mishele (May 8, 2013)

Tiller said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > Never, ever, call a female homely!! God!!! hehe
> ...


Could you walk afterwards? hehe


----------



## Tiller (May 8, 2013)

No. I think she wasn't sure what it meant either. She just smiled and thanked me. Bullet = dodged.


----------



## runnah (May 8, 2013)

Ok now try calling her something worse.


----------



## Tiller (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> Ok now try calling her something worse.



Nah, I don't have a cool beard to soften the slap that would follow.


----------



## EIngerson (May 8, 2013)

runnah said:


> EIngerson said:
> 
> 
> > 1, Were you payed?
> ...



1 and 2 just don't mix well. I feel for you man.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 8, 2013)

mishele said:


> Yo, dawg!! Fo realz!!



HOLLLAAAAAAAA


----------



## frommrstomommy (May 8, 2013)

just implement a new rule.. you only photograph pretty people. problem solved.


----------



## runnah (May 9, 2013)

frommrstomommy said:


> just implement a new rule.. you only photograph pretty people. problem solved.



Done, so when can I take your photo?


----------



## Stacylouwho (May 9, 2013)

I have a friend who is like this and she seems to only like the photos where she is slightly looking up.. I don't know why we women get that way! But we are hardly ever happy with photos of ourselves, so don't beat yourself up!


----------



## kathyt (May 9, 2013)

runnah said:


> frommrstomommy said:
> 
> 
> > just implement a new rule.. you only photograph pretty people. problem solved.
> ...


runnah, your avatar is giving me motion sickness.


----------



## runnah (May 9, 2013)

kathythorson said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > frommrstomommy said:
> ...



I seem to always make women queasy...


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 9, 2013)

runnah said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...




Oh, there's no question about that.  As you can see, Kat has already dumped me and moved on to bigger and hairier men.  I feel so emasculated...:hail:


----------



## runnah (May 9, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > jwbryson1 said:
> ...



It's ok, I will protect you.


----------



## o hey tyler (May 9, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> Oh, there's no question about that.  As you can see, Kat has already dumped me and moved on to bigger and hairier men.  I feel so emasculated...:hail:



It's because you're from Texas.


----------



## frommrstomommy (May 9, 2013)

This thread really is going places.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 9, 2013)

o hey tyler said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, there's no question about that.  As you can see, Kat has already dumped me and moved on to bigger and hairier men.  I feel so emasculated...:hail:
> ...



Well see?  Now that makes so much sense!


----------



## mishele (May 9, 2013)

Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.


----------



## bentcountershaft (May 9, 2013)

mishele said:


> Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.



How did I miss that line?


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 9, 2013)

mishele said:


> Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.



She tells me that she gets bored quickly.  We must be unexciting...


----------



## kathyt (May 9, 2013)

bentcountershaft said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.
> ...


You were busy on the pipeline. I mean propane line. I mean cartoon character creating line.


----------



## bentcountershaft (May 9, 2013)

I'm no longer busy, unless you mean busy being subtle.


----------



## mishele (May 9, 2013)

jwbryson1 said:


> mishele said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.
> ...


Speak for yourself, friend. I was too exciting...lol


----------



## kathyt (May 9, 2013)

mishele said:


> Damn, Kathy dumped you too?! Man, she's really plowing through the members.


That's how I roll.


----------



## Mike_E (May 9, 2013)

mishele said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > mishele said:
> ...




Ummm, ever tried replenisher?


----------

