[Closed] My photography competition entry - Portrait of Britain

Time to die.

Time to die.

Everyone's a critic.

Everyone's a critic.

No he's a Blade Runner

Fantastic stuff, Geetee. 🙂

Some lovely pics. I really admire the honesty in your written pieces; I don't think I could be that open to the 'world'. And I think that your own struggle comes across in the images, as if the subjects are a conduit for your own feelings. They are all somehow a bit 'unsettling'; you can see that the subjects each have their own dark story to tell, even without the text. You have a clear talent for capturing what you see in people, and many photographers, myself included, could learn from you.

Which is why I'm a bit surprised, annoyed even, that this thread hasn't attracted more attention. If people could tear themselves away from the arguing threads more often, and look at the creativity of others on this forum once in a while, they might benefit themselves. 😡

I'm really getting into portraiture, as it was something I discovered I had a knack for many years ago. Took just the 50mm lens to a friend's party this weekend, to take some people pics, and was really pleased with the results. I was using a manual focus lens (Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AIS), which is super sharp, but as the evening wore on and the light went, became increasingly difficult to focus. In the end I was reduced to shooting at 6400 ISO at 1/30" f4 or lower, and some of the focussing is a bit off here and there, but I found it a great exercise as it made me concentrate on the technical aspects a bit more, as I can get a bit lazy. I've become a bit reliant on using zooms lately, and need to get back to basics more.

I notice that many of your portraits are shot using an 85mm lens. I have one on my shopping list. 😉

There's something about 'Brooke' that reminds me of the cover of Dinosaur Jr's "Green Mind."

Great work.

waaaah... why can't I see the full descriptions?

I think I've said before that I find your insights and speculations a fascinating part of your work

Some great shots in that collection, thanks for posting. I especially like 'Graeme' though I'm not entirely sure why. As others have posted the words really do enhance the images (and for me certainly make me re-evaluate the image in the context of those words).

I keep [s]reading[/s] viewing threads like this and end up thinking I need to get out more with my camera. There is so much art in the seemingly mundane if you just look for it.

This should be a strong entry for "A Portrait of Britain"

[img] [/img]

Some nice images, but whats with the essay along side. A good image should stand on its own and not need a narrative providing to explain it.

I notice that many of your portraits are shot using an 85mm lens. I have one on my shopping list.

If you are on a cropped sensor you are shooting a similar angle with a 50mm that geetee is with a full frame.

If you are already on a fullframe I'll just sit quietly in the corner again.

Top pics as always geetee!

Great stuff

In no way a photographer myself, but love images and you've captured some great ones... like the balloons in the bin

And like clodhopper has said, always good to see STW's creative side.

Thankyou all for the positive comments. Greatly appreciated.

Chrismac - you make a reasonable comments regarding the commentary and whether a strong image needs one. I think that this principle applies very much to documentary photography and celebrity portraiture, where we as observers already know something about the subject. A good portrait of an unfamiliar subject will also carry itself as such but it's part of my style to want to also tell the story in words as well as pictures. I enjoy that aspect of it and I also did it very therapeutic. As I (hopefully) get better I will perhaps need to write less or even nothing at all but for the moment I'm not good enough for my pictures to stand just on their own.

I think your pictures have a great quality to them, however they say little to me personally as I don't see that such staged portraits capture the personality. My favourite though was Graeme, perhaps as you suggested he has an impairment and so he seemed much less conscious of the camera.

Good luck, none the less.

I think they're great. Its always good for someone to to take an interest in their environment and the folks that inhabit it.

Best of luck.

Really superb portraits. Good luck with the competition.

I agree with the commentary comment - let the images stand on their own.

"A good image should stand on its own and not need a narrative providing to explain it."

I think most of us would agree. But in certain contexts, words can compliment images. I think the pictures do stand up by themselves, but I would say that I think it's a 'work in progress' rather than the finished article, and that Geetee should carry on with it, as it can only get better and better.

"If you are already on a fullframe I'll just sit quietly in the corner again."

😀 Want a cushion?

