Beauty Portrait

A couple of weeks ago, I did a test shoot with some friends of mine. The approach for the shoot, despite being in a very familiar environment (my apartment), was different. The portion I had spent most of time my pre-visualizing was the portrait of Kim, the female subject. The aim was a beauty portrait. I do not normally do beauty. Bluntly speaking, for me, photographing female subjects is very difficult, much harder than photographing male subjects. Although some of the challenge can be attributed to a number of items, I think much of it is due to the society and the well defined parameters it has set for what should and should not be seen as "beautiful." It sounds cold, I know. I do believe in the mantra of everyone being beautiful in their own way. But at the same time, no one can fully deny that mainstream media has not shaped our perception of what is attractive to the human eye. Clothes, hair styles, make up, the human body. It's all included in the list. But what is even more interesting is how this affects self-perception. As a result, people, women especially, spend more time criticizing themselves than complimenting. From a photographer's standpoint, these societal pressures create a bit of a challenge. 

Onward...

The second big difference coming into this test shoot was my mental approach. A few months ago, I dove headfirst into the realm of film photography and put myself on digital hiatus, during which I learned two main lessons. The first was being more critical of what was in my frame. I started a "Project 120" on my Facebook page not only to share the images I had captured, but to force myself to post images I had not framed perfectly. The goal was to learn how to frame the hard way, which meant learning through failure and posting those imperfections, not as punishment, but rather as a method of reinforcement. In practice, it simply forced me to be more aware as I shot.

The second lesson I learned was to shoot at a slower pace, which compliments the first. Having to physically wind the film after a shot forces one to recompose and refocus, assuming the camera is hand held and not on a tripod. I lugged along my film camera on my rock climbing trips and asked a few of my buddies to let me take their portraits. They were gracious enough and let me harass them for 3 minutes in front of their peers (thanks guys!). One frame in 3 minutes. Not exactly snapping away. Each portrait had a slower pace than with my DSLR and in a way, it helped the portrait come together because the subject assumed the process would take longer than with digital, thus allowing more time for me to compose and, more importantly, for the subject to relax and simply be themselves.

Fast forward to two weeks ago. I wanted to do a studio-type portrait session again with my digital set up along with my strobes. I wanted to see what impact going on digital LOA had done for me.

Here's the set up I had pre-conceptualized:

Diagram of the set up

Diagram of the set up

The set up was meant for the female subject. The overall feel I wanted was a comfort, "at home" type of beauty portrait. I asked Kim to bring clothes she felt comfortable in and were somewhat revealing but still PG-13. As for the lights, I used a large octabank on my main light and a beauty dish on the back light. The purpose of the backlight was to simulate sunshine coming through the window, which is what my subject's back was against (not shown above). Why not use real sunlight? Well, it was winter time in Seattle. That should be enough to tell you why I could not rely on the sun to make an appearance. But despite (or in spite of) my cruel assumptions, the sun DID show up and it came full force. There wan't a single cloud in the sky. Here's an ambient light shot at f/11, ISO 100 at max sync speed WITH a 2 stop ND filter:

Snapshot of the ambient light at (an effective) f/22, ISO 100.

Snapshot of the ambient light at (an effective) f/22, ISO 100.

I originally planned to shoot at a wider aperture, but quickly realized that wasn't going to happen. The space in my apartment is less than ideal as a portrait studio, but I can make things happen if lights and props are positioned strategically around, almost like cramming one last object into a full closet and then quickly closing the door before it all comes tumbling down. I had set up the lights and rearranged my apartment furnishings to make the shot work at a specific shooting angle. But with the unexpected appearance of the sun, the shot now involved really intense flare that I could not frame out without compromising my composition. 

I decided to turn the negative into a positive and utilized the sun as a third light. I metered my lights in such a way that the sun was now a second kicker. The new orientation for my subject still involved the window but instead of her laying comfortably on the couch, I had her sit up on the window sill. I used a piece of white tulle I had leftover from another shoot to help diffuse the harsh sunlight that was blasting through the window (seen above). It also helped blur out the unsightly building behind her. 

