Ian, the steel fixer

[Wandjina]

As a steel fixer, Ian's primary job is assembling and securing reinforcing steel prior to concrete being poured around it.
The steel is dirty and the ends of it are very sharp. A quick look at his hands and wrist will attest to this.
He had just stopped work to roll a cigarette and have a cup of coffee when I found him in his shed and took this image.
The light is from the open doorway behind me as I looked into the shed. I have darkened the background.

Canon 5D Mk lll, 1/80 second,f/6.3, ISO 400 with Sigma 85mm, 1:1.4, DG HGM Art 16 lens.

[pschlute]

I love the pose, the cigarette, and the way his eyes are engaging with the viewer. I do find the image to have an over processed look especially with the hand which appears to have a poster-esque look about it.

[xpatUSA]

Certainly tells the tale, Martin.

I was an RAF aircraft engine tech. for 12 years and bore locking-wire scars for a few years thereafter.

[lovelife65]

Awesome photograph. Those eyes tell a ton of stories, and look like they are ready to cut right through you.
well done!

[Manfred M]

Good strong image that just oozes emotional impact.

This is a well composed and executing portrait of the man. You have made a "connection" with him and that shows in the image.

[wilgk]

Terrific shot, I read somewhere by someone, include the hands in an environmental portrait to help tell the story, not as easy to do as it may sound. You have nailed it here, we’ll done.

[Manfred M]

Terrific shot, I read somewhere by someone, include the hands in an environmental portrait to help tell the story, not as easy to do as it may sound. You have nailed it here, we’ll done.

Kay - this is not an environmental portrait. We would need to see, in this context, the steel re-enforcement bars that he works with. This is just a portrait; in fact really just a head shot.

As for including the subject's hands, that is just someone's opinion. Frankly, I can go either way on that point.

This is an environmental portrait and does not show the hands.

Old Order Mennonite Boy - St Jacobs, Canada

[wilgk]

I wasn’t trying to teach Martin anything, I was just trying to add a positive comment to an outstanding image.
So I must have chosen the wrong word calling it an environmental portrait.
I wasn’t trying to convince you to agree that including the hands is a good idea, I was sharing someone’s opinion that I had read.


I thought both of these points was part of offering a response in a positive way with an example as opposed to no comment or just a wow great shot, I hoped was a good thing to try and do here, as I know myself I really appreciate it when people take the time to do that.

I also missed the autocorrect of well done to we’ll done.

[Wandjina]

Hi Kay. I am open to all comments both positive and negative. That is why I come here.

Like you, I have heard the "hands, no hands" debate. The "no hands" argument seems, more often than not, to come from Camera Club judges whose expertise lies with taking photographs of subjects other than people and are bound by the competition rules and definitions. I think "Hands" versus "No hands" is a personal choice. The question is:- Do they add to the story? I think in this case, yes, they do.

Now that I have got that off my chest. *laughs and takes a deep breath*

In the original image above, the hands tell so much of the story. The dirt on the fingers matching the dirt on his cheek. The open wound on his wrist and the fingers in that typical smoker's pose as he moves his hand up to the "roll your own" cigarette. They all add character to this fellow.
By comparison the image without the hand, I think, seems quite bland.

[rpcrowe]

Absolutely great image!

[DanK]

IMHO, this is a powerful and intriguing image. Very good work. I do agree with Peter, however, that it looks a little overprocessed to me.

Re the hands: Include the hands if you think they make a specific image better. In this case, in my opinion, the hand makes the image much stronger. In other cases, it might not.

I don't know how you are posting your images, but it isn't working very well. The first shows up as a thumbnail, but when it is double clicked, it's fine. I can't see the second one at all.

[Wandjina]

I don't know how you are posting your images, but it isn't working very well. The first shows up as a thumbnail, but when it is double clicked, it's fine. I can't see the second one at all.

The images are linked to a web site

[Donald]

The images are linked to a web site

All our images on here are. If you were to read, HELP THREAD: How can I post images here?, the thread would help you post the images inline like the rest of us do.

[William W]

(The image in Post #1) It's a very strong Portrait. Bravo.

Interesting conversation concerning the hands: my view is the hands make the image stronger adding both emphasis and insight to the character.

Interesting comment about 'judging' competitions: more precisely the comment was about Camera Club Judges, but that leads into this comment concerning Competition Judging - if the image were entered into a Portrait Competition, then, some Judges would deduct points on technical aspects because of the hands: not because the hands were included, but because there's movement blur in the hands which is distracting. The blur is not apparent at the in-line view, but it is, at the full resolution.

WW

[Manfred M]

Like you, I have heard the "hands, no hands" debate. The "no hands" argument seems, more often than not, to come from Camera Club judges whose expertise lies with taking photographs of subjects other than people and are bound by the competition rules and definitions. I think "Hands" versus "No hands" is a personal choice. The question is:- Do they add to the story? I think in this case, yes, they do.

The comment regarding hands is one that I have not encountered before; either from judges or my instructors. I've taken two full-semester portraiture courses; one from a retail / studio direction and the second from a "fine art" perspective. Both included working on environmental portraits. The only difference between a regular portrait and an environmental portrait was the setting and how that was integrated into the shot.

There were discussions on what to do with hands and how to deal with them. Usually that meant ensuring that they were not a distracting element and would be downplayed in the pose, lighting and post-processing steps. Sometimes they were an important compositional element; think of a classical shot of someone praying. In that specific case, the hands are sometimes given more presence than the face in the portrait.