[i]Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon
Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Plannar T*
Leica Summarit 75mm
Zeiss 85mm Plannar 1.4ZA T*[/i]

Not a smartphone in sight. 😉

A couple of more lenses have found their way onto my shopping list. I'm trying to wean myself off the zooms; they're ok if you don't have a set plan of what you want to shoot (great for travelling etc), but the recent results from the 50mm show just how much more capable good primes are, especially in low light, and really I'm sacrificing ultimate quality for convenience, which isn't good for discipline. Thinking of getting a cheap s/h 85mm f1.8 to see how I like the lens compared to a 105 or 135mm, before taking the plunge and investing in an expensive piece of equipment. Nothing worse than having stuff you never use.

I think the pictures do stand up by themselves, but I would say that I think it's a 'work in progress' rather than the finished article

You're very kind to say this and it is very much a work in progress. Funnily enough you're not the first person to say (almost) exactly that. A very good friend of mine, who is also an accomplished and published fine art photographer said 'It's where you're at right now' in response to my own question as to whether the captions were unnecessary.

Not a smartphone in sight.

Rather embarrasingly you even missed one off. The 85mm G Master 😯 although it fairness it has replaced the Zeiss 85mm Plannar as it's a native lens and is significantly better on the A7rII than the Ziess was.

The Summarit is also in a new home and was second hand when I got it. I tend to treat buying lenses like lens rentals only on a prolonged basis. Buy them second hand at a smart price and sell them with very little cost in between. Any net difference is either the rental cost or profit.

Honestly I've tried using my iPhone to take pictures and it's shite, at least from usability perspective. I've seen some pretty niffty results from them but I hate actually using it.

Thinking of getting a cheap s/h 85mm f1.8 to see how I like the lens

What camera body do you have?

I'm using a Nikon FX (D610). Fantastic camera. Came from using Nikon SLRs; F3, FM2, F5 etc. Used to be a vehement acolyte of film over digital, but nothing, nothing ever came close to producing results that this camera can. I don't even think I've even seen anything like it's real potential yet. But the pics with the 50mm showed what can be produced even in very poor light, so some fast primes are on the list. I do think of getting an AF 50mm, but the version I have is one of the sharpest Nikkor lenses ever made, so I'll definitely be hanging onto it!

Thinking about an 85mm as the 105/135 can feel a little long at times/in tight spaces. The current Nikkor 85mm f1.4 gets very good reviews, but is bloody expensive new, and not many s/h ones about yet. The Zeiss ones are also very expensive, and manual focus only I think? Not sure if they would work electronically with flash either.

Definitely considering a 180mm f2,8, as it's reputedly a very, very good lens. The 200mm f2 is massive and costs a silly amount.

"Honestly I've tried using my iPhone to take pictures and it's shite, at least from usability perspective."

The smartphone pics thread showed some excellent pics, but on closer examination of the jpegs on people's flickr etc accounts, revealed the weaknesses compared to DSLR images. Lots of jpeg compression and no RAW file to play with.

The Zeiss ones are also very expensive, and manual focus only I think? Not sure if they would work electronically with flash either.

The Zeiss lenses are all manual focus for both Canon and Nikon. Neither company will give Zeiss permission to develop an AF lens; the AF system is licensed to third parties which is how they control it. The fact that they allow Sigma and Tamron a license to build AF lenses suggests that the reason for excluding Zeiss is the fear that it would result in sales of their own expensive glass being canabalised.

I can't begin to imagine how hard it must be to manually focus say an 85mm f/1.4 Otus without the aids that mirrorless cameras offer through the EVF with focus peaking, but I can't see any reason why you would not be able to use the Zeiss with a strobe. The camera's TTL would still work just fine.

But all the said, Sigma's 85mm HSM AF lens for both canon and nikon is so good it's been cited as the reason why Sigma have delayed bringing an 'Art' version to market for so long. It was not seen as necessary.

You can pick up a new Sigma 85mm f/1.4 HSM for half what a Nikon 85mm G f/1.4 costs.

Ah, that explains why you can't get AF Zeiss F-Mount lenses! Shame.

