> .>Maybe you gave yourselves too much time with only one > > situation. Once you've exploited it there's no point in continuing. > > > Thanks, Bob! And yes, that's good advice. Big Cheers, Christine >
Some of the best portrait photographs take very few frames of their subjects. I personally like quite candid portraits. I don't like lights and studio set-ups. Cartier-Bresson was one of the great portraitists and he said that if he didn't get the picture straight away he knew he would be unlikely to get it. Apparently his portrait of the Joliot-Curies was like that: "I rang the bell, the door opened, I shot, I then said good morning. It wasn't very polite." http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/26/arts/design/26cart.html Jane Bown similarly, although she often works with an interviewer, so it is not her and the subject one-to-one. She says in the book Unknown Bown "I rarely expose more than two rolls of film, more than that is usually a sign that things are not going well. Sometimes I can see the picture immediately and then the first exposure is often the jackpot one. Other times [...] it's often the last one". She also tends to use just one or 2 lenses (50mm and 85mm) and usually shoots at 1/60th at f/2.8, making everything else work round that. http://arts.guardian.co.uk/flash/page/0,,2176315,00.html Incidentally Unknown Bown is an excellent book of pictures she took while she was an amateur, still learning photography, and done with a Rolleiflex TLR. Her 2nd camera was a Pentax. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
