# Like the Naked Leads the Blind



## JEazy (May 30, 2006)

Self Portrait taken at 3:00am. Critiques and constructive criticism definantly welcome!


----------



## danalec99 (May 30, 2006)

I like your lighting and the post processing here. Love the contrast :thumbup:. 

However, I think this would be stronger if it was framed verically.
Also, the signature, is a bit XL; but it's your call.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

The crop should indeed be verticle for classic compositon, but it seems more and more people are going this route and it just looks out of balance to me.

This is not just for this photographer, but in general.  It makes me wonder if they choose to break an accepted guideline for some specific reason, or just don't know any better.


----------



## JEazy (May 30, 2006)

what if i wasn't going for classic compostition? do i still not know any better?


----------



## Janet80 (May 30, 2006)

I like the lighting..... but the way the white on the chin on the left isn't defined from the background meaning its completely white, doesn't that break a rule too? (maybe that was just my professor??)


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

I have no problem with what anyone shoots, it is your image son. I just wonder what your purpose was in choosing so off balanced a crop.. Im sure you have one.


----------



## JEazy (May 30, 2006)

I guess I don't understand why you think the crop is so off balanced. Part of my shooting style for portraits is to have the subject off to one side. Is that wrong of me to do?


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Well it isn't how I would shoot one.  To my old eye it isn't a pleasing composition but if it is your style it is your style.  

If you shoot for money, you generally want to shoot a style the customer likes.  If the customers sees your style and likes it then it is a great style.  It just seems awkward to me.

I'm curious, did you learn that style in a school somewhere, or just develop it on your own.  It has been over two decades since I taught composition, so things may have changed that much.


----------



## AprilRamone (May 30, 2006)

I like the horizontal cropping.  I guess it is more modern but I see it everywhere.  I think it might have looked a little bit more pleasing if you had included just a bit more of your shoulders.  I think the lettering is a little bit distracting, but at the same time it helps sort of balance out your composition also.  What kind of lighting were you using?


----------



## JEazy (May 30, 2006)

Mysteryscribe, i see where you're coming from about rules of composition, but this is a style that i've developed on my own. not something that somebody taught me.

As for the lighting, i was using two flashes. One aimed at the background and another bounced off a white wall to the left.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Like I said earlier a style is personal. I just looked at it from a viewers perspective and that is personal as well. I see a lot of horizontal and to me it always looks like someone didn't bother to turn the camera up. 

I shoot a lot of posters, so im used to seeing blank space but something usually goes into the space. 

And yes you are probably right about it being a modern thing. The tv and movie screen are horizontal and most likely that is why it is not bothersome to younger photographers. That is my guess anyway. Do they still advise young photographers to look at books on painting for composition tips. 

Like I said before I am seriously curious not being a smart ass though I can be that to on occassion.

And a lot of really good photographers are self taught nothing wrong with that.  I would suggest you keep the lines of communication open as that is how you learn.  Listen to all the points of view try them all (expecially since digital is cost effective) .  Don't nail yourself into anything until you see and try it all.  Just advice I don't expect anyone to take.


----------



## markc (May 30, 2006)

I use horizontal compositions for some of my portraits also, but I do think this one feels a bit off balanced. you could stick with the horzizontal, but crop it down to 5:4. Personally, I'd go with square. There's just too much white background for me and my eye gets lost in it. By trimming some of it out, your face becomes much more focused and striking.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Mark, could you send me to one of your horizontal headshots please. I am dead curious now.

And i will agree to this about the shot with the angle of his head the the crop that is there square is about the best you can do.

I can remember several cases where horizontal is the only way to go.  I am thinking of a very famous profile headshot of a man with a cigar.  The cigar was the reason for the horizontal crop.  In the classic or old school (I guess now) It was verticle subject, verticle crop.  However a man with a cigar is not a verticle subject any more.  

I took a look at some skateboard contest winner pictures because someone said a center skater is a no no... Well it is, if there is a reason for him not to be.  However if the shot has no over riding reason then the shots are verticle and as close to centered as is possible and not lose the reason for the shot.  In other words it looked to me like the shots were just the same composition as they ever were not something different at all.