Would always prefer Nikon over Sigma or Tamron etc, would always consider a Zeiss if they did AF! Found build quality on 3rd party lenses to be inferior to Nikon in the past, don't know if they are closer now that Nikon have followed Canon by making more plastic bodied lenses. Love the fact that some of my MF Nikkors are well over 30 year old, have been used countless times and still work perfectly with a lovely smooth focussing action. A Sigma AF lens I had for a much shorter period more or less fell apart. And wasn't great optically. You tend not to see very many older Sigma, Tamron, Tokina lenses in the s/h market because they simply weren't built to the same quality as Nikkors, Canons and Pentax etc lenses.

It might be that the build on Sigma's lenses is less robust but the Art series of lenses typically have market leading scores for things like sharpness, contrast, distortion, CA etc. I don't use them myself as they don't make anything native for FF E-Mount but by all accounts the Art series lenses are easily better than the Nikon and Canon equivalents in terms of IQ.

And they have recently announced an 85mm Art lens. If you really wanted a Nikon G lens but didn't want to spend that much you should look at the Art range. You can rent one for about £30 a day.

[b]clodhopper[/b] I recently bought the Samyang 85mm f/1.4. On my A7II it's a fully manual lens, but the Nikon version has electronic aperture control and therefore TTL functionality. It's £250. I like mine 🙂

http://www.samyang-lens.co.uk/samyang-85mm-f14-as-if-umc-nikon-ae.html

Some photos here from it: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gingerfox/albums/72157669128225505

Sorry with the risk of being flamed I don't like them.

They are all too staged, as in you can see the photographer has asked for the scowl or a certain look.

IMO the best portrait photos, the face tells a natural story, these are just too staged for me

They're posed but they are definitely not staged. The things are different. Not that I think this should change your mind. I respect your view. But you're suggesting I've asked the person to look like that and I absolutely have not. The way they look is the way they felt comfortable or was the result of the dialogue and in the interaction. The emotion being reflected is real not acted. To me that is terribly important and knowing them as I do, I know it reflects their story.

Of course I would feel happier if you did like them, but it's unrealistic to expect that everyone will.

Those pics look great Kit. Very sharp. I think I'd look for a s/h MF Nikkor 85mm f1.4 if I wanted a MF lens though, but thanks for the suggestion.

"And they have recently announced an 85mm Art lens."

I'll have to have a look at that, when/if it comes out. Renting sounds like a good idea to try a selection of lenses.

"They are all too staged"

I don't get that feeling. Certainly for Geetee's other street portraits, I think it would be pretty difficult, even impossible to get people to pose deliberately in the way they appear. So no, I disagree. From my own experience, I'd say that they are probably faithful captures of those individuals, and not at all 'staged'.

Geetee; I must say that I've actually found your work quite inspiring, for me to go out and do more portraiture myself. I have a very different personal style, and prefer a more 'natural' or candid approach, but I definitely want to do more portraits. I think I've reached a level where I'm more confident to ask people I know, certainly, to pose for me, and know a number of great potential subjects. There's at least two from the weekend I'd love to photograph again; they were all interesting individual characters, with faces that have a lot to tell.

I was talking to someone earlier, and mentioned looking at your work. We discussed how a photographer's own personality/character can somehow be channeled through another person, and how it's down to the photographer's skill and talent to portray this. What do you think about this?

Half of them look monstrously depressed, as if they are living in the USSR.

Brooke is Christina’s granddaughter (also represented in this submission). She represents the experiences of our children, the weight of expectation we place on them and the pressure they feel to grow up and the struggle in making that transition from being a child to being a teenager.

Meanwhile, in the Philippines

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Call me old fashioned or a massive arsehole, but if my kids ever feel "pressure" and look that mopey - they will be carted off to some third world shitheap for the summer holidays.

I've liked a lot of your stuff Geetee - and to be fair some of those photos. There are just a few that hit me like someone scraping a blackboard with their nails.

There are just a few that hit me like someone scraping a blackboard with their nails.

Well I'm an amateur and fairly new to this so that's probably not just your imagination. Probably some of them are hackneyed and in poor taste. I will take that as helpful commentary - sincerely I do because the most important thing to me is authenticity and honesty and if I thought for one minute that I was compromising that I'd never take another portrait again. I know you're not being an arse; just critical but that's important and I do value your opinion.

