Who are you?

[Manfred M]

I generally think a portrait of person as aloof with sunglasses.

Manfred, what do you think of this?

http://www.gregoryheisler.com/#a=0&a...=10000&s=3&p=0

Works for me; eye closest to the camera is sharp (as it should be). That draws my eyes into the image, which is where they should be looking.

[juznobsrvr]

Works for me; eye closest to the camera is sharp (as it should be). That draws my eyes into the image, which is where they should be looking.

Thanks for checking it out.

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi Rob, Ive got to agree with Manfred, in the pic from the link, although the out of focus part of the image compliments the composition it is secondary to the in focus part with the all important eye. In you picture the out of focus part very much competes with the in focus part and my eye struggle to settle. ITs hard to verbalise what im thinking sorry.

[juznobsrvr]

Hi Rob, Ive got to agree with Manfred, in the pic from the link, although the out of focus part of the image compliments the composition it is secondary to the in focus part with the all important eye. In you picture the out of focus part very much competes with the in focus part and my eye struggle to settle. ITs hard to verbalise what im thinking sorry.

I believe you have articulated it well, Mark. Thanks.

[Manfred M]

Hi Rob, Ive got to agree with Manfred, in the pic from the link, although the out of focus part of the image compliments the composition it is secondary to the in focus part with the all important eye. In you picture the out of focus part very much competes with the in focus part and my eye struggle to settle. ITs hard to verbalise what im thinking sorry.

Mark - exactly what I was thinking and you said it so clearly.

All joking aside, I thinking this is really what separates the really great portrait photographers from the rest of us mere humans; the ability to recognize what will (and will not) work from a compositional standpoint. Which rules to live with, and which ones to break; in this very specific instance.

- The the nearest to the camera is in sharp focus (rule to do so; followed);

- The nose cuts the cheek-line (rule to not do so is broken)

- Avoid internal lens reflections (rule broken and the reflective halo is positioned over the hidden eye).

- Avoid blowing out the highlights (at least I assume that they are blown out).

It works, and who are we to argue. I remember looking at some of Karsh's work and thinking if one of the CiC members had posted some of his work, how the critics would jump up and down about certain photographic rules having been broken.

As we all know, those rules can (and sometimes should) be broken. The skill and experience of the photographer is understanding why this works and essentially doing so on purpose.

[juznobsrvr]

Mark - exactly what I was thinking and you said it so clearly.

All joking aside, I thinking this is really what separates the really great portrait photographers from the rest of us mere humans. the ability to recognize what will (and will not) work from a compositional standpoint. Which rules to live with, and which ones to break; in this very specific instance.

- The the nearest to the camera is in sharp focus (rule to do so; followed);

- The nose cuts the cheek-line (rule to not do so is broken)

- Avoid internal lens reflections (rule broken and the reflective halo is positioned over the hidden eye).

- Avoid blowing out the highlights (at least I assume that they are blown out).

I works, and who are we to argue. I remember looking at some of Karsh's work and thinking if one of the CiC members had posted some of his work, how the critics would jump up and down about certain photographic rules having been broken.

As we all know, those rules can (and sometimes should) be broken. The skill and experience of the photographer is understanding why this works and essentially doing so on purpose.

I am tempted to post one of the photos by Joe McNally just to see how others would react. He tends to break the rules quite a bit. I think we should not be afraid to break the rules. Most certainly learn them but know when to use them. Knowing when to use them is the most difficult. I feel that sometimes we get bog down with the "do's" and "don'ts" that it becomes an exercise in going through a check list. I am glad that I can audition my work here and get some feedback - to find out if it works or not.

[Manfred M]

I am glad that I can audition my work here and get some feedback - to find out if it works or not.

I'm in total agreement with that statement; that is part of the reason I've started to post more of my work than I had in the past.


I should also have said, never shoot portraits with a wide angle lens, as they distort facial features. McNally and Heisler both break that rule.

[truonda]

I've got mixed feelings about this one, Rob. I can't quite put to words what is bugging me about this image. Maybe it's the selective focus? I think you chose a very good caption for the image though. Cheers.

[nimitzbenedicto]

I've got mixed feelings about this one, Rob. I can't quite put to words what is bugging me about this image. .......... Cheers.

I remember a doctor friend. What really bugs him is when a patient comes in and says
" Gosh Doc, my body hurts, but I can't describe when/how/where/what hurts?!...."

[juznobsrvr]

I've got mixed feelings about this one, Rob. I can't quite put to words what is bugging me about this image. Maybe it's the selective focus? I think you chose a very good caption for the image though. Cheers.

Cheers, Daniel. In my mind, the image is supposed to make the viewers uneasy. So maybe it is doing that to you :-)

[juznobsrvr]

I remember a doctor friend. What really bugs him is when a patient comes in and says
" Gosh Doc, my body hurts, but I can't describe when/how/where/what hurts?!...."

I must have been your doctor friend's patient :-D