So Mark I would love to see your horizontal head shots so that I can add them into the equation.  

Honest to god guys I hate being behind the curve like this..


----------



## markc (May 30, 2006)

I don't want to step on JEazy's thread, but here's a couple in case any one else is curious.

http://www.markcarpenter.com/gallery/Portraits/K2730
http://www.markcarpenter.com/gallery/Portraits/Carl
http://www.markcarpenter.com/gallery/AtomicEggplant/Meg

I have a few square ones too, but the majority are definitely portrait orientation. There needs to be a specific reason in the image for me to go horizontal.

In the case of JEazy's, a portrait comp might feel too cramped for him, which is why I think square works so well for this one.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Your number two is a classic man and cigar reason to go horizontal. 

The other two I like and have no problem at all with there is a reason for each not to be verticle. 

Number three is cropped to the universal experience of having sat a lunch counter and looked through the window into the food prep area. To cut the window verticle would make it feel open on one end. the anchor feeling would be lost.

Number one I'm not sure about but it certainly isn't floating so I dont have a problem with it. (not that it makes any difference what I might have a problem with.) I think the point most people who understand composition can agree on is that you break the traditions for a reason.  We were all saying the same thing I just had to understand what we all meant.

Traditional composition is alive and well and I can rest easy tonight...Or not

I to am sorry for hi jacking the thread. I would hope that all people are interested in learning. I know I am...


----------



## JohnMF (May 30, 2006)

i think you raised an interesting and valid point mysteryscribe

IMO though i think it's the vacant expression that could leave the viewer cold, and considering it is basically a photograph of a face i think it should have projected more emotion or expression


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

You have to assume that the photographer knew his subject...


----------



## ShutteredEye (May 30, 2006)

I think this is some of the better discussion on here as of late.

I know I have used a horizontal composition in portraits for a couple of reasons.  First, often it lends a sense of intimacy, or closeness for me.  Cutting off the top of the head and under the chin brings me in closer to the subject as a viewer.  Just imagine how close you might have to stand if that were your field of view.  Second, it can be used as an artistic tool, IMO.  For example, the woman in THIS image of Mark's seems to be alone.  There's space there for someone to be in her life.

Thats my completely uneducated take on this subject.

In this particular photo of JEazy's I agree, it does feel a tad unbalanced.  It's in the middle ground IMO.  His head tilt tends toward the center of the picture and there isn't enough dead space to the left of the frame to indicate that it is done on purpose to me.

If he cropped a tad closer, maybe to the top of the head, or created more negative space it would work better to me.

Oh and I agree about the signature.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Let me say this one thing then get off his tread... It speaks a lot about this young photographer that he didn't ask for a critique then cop an attitude when he got it.  From experience I can tell you that a lot do.  I am impressed by that more than I would have been by a perfect classic self portrait.  Being willing to learn is the only way to learn.... Now Im going to go hide..


----------



## JamesD (May 30, 2006)

The lettering distracts me.

Looking at this with the analytical eye that (I think) I'm gradually acquiring, I find that I'm not inclined to take it as a literal depiction of reality.  After all, in reality, peoples' faces don't blend into the whiteness.

I see the "blinding whiteness" behind the subject, and the highlights merging into that brightness.  At the same time, the rest of him is much darker, much closer to reality.  Overall, there's heavy contrast between the background (wherever the subject is, figuratively, I guess) and the way the subject appears.  Also, I find it interesting in this light (no pun intended) that this is a nude, which nobody has pointed out yet.

I won't get too much further into interpretation than that, partly because it seems to me that the topic is the composition, rather than the message; and partly because I probably don't know what the heck I'm talking about.

Anyway, considering what the "message" may (or may not) be, I think that the horizontal format is important.  Probably critical.  If you turn this one on its side, it just wouldn't be the same.  Also, the way he's placed in the image leaves me with the impression of, maybe not advancing, but almost as though he's just come around the corner and is wondering what I'm doing... perhaps as if I'm supposed to be or have been following.  Also, I'm not quite sure why this expression would be described as "vacant."  Subject is looking at viewer, and is clearly thinking something.  To me, "vacant" means "catatonic," or something similar--at the very least, detatched from the present circumstances.