Call me old fashioned or a massive arsehole, but if my kids ever feel "pressure" and look that mopey - they will be carted off to some third world shitheap for the summer holidays.

This is also genuinely interesting comment and worthy of more debate. That debate is less about the photograph and more about life but it's good to be talking about it.

I'm sure you don't really mean what you say, even though I think you do mean the sentiment behind it and as a father also I can understand that. I'm sure that if you do have kids, if at the age of 12 they ended up being that mopey, probably your first reaction will be to sympathetically try and find out why. If the answer ends up being 'because all my friends get more money and more things than I do', then the trip to the third world shitheap would probably help a lot.

If on the other hand they said it was becuase they were being continuously bullied at school both by the pupils and the teachers, and that they were genuinely and abjectly miserable as a result, you'd probably react differently.

You don't know what's going on with any of the subjects I've presented other than what I've alluded to in the captions. I don't know full extent either but I know enough about them to feel comfortable defending all the individuals in them.

Of course Geetee, I'd pull them from school immediately. I just get flashbacks of horrible scenes sometimes, I guess. If I have a crap day I remember some skinny street kid with no shoes begging for money and suddenly I don't care anymore.

I think I'm just as asshole, but seeing people living in utter abject poverty just made me dislike the working classes in the uk. I shouldn't, I know it's wrong - but I do. Especially when I see them moaning about something on TV using worse English than one of those street kids.

I guess that is a major prejudice of mine....I think I just left my heart somewhere in the Phils. I'll stop now and leave the thread for the discussion of photography.

Brooke is Christina’s granddaughter (also represented in this submission). She represents the experiences of our children, the weight of expectation we place on them and the pressure they feel to grow up and the struggle in making that transition from being a child to being a teenager.

Is that the spiel that comes with the images? Do they really need the guff to support them? It's actually offensive to the viewer having a dissertation to read before you look at images. Photographs have a visual language that means you shouldn't need handholding. (In my humble opinion)

The shot of your father is such a vibrant image and has so much to offer in the way of stimulating the curiosity, even without the back story. Otherwise, I'm afraid I find the portraits rather empty. The subjects have an air of awareness of the camera/photographer, which sucks the life out of any potential (visual) narrative, and they may as well be shot in a studio, so staged and still do they feel. If they weren't expressed with such out of the ordinary lenses, they would really just be rather ordinary photographs. Street photography usually works best when the camera is invisible and the subject is acting unconsciously; portraits and head shots need things like context from the environment, and/or dress, and to have the eyes at least suggest a story rather than staring self-consciously or indignantly at the lens, although, ironically, that's one of the things that gives the great shot of your father much of its energy. One thing I've found interviewing people for documentary film is that, although you need the camera/recorder to make them aware of themselves, you also either need them to then forget that it's there, or to be glad that it is.

I also agree with Mr Smith in regards to the visual language of photography and think that you'd really add to your repertoire if you focused on developing that in your images. If you're looking for a portrait to generalise Britain, then maybe look for something more average, more mundane, more accessible.

Crikey everyone's an expert. Good portraits, good luck with the compo.

Otherwise, I'm afraid I find the portraits rather empty.

It's taken me a few hours to get comfortable acknowledging this but honestly and sincerely thankyou for being honest. It stings a little, but I can learn from it and on reflection, looking back at the set, I see your point somewhat. I don't think I agree 100% but I agree enough for that to have given me insight.

Thanks again.

I knew it would be uncomfortable for you; I took no pleasure from saying it. I'm no expert - never claimed to be - but I do have a good twenty years experience trying to capture and frame the abstract in a composition. I've a lot of respect for you for undertaking the challenge of still photography portraiture - I myself opted for a slightly different route of video/audio for this realm of human study - and it's been interesting to read your thought process as you've worked things out over the last year or so. I'm glad you took my criticism constructively, as it was intended. I figure we only really learn such a tiny amount from endless platitudes, eh?

"Do they really need the guff to support them? It's actually offensive to the viewer having a dissertation to read before you look at images. "

But it's a few lines, not a 'dissertation'. And it's the artist's choice whether or not to have accompanying text. Personally, I didn't read most of it and found the pictures did speak for themselves.I wasn't 'offended' because there was some text alongside.

