What is a portrait?

[billtils]

My local camera club is stuck in a seemingly never-ending debate on the definition of "Portrait". The Scottish Photographic Federation, which coordinates events for clubs in Scotland, has no formal definition in spite of all its national competitions having an award in the category (they have accepted dogs and horses and sheep in addition to humans ...).

Our committee is trying to resolve matters before the start of the new season and I'd appreciate any formal or informal feedback.


Thanks


Bill

[DanK]

I'll be interested to see what people suggest. Colloquially, people often use "portrait" to refer to staged, studio shots or environmental portraits, but that seems arbitrary to me, as one can have interesting candids of people that still have a person as the main focus.

Personally, I think the only important thing is that the guidelines for events or competitions be clear to all involved. For example, I will probably enter a contest being run this fall by the state chapter of the Audubon Society. Plants are one category. However, their particular definition is:

"We’re looking for shots of wild, non-invasive flowers, plants, and fungi found in Massachusetts"

and they note:

"Images submitted must not be obtained by harassment or disturbance of wildlife, damage to the environment or wildlife by the photographer..."

I think this will rule out most of my flower photos, which are mostly taken of cut flowers in the studio. In some other competitions, these have been fine.

[Manfred M]

I'm currently in a Portraiture Mentorship program at the local photography school and this is one question that we dealt with on day one. As you have discovered the definition is not cut and dry, even if you exclude animals (and yes, that is legal, although many competitions specifically exclude anything other than humans).

In general, shots of a person or a group of people can be considered a portrait as long as they are the primary subject in the image. Generally there are worlds around the image to be careful and considered (i.e some random street shot with people in it will not be a portrait), however a subject (or subjects) who has been well lit and framed would be considered portraits. The same applies to sports or event photography.

Parts of people; not just the heads can also be considered portraits. I've seen a series which was nothing more than hands work very well. Closeups of the eye have also been used. I have seen some body sculptures (nudes) without heads accepted in competitions. I saw a series where someone followed a dying person and include the remains in the set also viewed as a portrait (there is a lot of historical precedence here; family portraits including the recently departed (often with eyes painted onto the eye lids) were often taken before the funeral).

I have seen a lot of creative edits entered as portraits, even some fairly abstract ones where the outline of the subject was the main connection to the person not only accepted, but also do well in competitions. in fact, I am seriously considering using one of my photocomposites that I recently posted here as an entry to an upcoming portraiture competition:

Self Portrait - Photocomposite

Bill from an approach, could I suggest looking at an exclusionary approach to defining the topic. Tell people what will not be accepted (much along Dan's cut flowers example). I suspect the endless debate on this will be ongoing. This is the definition my club uses for its annual Faces & Figures competition:

Topic Description

A photographic portrait which is a representation of a living person, especially the face, or a photograph in which the subject, the human body, is the primary interest.

Entries are limited to posed photographs of one or more human beings. The backgrounds may include statues or paintings of people provided that these are not the primary subject. Pet and animal portraits are excluded. There are no restrictions on location (indoors or outdoors) nor on lighting (ambient or artificial), however both must be considered and controlled.

[billtils]

I wonder how many bodies would be prepared to disqualify the July competition winner from their "Portrait" competitions ... I certainly would not.

[Manfred M]

I wonder how many bodies would be prepared to disqualify the July competition winner from their "Portrait" competitions ... I certainly would not.

Looks like a portrait to me too Bill. I'm not sure what else it could be.

[rpcrowe]

The term "portrait" is exceptionally broad. Most definitions agree that the term portrait includes an image of some type; a photo, a drawing, a painting, etc.. This is how it is understood in the photo world.
Many definitions state that a portrait is a image of a human, most often head and shoulders.
HOWEVER: The term "Portrait" can be much broader than this. It doesn't necessarily even need to be an image. I read a review of the book, "Drums Along the Mohawk" which described the book as a "Portrait of life in upper New York State during the Revolutionary War".
So instead of beating a dead dog, I might offer this solution: When using the term "portrait", especially in connection with some type of contest, that term should be amplified with certain criteria such as: "head and shoulders image of a human" or "image of a pet in which the pet is the primary focus of the image" etc., etc....