Standards In Shooting Models????

[ErikJonas]

A long time pro photographer whos published,shot fashion in Paris,New York and so on and has much to his credit.Shot for Eddie Bauer when Eddie Bauer had just one store so a life time of shooting to back up what he says....He told me that as a rule models hands and feet are ALWAYS to be fully in frame or fully out of frame...A hand or foot partailly in frame is not acceptable at all for a MODEL portfolio image....

Now..Another pro told me thats BS...He said thats old school catalog shots thats in referance to.

Myself i think it looks sloppy to have a hand or foot partially in frame.But is that the standard.Or is it more old school catalog type shooting?

Another one was you never crop just below a joint.

Like with a Fine Art image there are certain things that make it a Fine Art image...Case in point...I shot this sail boat,it was at night and was lit..Anyway I so wanted it to be a Fine Art shot but looking at it i knew it was'nt.So when i was at the office of Lens Work magazine I asked Maureen Gallagher saying that i wanted it to be a Fine Art shot but felt it was not.She confirmed no it was not and told me why....And what was applicable was that there are certain things that make a Fine Art image just that....The same is with a model shot,model portfolio shot theres certain things that make it such....

So...could i get a show of hands or partially cropped hands as the case maybe as to if its acceptable or not to have a partially in frame,partially out...?????

just like another is hands are always to be flat,not curled,generally on the side of the thigh which creates a slimmer profile of the hand.

I dont know how many shooters here are published and or make a living off of fashion or model type images.This is who would have the best information.....As well rules are rules and som can get away with breaking those rules...

 

[Daniel Buck]

there aren't "rules" in photography, as far as I'm concerned. People have different styles, and expectations of their own (and other peoples) photography, but those are personal preferences in my book. Some folks are more riged, others are more open to "off the wall" ideas.

But that said, one thing I like to do when shooting cars, is to make sure that if I have a wheel/headlight/whatever in frame, that it's not cut off if I'm doing a close up shot. There are times when I'll break my "rule" of doing this, but generally my style is to avoid cutting major features with the frame.

If there were hard fast rules, photography would not be an art, and everyone's photos would look the same. Don't listen to the "rules" others try to impose on you, unless you are trying to emulate their style, or you have specific requirements for a shoot.

That's my thoughts on it. YMMV

 

[Kathy Rappaport]

@Erik

Erik:

You are correct. For fashion usage, it is inappropriate to cut off limbs exactly as you state. That is the general rule of good fashion photography. It is a rule that I mostly adhere to in any work that I do. I learned that from Douglas Kirkland - one of the Canon Explorers of Light. (www.dougladkirkland.com). I took his workshop locally when I was interested in seeing about Fashion shooting and studio lighting.

If I am shooting a fluid event, there are times when it is not always 100% possible to do that from a journalistic standpoint and I might use the image for a wedding album or news article.

For art - I would take it case by case , but mostly I would follow as much of the fashion rule. It makes for a better quality composition.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

there aren't "rules" in photography, as far as I'm concerned.

I beg to differ.

There are 'rules', e.g. if you want to clearly show your subject of main attention, focus and expose well enough to to see it. But the sensation one is trying to convey may benefit from breaking the 'rule'. However, it still requires knowing/understanding the essence of the 'rule' to be able to break it effectively ...

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Rules? Rules for what?

There's always an audience and a context.

Cut, squeeze remove, replace for one picture, in one photographers hands will get lines outside MOMA and in other hands a blank look and walk past.

A model can be shot anyway you choose that fits your end use. Still, expectations are very important. Do you want an immediate reaction from people, you want to challenge them? Can you afford to take a risk with this subject/client?

there aren't "rules" in photography, as far as I'm concerned.

That seems self-evident!

I beg to differ.

There are 'rules', e.g. if you want to clearly show your subject of main attention, focus and expose well enough to to see it. But the sensation one is trying to convey may benefit from breaking the 'rule'. However, it still requires knowing/understanding the essence of the 'rule' to be able to break it effectively

That too!


So how do we then approach photography? Likely I shoot more young adults than most folk here. I shoot in 3 stages; classic formal poses, as they are themselves and then doing as I direct pushing boundaries and breaking any rule I can find. Each picture then has value for different uses but the most successful in print are the ones taken based on creative impulse.

Well then, let's look at the work of Daniel and Bart, both accomplished photographers who not only know their craft, but each, with no reference to anyone else's work but their own, could write a book on executing the photographic idea.

First Daniel; he has earned his bread at the cutting edge of commercial photography. Likely he has to both satisfy expectations of his clients and yet push the limitations of such expectations to allow even more creative expression into his work.

Bart, like Daniel, as photographer is not only artistic but also a master of modern lens technology and software to not be limited much to making pictures. His pictures here exploit optical, software and psycho-perceptive knowledge to deliver images of beauty, but no doubt, his work is broader than that. If anyone wants to follow this path, then obeying the rules and skill will take the photographer very far towards delivering a beautiful photograph expressing the feeling you intend. Even adding passion, skill, insight, creativity and opportunity, the photograph may excel. (However that's no guaranty of fame or fortune.)

The person wanting to get an immediate, straightforward response from people, at the very least, needs to get the observer to connect to what we are "talking about". As Ken Tanaka often points out, photography can have the properties of a language too. Without allocating attention and clarity as to what's significant, (and then how this relates to everything else), we may just have a flat snap without much to even obtain our attention, never mind get our interest.

So Daniel's work is always based on a platform of skilled image presentation and elements of a language that has been built up in the industries' clients he serves. So he can break rules because he knows the limits which he can push things around to get effect.

For most of us, Bart's rigorous direction is worth taking to heart. First beauty and form, then whatever you like however made as long as it can carry your intent and works for you and your audience. However, I have the right to just keep on walking.

Asher