"Otherwise, I'm afraid I find the portraits rather empty. The subjects have an air of awareness of the camera/photographer, which sucks the life out of any potential (visual) narrative, and they may as well be shot in a studio, so staged and still do they feel. If they weren't expressed with such out of the ordinary lenses, they would really just be rather ordinary photographs."

I disagree. I'm not a fan of the approach Geetee uses, but it's very obvious he has a knack of being able to engage with his subjects, to get the pictures he wants. Bear in mind most are absolute strangers to him, yet he has managed to engage and communicate sufficiently with them, to be able to take some excellent pictures.

So; just ordered a s/h Nikkor 85mm f1.8D, at a very good price. 🙂 Will have a play and see if I like the 85mm focal length for portraits. I'm now considering the 180mm f2.8 as a longer portrait lens, as it's reputedly optically extremely good, and better than a zoom. A lot cheaper too!

There is a similar lens in the Sony firmament - the Zeiss 135mm f/1.8, which because it is A-Mount can be had for about a third of the original asking price on eBay (and they all tend to be in as new condition as well).

135mm is very long though for anything other than head shots. It puts you way back from your subject, which if you're outdoor makes it difficult to continue talking to them.

Had my 85mm a few days now. Only done a few shots so far, but already I'm very impressed. 😀 The lens is actually in excellent condition; perfectly clean optics, insignificant wear to the lens mount, and very little signs of use. Absolute bargain for £200. Results so far show that the sharpness is just amazing, and the DoF wide open at 85mm is a lot easier to work with than longer lenses. The relatively short length means it's an easy lens to work with, compared to say a 135mm or longer. Focussing is also very fast as a result, and it doesn't hunt like smaller aperture lenses. So far so good.

Been looking at the Nikkor 135mm f2 DC. I have an older MF 135, so the DC lens looks very appealing.

Next challenge is to do some portraits with my old MF 24mm lens. Obviously not a classic portrait lens, but I'm planning to do a set of environmental portraits, so it could be used to produce some interesting result. Huge DoF, focussing not nearly as critical, and the distortion can be used to good effect if used carefully.

Having a look through a page or two of them I notice that they are all either square on facing the camera, or 30 degrees on but looking at the camera in all cases. A quick shufty at Jane Bown's portraits shows a greater variety of angles, but particularly that far from all are looking at the camera.

Some nice shots there - the one I liked best was the child peeping over the church pew.

Agreed with the comments about the need for more narrative. Would it help if you allowed your subjects to have a prop? Even a glass of beer or a ciggy or a toy can help them to forget the camera and lapse into a more natural pose.

a quick shufty also reveals she mostly shot in black and white.

i’m not sure how comparing one photographer with another brings anything to the party? it’s almost as if photographers should be working towards a homogenous body of work with a constant reference to the past. 😕

i’m not sure how comparing one photographer with another brings anything to the party? it’s almost as if photographers should be working towards a homogenous body of work with a constant reference to the past.

I looked at geetee's photos and noticed that there were a lot with the same (homogenous!) "look" - square on, almost staring at the camera - and then looked at the photos of a well-known portrait photographer to see how she varied the portraits. I would have chosen a photographer from the future but couldn't find one.

I would have chosen a photographer from the future but couldn't find one.

😀

Thanks for the constructive suggestions. They are indeed helpful and the comment about having a prop is particularly true. I often try to find something but I might start taking things with my for when there isn't something available.

...but I might start taking things with my for when there isn't something available.

Are you telling the story of the person you portray, or are you using them to portray a story you want to tell?

Are you telling the story of the person you portray, or are you using them to portray a story you want to tell?

They are impossible to separate.

I would beg to differ.

If you are the one taking the picture you are part of the creative process. You're very presence changes the outcome; you influence the subject and it's your decision when to press the shutter and which picture to present. You can try to minimise your influence on the image but since you cannot do that in the absence of conscious thought you as the photographer will always have an input on the final image.

