Ch. 64: Ballet Portraits

rutt

I just looked at the challenge topic, and as it happens, I've been hard at work on a project that might be relevant. Any thoughts about the following:

#1

Christopher Budzynski in Gopak from Taras Bulba
Canon 5d with 135 f/2.0
1/250 @ f/2.0
ISO 1600

#2

Lorna Feijoo
Canon 5D with 135 f/2.0
1/640 @ f/2.2
ISO 1600

#3

Karine Seneca
Canon 5D with 135 f/2.0
1/100th @ f/2.0
ISO 1000

Raff

#3 is awsome

Flyinggina

What is wonderful about these shots is that just by the positions of the dancers and their costumes the context is obvious. Fabulous.

Virginia

sayntbrigid

I love #3.....the lighting adds so much.....really nice

xtnomad

All Great Shots
I love all the shots. I am torn between #1 and #3, #1 is timed very well and #3 is so graceful. If I was voting now I would choose #1.

Sam

Exceptional!

Sam

§imone

As I know from experience the hard work & commitment that is involved in ballet, I am very much drawn & appreciate these shots. You have managed to capture what dancer hope the view sees, to make it look so easy & gracefull. All 3 are breath taking, but as with others 3 is outstanding.

Yes they fit the current Challenge theme.

twinbnj

All of these are spectacular and my pick would be #3 - my only nit pick would be the challenge is for a portrait, my understanding is the shot would usually be from the shoulders up. JMHO

rutt

twinbnj wrote:

All of these are spectacular and my pick would be #3 - my only nit pick would be the challenge is for a portrait, my understanding is the shot would usually be from the shoulders up. JMHO

From The American Heritage Dictionary:

A likeness of a person, especially one showing the face, that is created by a painter or photographer, for example.

twinbnj

Thank you - I looked it up in Websters just to check before I posted and it gave a different definition -

swintonphoto

#3 is fabulous. Knocked my socks off!

Angelo

Superb!

Charbu

All the shots are great. I especially like #3 for it's lighting.

smhs.images

Number 1 would be my choice if it was straightened a bit:):

davev

#3 for sure.

A great shot shot, both in front of the camera, and behind it.

ultravox

Great ones!lust
#3 for the touch of colors.

Scott_Quier

I also think #3 is awesome . Too bad there is a color shift from blue to warmer as you scan down the lady's legs. Be interesting to see if that can be corrected in PS. I know I don't know how right now.

ginger_55

May I be the Devil's Advocate, here, or whatever. I think they are absolutely wonderful shots.

However I question whether they are portraits, and it might be better for me to question that now and for all the feedback to come in on that now, rather than let it go to the "end".

I am wondering if you have tighter shots of these people. Plus the director.
If the shot were tighter, I have not looked up the word portrait, but I would be more apt to put it in the portrait category.

See into the soul of a dancer, so to speak.

Here I feel I am concentrating on the athletics, the beauty in general, but I am just not feeling portrait.

And, by the by, my fave is the first one. Do you have your camera set to al servo, whatever it is that we use with flying birds????

Rutt, you know you are my favorite person in the world, and that is why I am raising this issue.

People, you are behind Rutt now. Are these portraits, or would a tighter shot help?

ginger (just woke up, may regret this post)

rutt

I did some more research. The OED says:

A representation or delineation of a person, esp. of the face, made from life, by drawing, painting, photography, engraving, etc.; a likeness.

But that's actually definition 1b. The other definitions are all much more general. This definition does say (now almost always).

Like The American Heritage Dictionary note the especially. Unlike it, it doesn't say showing the face. I think the take away is that the face is important to our sense of what a portrait is. That's a big part of why I chose #3 in the end. It does show the dancer's face and her expression is a big part of the image. Being a dancer, she is also expressing herself with the rest of her body. This contrasts with the other two shots which I think are more about just what these people can do.

But at least two people have raised the issue about how tight the crop should be, so I'd love to hear from others. Am I off the money here?

snapapple

Rutt,
I believe #3 is a portrait for sure. I visited a website (I'll have to do some research on the name) of a portrait photographer where he gave tutorials on posing your subjects. He had male and female poses in separate tutorials and in each showed full body as well as "head shots". The men were posed standing, looking relaxed, sometimes hand in pocket. He explained how to pose the feet when sitting and standing. All full body.

When my daughter was ice skating, the portrait photographer would pose the girls in full body poses and try to get them looking like they were skating. He used a large sheet of plastic for them to stand on so it would look like ice. The point being that a skaters portrait should show them as a "skater". That's what a "context" portrait is all about. Head and shoulders would not show context at all for a dancer or a skater.

And for people that are hung up on "portrait" meaning "head and shoulders", what about the formal portraits of brides showing the full body and especially the dress from the rear. These only show a profile of the face and emphasize the dress because it is so important to the context of the day.

Portrait painters of old did many full body poses. I've seen portraits of George Washington, Napoleon, and many others. How about reclining nudes? The painter worked very hard to paint them as more than a representation of their image, but a picture of the soul of the person. He used props to show them in a context.

Your dancer is a perfect example of a context portrait. And, very well done indeed.

rutt

Scott_Quier wrote:

I also think #3 is awesome . Too bad there is a color shift from blue to warmer as you scan down the lady's legs. Be interesting to see if that can be corrected in PS. I know I don't know how right now.

Thanks for the thoughtful point about the light.

I watched the lighting crew play with this through three rehearsals. They want that dramatic blue light on the torso and don't want it on the floor. They want the dress to seem to float. They want the feet to balance her face and shoulders. They want the pink reflection of the slippers on the floor. The lighting on this shot is a big part of an answer to a question I had: how can they perform this old chestnut and make it live. The answer, the dancer has to work as an abstract statement in space. That adds drama and makes it modern. See how she divides the space. That's a very conscious statement on her part and on the part of the artistic staff, the lighting designers in particular.

I did tone down some of that most violet of light, just to make it believable. I don't think it should go any further.

snapapple

rutt wrote:

Thanks for the thoughtful point about the light.

I watched the lighting crew play with this through three rehearsals. They want that dramatic blue light on the torso and don't want it on the floor. They want the dress to seem to float. That focuses attention on her as an abstract statement. The lighting on this shot is a big part of an answer to a question I had: how can they perform this old chestnut and make it live. The answer, the dancer has to work as an abstract statement in space. That adds drama and makes it modern. See how she divides the space. That's a very conscious statement on her part and on the part of the artistic staff, the lighting designers in particular.

I did tone down some of that most violet of light, just to make it believable. I don't think it should go any further.

on the lighting issue. You seem to have a real understanding of what it's all about. A theatrical presentation depends on lighting for a lot.