Figured I might post some of the more popular shots I have on Flickr. The ones that have received more than 100 likes. For this first set I think I will just do some of the horizontals.





















Feedback is always appreciated.

[jpzk]

As usual, your work is always professional quality.
Of course, the models also contribute a lot to the images !

Works for me: portraiture done in this way (horizontally) shows more than the actual subject with a touch of nicely rendered background.

[LeRolls]

As usual, your work is always professional quality.
Of course, the models also contribute a lot to the images !

Works for me: portraiture done in this way (horizontally) shows more than the actual subject with a touch of nicely rendered background.

Thank you for the kind words Jacques. I am lucky to have worked with some very lovely and creative ladies these last couple of years so yes I would agree.

[kjphilippona]

You are an amazing photographer and am inspired by you great work!

[Schraubstock]

A portrait is or ought to be where the face or head of a person (can be an animal by extension) predominantly shows an expression or personality reflected in the face. This is a portrait, head and shoulders at the most, in a classic sense. And I think we should stick to it.
As with all established rules there are exceptions (Confucius says: exceptions confirm the rule).

In no way do I want to diminish the worth of your imagery, they are very fine and well executed photographs, I admire your work and enjoy looking at your posts in the most part.

But I am afraid portraits they are not. Full body shots hardly ever will be.

Regards

[clackers]

A portrait is or ought to be where the face or head of a person (can be an animal by extension) predominantly shows an expression or personality reflected in the face. This is a portrait, head and shoulders at the most, in a classic sense. And I think we should stick to it.
As with all established rules there are exceptions (Confucius says: exceptions confirm the rule).

In no way do I want to diminish the worth of your imagery, they are very fine and well executed photographs, I admire your work and enjoy looking at your posts in the most part.

But I am afraid portraits they are not. Full body shots hardly ever will be.

Regards

I'm afraid neither portrait photographers or portrait painters would agree with you, SS.

Passport photos need to be head and shoulders, anything else restricts creativity.

[Schraubstock]

Passport photos need to be head and shoulders

Ah, the old creativity chestnut. As Andy Warhol once said: "Art is what you get away with"
I always thought you would be the first to be contrary and you did not disappoint. You forgot driver license photos. Mine looks like as if it was taken in a morgue. Now I don't know if it is creative or not or just plain incompetence. Most likely the AI robot camera was not trained in portrait photography.

Also please note I said there are exceptions. But exceptions should not become the norm even in the name of creativity. When that happens we better give it a new name by which it can be classified.

I shall leave it with that, there are always people who know more than I do.

"A picture of a person, especially of his face, drawn, painted, photographed, etc. from life." Webster's Dictionary

"A portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation of a person, in which the face and its expression is predominant. The intent is to display the likeness, personality, and even the mood of the person." Wikipedia

[photomax7]

Another match made in heaven... the K1/FA85mm...but it's the creative photographer behind the camera makes the magic happen...well done LeRolls.

[clackers]

Ah, the old creativity chestnut. As Andy Warhol once said: "Art is what you get away with"
I always thought you would be the first to be contrary and you did not disappoint.

I'm glad I didn't disappoint.

The jury of the Archibald don't agree with you either. Like every photo or painting competition rules I've ever seen, there is no cropping requirement of the subject.

In taking photos of people I always do full body (seated and standing), two-thirds/half (seated and standing) and head/shoulders.

Can't imagine why you'd crop Yusuf Karsh's famous portrait of Churchill, the frail but determined hands and posture make it iconic, or Leibovitz's Demi Moore with her baby bulge.

[LeRolls]

You are an amazing photographer and am inspired by you great work!

Thank you for the kind words!

Another match made in heaven... the K1/FA85mm...but it's the creative photographer behind the camera makes the magic happen...well done LeRolls.

Appreciate the compliment and yes the K-1 and the FA 85 make a great combo.

---------- Post added 11-13-17 at 09:52 PM ----------

A portrait is or ought to be where the face or head of a person (can be an animal by extension) predominantly shows an expression or personality reflected in the face. This is a portrait, head and shoulders at the most, in a classic sense. And I think we should stick to it.
As with all established rules there are exceptions (Confucius says: exceptions confirm the rule).

In no way do I want to diminish the worth of your imagery, they are very fine and well executed photographs, I admire your work and enjoy looking at your posts in the most part.

But I am afraid portraits they are not. Full body shots hardly ever will be.

Regards

I thank you for your kind words but I have to agree with Clackers on this one. Was never one to go along with strict definitions especially in the creative/artistic fields but hey what do Clackers and I know we're just portrait photographers after all.

[Schraubstock]

In the classic sense:

Portrait | Definition of Portrait by Merriam-Webster

origin of word portrait - Google Search

portrait | Origin and meaning of portrait by Online Etymology Dictionary

I made a point of this and I do understand, variations are allowed. But, and it is a fundamental but, if the face of the image is not the important feature, in other words if your eyes are not immediately drawn to the face and it is clear the "person" was photographed, sketched, sculptured or painted (or whatever) with the gravity or purpose of the image not being the face then it is not a portrait. No amount of creativity will change this.

Demi Moore with her baby bulge is not a portrait because the interest is not the face. Period. (As they say in the USA)

Cheers

P.S.
The Archibald price for portraiture is not a good example. Creativity more than once has run away with the purpose of the competition. The judges were criticized many times. Among others, some of the submissions where clearly not portraits in the classic sense and it was said so. A number of submissions where clearly caricatures and was pointed out by qualified art critics to the judges but still were allowed to be entered. Good old "creativity" had reared its ugly head again. Go figure.

But I must admit old norms in everything are constantly being eroded in modern times. Perhaps I should start to make adjustments to what I have learned.

[clackers]

Demi Moore with her baby bulge is not a portrait because the interest is not the face.

Clearly, I don't think much of your argument, SS.

It's perhaps just as well you're not a working portrait photographer or a competition judge.

[Schraubstock]

Clearly, I don't think much of your argument, SS.

Why am I not surprised.

LeRolls' Photography is indeed outstanding, and I mean it. But portraiture it is not. Some shots would qualify though !

His style of photography is usually, or used to be, referred to as "Boudoir & Pin-Up Photography" His photography is a much more modern type. Vintage "Boudoir & Pin-Up Photography" looked a bit more, well, vintage. Perhaps in another 50 years they will look vintage as well, who knows.

Clackers, I would have thought a man with your vast experience would have known this. Or perhaps you have not been in photography as long as I have. You might say I am vintage.

Lets just agree to disagree this way we both win.

It's perhaps just as well you're not a working portrait photographer or a competition judge.

How do you know.

[clackers]

Why am I not surprised.

LeRolls' Photography is indeed outstanding, and I mean it. But portraiture it is not. Some shots would qualify though !

Again, this is your imagination, Schraubstock.

Below are the highlights from the 2017 National Photographic Portrait Prize.

2017 – National Photographic Portrait Prize

They are of all crops and aspect ratios. The winner is in fact of *two* people, which must send you dizzy.

The rest of the world seems to get that 'Headshot' is a Venn diagram subset of 'Portrait', not a synonym.

Lets just agree to disagree this way we both win.

Let's do better than that. I'm going to let you have the last word, because all this is disrespectful in a thread that showcases Chris' great work ... he brings a landscaper's fine eye to what you refuse to call portraits.

No one else has responded to you because the situation's like 'that guy' at the party everyone's moved to the other side of the room to get away from. I'm joining them - goodbye.

[Schraubstock]

Mods please close this thread !

Clackers does not understand text book facts and has painted himself into a corner and is now starting to become obnoxious.

Cheers