In order for me to not to have at least part of my story in the picture, I would have to make the picture in the absence of conscious thought. Clearly that is impossible.

"Conscious thought" doesn't even scratch the surface of what is going on, let alone make a distinction between the two parts of my question. They may well, for the sake of argument, be inseparable at the moment you release the shutter; but either side of that action they can be infinitely scrutinized as independent ideas. It's not simply a matter of influence - on the subject or the image, though even those are deeply distinct and interesting subjects - but a matter of motive and intent, and even what is informing your unconscious actions. And of course the photographer will always have an input - direct, indirect, concrete, abstract, or otherwise; but that wasn't exactly my question.

i find myself instinctively agreeing with everything you've written in that last post so I'm not sure on what, or why, we disagree. Perhaps we don't.

I think perhaps a better answer from me, to your original question, is 'both'. I'm telling both stories. I'm actually quite explicit about that.

I'd even go as far as to say that what I am actually doing is exploring (and thus telling) my own story through other people.

I think I would even go further than that and suggest that this is all an artist can ever do.

"I looked at geetee's photos and noticed that there were a lot with the same (homogenous!) "look" - square on, almost staring at the camera - and then looked at the photos of a well-known portrait photographer to see how she varied the portraits. "

Artistic convention often dictates that we should follow certain 'rules' when taking particular types of photos, such as portraits. Sometimes, breaking those rules actually helps achieve an aim a lot better than 'obeying' them. I find the classic 3/4 pose really quite boring personally. Look at the difference between a 'nice' school photo and a police mugshot. The 3/4 shot is all about the 'glance', deemed to be more flattering, less arrogant maybe, on the part of the sitter. Wealthy patrons of portrait painters didn't want to appear so vain, and perhaps artists considered the full frontal look to be more intimidating to the viewer, so a less direct approach was favoured. Compare Ingres' portrait of Napoleon to Vermeer's 'The Girl with a Pearl Earring'. Geetee seems to have gone with the square on style for a reason; maybe to provoke a less sympathetic reaction in order to have more impact? Whatever, it's his choice. Because he's the one telling the story.

Not everyone's cup of tea Im sure, but I found these images rather striking and disturbing; not so much fo the content, but they way they've been planned and executed.

http://www.mariasvarbova.com/index.php?article=gallery&id=25

[img] [/img]

The 'straight on' composition is quite deliberate. I want to force the viewer to look more directly, to see the person in front of them more deliberately. It's less about intimidation and more about being direct and engaged with the 'person' rather than with the 'portrait'.

I dunno, sometimes I write this stuff and think I'm just being a pretentious ****er and I'd be better off giving up and just going back to being boring.

The swimming pool set I've seen before, I think on Lens Culture. The images are very interesting but I think they are less about the people in them and more about the colouring, lighting and overall mood. It's almost as if the people are only there as props to introduce colour.

I love the colouring though. It's a look I've been trying to understand and replicate.

"I dunno, sometimes I write this stuff and think I'm just being a pretentious **** and I'd be better off giving up and just going back to being boring."

I think you should stop trying to justify your approach to others, and instead concentrate on what makes your pictures 'work'. Which images stand out above others? Why? What techniques/circumstances allow that to happen?

I'm currently going through a lot of my early work, and selecting images for a website. There's a particular style in my earliest stuff, and often a disregard for traditional 'rules' of photography, yet those images are very strong. So I'm finding it helpful to reinvestigate what made those images work so well. I think as I've got older, I've tried to 'discipline' myself in terms of those traditions, and ended up with images that are too conservative and not 'me' enough. I think I need to rediscover that rebellious youth. 🙂

Resurrecting this in an attempt at getting myself away from the pointless political threads (a bit like hard drugs; you know it's bad for you but you just can't help yourself 😳 ).

Been playing with the 85mm, and have to say I'm in love with it! It's such a brilliant lens. Seems a lot more versatile than my 135mm, and the shorter length allows for slightly slower shutter speeds, which is a bonus in low light. It's so good, I'm leaving the zoom at home more often. Zooms are great when you need one general purpose lens, but I'm rediscovering the beauty of primes. The 85mm is making me want to do more portraits, so that's only a good thing. 🙂