Portraiture: Poses, body language, expressions, clothing, props

I've found that in some ways, the camera itself helps. Shooting mostly large format, toting around the big monster acts as an icebreaker. You can get the sitter relaxed by talking about the camera itself, how it works, what you do with it, and then getting in front of it yourself to let them see what you see. Often that's a big help, because once they see what you're seeing on the groundglass, it gets them thinking, and gives them a new respect for the work you're doing. I don't think this applies so much with smaller format cameras, since even medium format viewfinders project a right-side up image and they also "feel" familiar. Large format also has compromises, of course, but I think in the end they're worth it as they help engage the model in the creative process.

This is not to slight medium format or 35mm in the least- some terrific portrait work has been done and continues to be done in those formats. I think that they lend themselves to a more fast-paced and less interactive way of working. I'd be much more likely to pick up the Hassy if I were shooting a fashion shoot or an editorial project than I would for a portrait session, or for a nude project.

Roger Hicks said:

Try Konstantin Stanislavsky's books on acting: 'An Actor Prepares' is the one I remember most. They give you a tremendous set of tools, and vocabulary, for analyzing what you see. Also Charles Darwin's 'The Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals' -- old but unparalleled.

Cheers,

R.

Click to expand...

That book as well as the one called "(On?) Acting" are the classics among theater and motion-picture actors. I used to take photos of a theater group for a while in the U.S., and my actor friends told me about the book(s).

Also, Stanislavsky's method was (or still is) often talked about by well-known actors who appear in the TV show called, "Actor's Studio" produced by New School in NYC.

http://www.bravotv.com/Inside_the_Actors_Studio/index.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actors_Studio

This TV show gets aired in Japan for some reason in awfully late night hours, so sometimes I watch it even now. It's very comprehensive if you listen to the actors talking about how they use their skills in the films they have appeared and what training they have formally had before in order to play what they play. If you can watch the show, you will probably find some of the things you're looking for.

However, in the non-western cultures like Japanese, I heard Stanislavsky's method is not nearly as popularly used (or not used at all in many cases in the Japanese popular cultures) as the wetstern cultures with a long history of teaching drama, so be aware that the western acting style works only within the context of the western cultures.

I hope this helps.

TheFlyingCamera said:

This is not to slight medium format or 35mm in the least- some terrific portrait work has been done and continues to be done in those formats. I think that they lend themselves to a more fast-paced and less interactive way of working. I'd be much more likely to pick up the Hassy if I were shooting a fashion shoot or an editorial project than I would for a portrait session, or for a nude project.

Click to expand...

Au contraire mon amie, I find shooting the Hasselblad quite slower compared to 35mm and digital and I need to talk with my model and keep them engaged constantly. After all, I lack an assistant and focusing, metering and loading the film backs takes time, especially because people are not used to film anymore and 12 frames seem to go by in a flash.

I find that anything other than your typical Nikon and Canon DSLR will attract interest.

Youtube rocks!

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=actor's+studio

If you watch the clips, pay attention to how these actors/actresses do their posing/movements, etc on screen in order to accomplish what they want to accomplish.

Ari, it's funny that you just finished reading a book on body language, I recently suggested that to someone in the gallery. Reading that book is like a Cliff Notes version (Cliff Notes being a summarized version of a book). It's a good start but does not give you much depth. As you are looking how to direct a subject in a staged environment and not capture them in a real moment, then you really need to become very familiar with the way people use their bodies to express themselves.

Besides reading about body language, the best, but slowest way to learn about it is by watching people. Find a comfortable place where you can sit for hours and just watch people as they go by, as they converse, as they sit, etc.

Another good tip is to work with some very experienced models, and I don't mean fashion models I mean what we would call here in NYC "commercial models". Commercial models are most often actors and actresses who appear in ads and commercials. Many of them have serious acting training and have studied how to use their bodies to express themselves without words. Many of them look like "real people" and not like models. You can ask them to show a certain emotion, or even better ask them to imagine they're in a certain situation in life and watch how their bodies and faces will change to reflect their imaginary circumstances. However make certain that you use models that have real acting training and many years of experience.

Another thing is to study the work of artists who have done very compelling portrait work, or better still environmental portrait work, and the work of photographers who have captured real life spontaneous scenes. HCB, Doisneau and Kertesz had great photographs of real people in real moments.

Be aware though that this is a very long and slow process and is totally dependant on your own observational skills.

I'm not sure if the past reigning crop of top actors, Paul Newman, De Niro, Dustin Hoffman, Gene Hackman, Pacino, Streep et all, were Stravinsky or Lee Strasberg or somone else but they came from the "method" school of acting. Meaning they "inhabited" the character and were always searching for the "motivation" in their character to slip under his/her skin.