Diagram of final set up

Diagram of final set up

Shooting film changed the way I shot this session. Simply comparing how many frames I took in this session (about 50 including test shots) compared to what I did a year ago (over 200) was pretty revealing. I felt more at ease and spent more time communicating with my subject instead of on the back of my camera. Always a plus. Below is the final shot. It's not going to win awards, but I believe it is a step in the right direction and I think I am finally starting to find my "style" (more on this in a future post). Keep scrolling for more shots.

Kim_Seattle_Portrait_BTS1.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...and a fun behind-the-scenes shot!  

Keep Shooting

Kickin' It with Film Photography

Film isn't dead. It's just the forgotten old guy in the back of the room with a legacy to back him up. Kind of like Clint Eastwood. 

Recently, I decided to venture down the path of film photography and explore what the past had to offer. I have to admit, I really just wanted to shoot medium format, which yields a more detail rich image compared to 35mm cameras. But with the cost of entry into digital medium format being too steep to justify (we are talking about the cost of a new car), I was left with going down the rabbit hole of film photography. I have to say, after shooting it for the past month, I don't mind staying down here for a bit. 

My digital SLRs have given me and everyone else in the world such a powerful platform in which to learn and embrace photography on. We are now able to shoot hundreds of images and instantly receive feedback from the back of the camera. *Click* Bad exposure? No big deal. Readjust and shoot again. Digital cameras are great learning tools and are fantastic workhorses for high volume work. 

As I grew as a photographer, I started to find myself getting lost in all the noise. Which lens should I buy next? What mode should I be on? I think I need more AF points. Should I upgrade to the mark III? What do the MTF charts look like for this lens compared to that one? What lens filter should I use? Should I get the one with the multicoating? Oh goodness. Lens dust! Start searching for cleaners and brushes. The list goes on. 

So what does any of this have to do with film photography? That's the beautiful part of it. Not much. 

For me, moving to film stripped photography down to its bare essentials. Light and composition. No more modes, no more camera body choices, no more lens choices. The gear was no longer a source of anxiety. It was now and always has been, simply, a tool. 

My first medium format film camera was a Yashica Mat 124g. These are beautiful cameras. 

Interestingly, this image is displayed back to front (left is right and right is left), which means composing takes some getting used to. The image from the bottom lens (taking lens) is what is exposed onto the film. Both lens are at a fixed focal length of 80mm (50mm equivalent on 35mm cameras) so there is no zooming to speak of (only "manual" zooming with your feet). Speaking of composing, the 6x6 is a square format and is an entirely different beast compared to the more rectangular format of 35mm. This is a welcomed challenge. 

There are two main differences between the two lens. Firstly, the viewing lens is physically higher on the camera, which means the taken image will differ slightly, although in practice I have not found this to be a real issue. You just have to be mindful of the slight shift in viewing angle. The second difference is that the viewing lens is at a fixed aperture of f/2.8 whereas the taking lens has a max aperture is f/3.5, but can be stopped down to f/32. This can be misleading in a way, but forces you to learn that "x" aperture at "y" distance will yield a specific look. 

As with all film cameras with fixed focal lengths, the photographer is given three options for taking their photograph: ISO (film speed), shutter speed, and aperture. In reality, once you have chosen your film speed, you only have two adjustments at your disposal until the roll of film is used up...all 12 exposures for 120 film (yeah, don't mess it up). The settings in the photo below are 1/8sec and f/5.6. 

Overhead view showing the shutter speed and aperture.

And of course, since their is no handy LCD on the back, there is no instant feedback and no second chance, assuming you're trying to catch a specific moment. You have to nail it. You have to know your exposure triangle. You have to compose correctly. If you don't, the camera will force you to learn quickly. But don't look at these differences between film and digital as limitations. Look at them as challenges and opportunities to grow. 

In the end, the question of "film versus digital" still and always will remain, at least until Kodak, Fujifilm, Ilford and the other film manufacturers stop producing film. This will be a sad day. From a hobbyist's standpoint, my answer is of course another question. Why not? Digital photography has only been around for a relatively short period of time and film carries such a strong and rich history. Why not explore it? If you are serious about photography, you owe it to yourself to shoot film and understand where all the terms and concepts of digital photography are rooted. 

Film for me means simplicity. It's the bare essentials. It's the heartbeat among all the noise. For those fellow photographers reading this, I challenge you to do the same for yourself. Ignore the noise. Find your beat.

Keep shooting.

Seattle street shot with the Yashica Mat 124G.