Anyway... Like I said, I probably don't know what I'm talking about, and I'm probably reading too much in to it.  So, I'll sum it up:  this shot needs to be horizontal, IMO, just as the waitress or cigar-smoker do.

My two-an-a-half cents, and you get what you pay for.


----------



## JohnMF (May 30, 2006)

JamesD said:
			
		

> Anyway, considering what the "message" may (or may not) be, I think that the horizontal format is important. Probably critical. If you turn this one on its side, it just wouldn't be the same. Also, the way he's placed in the image leaves me with the impression of, maybe not advancing, but almost as though he's just come around the corner and is wondering what I'm doing... perhaps as if I'm supposed to be or have been following. Also, I'm not quite sure why this expression would be described as "vacant." Subject is looking at viewer, and is clearly thinking something. To me, "vacant" means "catatonic," or something similar--at the very least, detatched from the present circumstances.


 
i had to look "catatonic" up, because i wasn't sure what it meant  apparently it's something to do with being schizophrenic or in a drunken stupor, which is not what i meant when i used the word "vacant" to describe his expression. I meant vacant as in empty and lacking expression... just so nobody thinks i was calling JEazy a drunken mentalist


----------



## Jeff Canes (May 30, 2006)

Back to Justin's shot, I like the horizon crop and light, did you try a version B&W

PS: was this a late night or early morning


----------



## JEazy (May 30, 2006)

mysteryscribe said:
			
		

> Let me say this one thing then get off his tread... It speaks a lot about this young photographer that he didn't ask for a critique then cop an attitude when he got it.  From experience I can tell you that a lot do.  I am impressed by that more than I would have been by a perfect classic self portrait.  Being willing to learn is the only way to learn.... Now Im going to go hide..



yeah i guess hearing what is wrong with my pictures helps me better future photos.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

Oh i dont know about right and wrong... seems as many folks liked it as it is, as those who said it could be better... The important thing is really listen and then try it all.  Some will work for you and some won't be in keeping with your vision.  

This is a true story.. In 1969 I began serious photography with film.  I made about five grand that first year and spent about ten, none of it on equipment.  I spent it on film and processing.  Learning the craft, and that was after I got out of school.  So the best learning is by doing.  It is inexpensive and easy to do that now.  It is the best time in the world to be a young photographer.  So many new things in the field and so easy to experiment with them all.  

The truly successful one will be the one who can blend the old school classics in new ways.  That is what I tell my son in law.  He shoots one thing this weeks, I *****, he defends, I shut up, two weeks later he is doing it different and criticising guys who did what he did the week before.  But he placed second in a competition in a very reputable technical college sponsored event.  It was highly digital, so I wouldn't have stood a chance, but he had a very classic portrait too.  He beat some guys with a lot more experience and a lot more formal training.  Like I said you can teach yourself just as well as anyone else can.  Just be open to new ideas...  Not follow anyone blindly or carve a hole for yourself you cant get out of.

Now where the hell is my ladder so I can get down off this soap box or is it high horse.  I can be a truly pompus ass by the way.


----------



## WelcomeToMyWorld (Jun 10, 2006)

god damn mysteryscribe get a life


----------



## Alison (Jun 10, 2006)

WelcomeToMyWorld said:
			
		

> god damn mysteryscribe get a life



Please refrain from personal attacks on this forum. We're here to learn from each other, not insult each other.  Thank you.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 10, 2006)

Its okay I try to remember who is talking and im not sure which one it is lol.. I wonder if they have the same isp number


----------



## JEazy (Jun 10, 2006)

you think me and him are the same person huh? whatever, go shoot with a pinhole or something...


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 10, 2006)

If not it must be love....


----------



## JEazy (Jun 10, 2006)

ok listen you old homophobe, if you're trying to call me gay as an insult, it's not going to work. although i am straight, i am a very open minded person unlike you. you think you know everything about photography but you're not willing to go past what YOU think is right. and for god's sake, you're 60 years old and still saying lol...


----------



## Alison (Jun 10, 2006)

I really hate locking threads. Especially ones that started out as very civil & constructive to other memebers. Please keep the discussion to photography, personal issues can be worked out via PM.


----------