One classic line during Marathon Man with Dustin Hoffman and Sir Laurence Olivier was that Hoffman was ruining take after take trying to get his "motivation" and Olivier walked up to him and dryly stated "try acting, dear boy".


Michael

arigram said:

Au contraire mon amie, I find shooting the Hasselblad quite slower compared to 35mm and digital and I need to talk with my model and keep them engaged constantly. After all, I lack an assistant and focusing, metering and loading the film backs takes time, especially because people are not used to film anymore and 12 frames seem to go by in a flash.

I find that anything other than your typical Nikon and Canon DSLR will attract interest.

Click to expand...

Ari- yes the hassy is slower than 35mm or digicrap. However, when you have to shoot an 8x10 all by your lonesome, all of a sudden that Hassy is a snapshot point-n-shoot.

thanks jonathon

one thing i have tried to do almost to excess is to shoot at the slowest shutter speed my subject can hold a pose ... even with props, clothes and expressions, and a headful of ideas from olde portraits, sometimes it is the long shutter speeds work well to help the subject exude who they might be, then again, maybe they are just bored? i worked on restoring a bunch of old family photos, maybe the latest being in the 19teens, and there was something about them, even the simplest poses and lighting that made the subject breathe-life.

I am not really a portraitist, but one thing not yet mentioned that I find useful is to look at rough drawings, caricatures and sketches. The funnies in your local newspaper is a good cheap place to start - or the Disney Channel. I have always been fascinated by the way that even very sparse drawings can convey mass, form and character. Studying them is a good way to tease out what is important, and what is mere infill.

firecracker said:

Also, Stanislavsky's method was (or still is) often talked about by well-known actors who appear in the TV show called, "Actor's Studio" produced by New School in NYC.

However, in the non-western cultures like Japanese, I heard Stanislavsky's method is not nearly as popularly used (or not used at all in many cases in the Japanese popular cultures) as the wetstern cultures with a long history of teaching drama, so be aware that the western acting style works only within the context of the western cultures.

I hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Stanislavsky is talked about more than read, according to my wife who has two degrees in theatre (USC and CSULB). The current version of the Method is re-interpretations of Lee Strasberg's re-interpretations of Stanislavsky. There has been considerable drift from the original, much of it due to those who make excessive claims for Strasberg and neglect Stanislavsky. Hell, bo' that there Stan-boy weren't nothin' but a dirty commie..

Stanislavsky also talks about other acting traditions, contrasting formalism (normal in most acting in most cultures) and injecting personal feeling/emotional memory into a part. It is not unrealistic to say that even when Stanislavsky founded the Moscow Arts Theatre, the general standard of acting was still the Shakespearian acTOR (note stress), Speaking From The Diaphragm.

There are many plays and parts where Stanislavsky's approach is of limited or no use but there are also lamentably many parts where both formalism and imperfectly understood 'Method' acting are used as a refuge by bad actors.

Cheers,

Roger

Roger Hicks said:

There are many plays and parts where Stanislavsky's approach is of limited or no use but there are also lamentably many parts where both formalism and imperfectly understood 'Method' acting are used as a refuge by bad actors.

Click to expand...

I believe so, too. I was reading a book that had an interview piece on Ingmar Bergman on his own theater work, and he called Stanislavsky method, "masturbation."

But anyway that led me to think about the directing aspect for the kind of portraiture that's been discussed here. I wonder how much of a direction or a guidline that a photographer needs to prepare for his/her model(s)/trained actor(s)/actress(es). I mean, obviously for theater and film, there's a story given by a script, which rules out certain things including the posing/movement. So, from there, maybe improvisation can be done, but the there still is the foundation of the story.

But for still photography, there usually isn't, right? Do many photographers in this genre(studio portraiture) provide much materials (scripts, reading materials, props, wardrobe, etc) to their models in general? I'm not talking about themes. The thing is, actors are very vulnerable and usually cannot do anything by themselves unless they are given something like a direction or story line to start off. It's probably harder when you have only one actor in front of the camera, and you as a photographer has very little experience in directing, and if you two have to communicate eac other with not much in common. If so, nothing can get started so easily.

I'm just throwing general ideas here, so please ignore my comment if you find it not so relevant.

I spend all my time photographing "ordinary" people these days but when I lived in LA I photographed a lot of actors and wannabees.

Sometimes you needed to bitch slap them to try to get them to quit "acting". It was like dealing with over indulged precocious children.

I believe the trick to photographing people is just talking to them about stuff and tell them what you're doing and making them feel like a part of the process. Then if you are after a "look" just tell them what you are trying and get them to join in.

When photographing kids I just chatter away at them, and ask them stuff and watch for reactions. Kids have the best reactions.

Of course if that doesn't work, I hit them with a stick.


Michael