With respect to competition judges, clubs will often draw on local portrait and wedding photographers to judge portrait competitions. I personally find that this usually does not work as well is one might hope as the business model of these photographer is usually highly reliant on a standardized formula approach. This is a reality of that business; the formula approach is interwoven with their "look" which is what the consumer base that they are serving are buying into. One former, very successful studio photographer told me that he hadn't changed is set and lighting in over two years at one point.

The problem when working with judges with that background is that they often look at portraits in light of how they would have taken the shot, but outside of that, they have problems with images that don't fit the mould. A three light setup with suitably large modifiers produces a particular quality of light. Try a gritty subject like you have here and they sometimes get lost; gritty subjects and hard lighting don't fit into their way of shooting or even seeing the image.

Bill's point about softness and motion blur is right on. In judging an image like this one, one has to consider whether the blur was accidental or deliberate (hint: you have a better chance of getting a higher score if the judge feels it was deliberate). The second part of what the judge then has to look at is whether or not that adds or detracts from the image.

One image I like throwing out at people when they discuss portraiture is this image that Karsh took on location of the famed cellist Pablo Casals. My understanding is that it the only portrait he ever took from the back, without showing the subject's face. No hands either....





I have been told by some photographers that they don't consider this a portrait. On the other hand, if Karsh did, who are we to argue?

[pschlute]

I have been told by some photographers that they don't consider this a portrait. On the other hand, if Karsh did, who are we to argue?

That image is my favourite portrait by a long way.

[William W]

Continuing -

I found Martin's comment interesting (my underline now for emphasis) - "The "no hands" argument seems, more often than not, to come from Camera Club judges whose expertise lies with taking photographs of subjects other than people and are bound by the competition rules and definitions."

It seems understandable, though perhaps not reasonable that when someone (i.e. a ‘Judge’) is out of their usual area of expertise then they would refer to something in black and white – i.e. ‘the rules’.

I am also speculating that Martin has had some interactions with Camera Club Judges who may have been more interested in 'judging by the Rules' and probably good at expounding 'the Rules' to the entrants and less inclined to view Competition Portraiture on: Artistic Merit, Visual Impact and A Story Told; probably also not so versed in Critique.

My view is, that if a continuum of Architectural, Landscape, Aerial, Scientific, Metallurgical, et al, Photographers are invited to judge Portraiture, then the Camera Club Membership should be pushing the Camera Club Executive to revisit whom they invite as Judges for competitions.

Additionally, in my experience, many Camera Club's "competition rules" often do NOT include "Judging Criteria".

WW

[Manfred M]

Continuing -

I found Martin's comment interesting (my underline now for emphasis) - "The "no hands" argument seems, more often than not, to come from Camera Club judges whose expertise lies with taking photographs of subjects other than people and are bound by the competition rules and definitions."

It seems understandable, though perhaps not reasonable that when someone (i.e. a ‘Judge’) is out of their usual area of expertise then they would refer to something in black and white – i.e. ‘the rules’.

I am also speculating that Martin has had some interactions with Camera Club Judges who may have been more interested in 'judging by the Rules' and probably good at expounding 'the Rules' to the entrants and less inclined to view Competition Portraiture on: Artistic Merit, Visual Impact and A Story Told; probably also not so versed in Critique.

My view is, that if a continuum of Architectural, Landscape, Aerial, Scientific, Metallurgical, et al, Photographers are invited to judge Portraiture, then the Camera Club Membership should be pushing the Camera Club Executive to revisit whom they invite as Judges for competitions.

Additionally, in my experience, many Camera Club's "competition rules" often do NOT include "Judging Criteria".

WW

I suspect that different countries have different competition approaches. In Canada, most clubs operate competitions under the Canadian Association of Photographic Art (CAPA) rules and there is a training and certification process for judges. Judges have to re-certify ever 5 years to maintain their certification.

The CAPA judging approach actively discourages "judging by rules". With a large pool of nationally certified judges (over 100) and remote judging being used for everything other than print competitions, things are not as dire as other places seem to be. Judges are mostly fairly competent and in general the scoring is quite consistent; in general scores tend from all three judges tend to be no more than a point apart most of the time.

That being said, they are still looking at images with a club view. I have images that have been accepted in a curated exhibition in a major gallery that did poorly at club level competitions.

[William W]

^ Indeed, Manfred.

Different countries also have different "Photographic Associations".

In my opinion, here (AUS) is an example of many, which are all vying for supremacy and offering lots of different 'accreditation' and there seems very little cohesion and few parallels of standards across each.

There used to be fewer associations and (for example in 1970~80s) certainly there was weight and acceptance if one were a Member/Licentiate/Associate/Fellow/ of what was then the Institute: this carried over into the workforce, one was certainly well ahead of the pack for getting a position or work, it was similar to a journalist having a Journalist’s Grading – which has also been axed.

I place value of Membership / Fellowship of the Royal Photographic Society above all – both then and now.

I’ll now take a line from Martin’s previous post - Now that I have got that off my chest. *laughs and takes a deep breath*

Anyway, my views maybe do resonate with our Adelaidean friend and maybe he is experiencing tugging from various ‘associations’ or the members thereof.

WW

[Wandjina]

Thank you for the link. I hope my images are now inline