You better Belize it
 

I have pondered the questions regarding outdoor photography and believe I have come across a couple of factors which can enhance your chances. First, buy a ticket to Belize. Second, convince the prettiest girl you know to go with you.

another...

Who among us would like to take this guy on? This is a local named Doctor Warpo. A self described "white rasta."

All the photos I took show what uncontrollable light does. It bounces, reflects and comes back in fairly complex ways. You can position your subject just so much. You are ultimately under the control of Mother Nature. Arguably, if I were trying to create a different looking photograph, I could have used a fill flash. But I was trying to leave the shadows and have the best of both worlds.

Of course it would be totally off subject to show the bikini shot.

This sweet looking soul, when I raised my camera to take the shot, threw her hand up to her chin as if to "strike a pose."

Last one for now, unless someone begs for the bikini shot.

Hi, Mike! These would all be great paintings, in my humble opinion. I'm curious to know how you would handle the glasses on the first hat lady. (Love her hat and pose.) I've wanted to paint some of my relatives that wear glasses and always find that the most difficult thing to do.

Doreen,

The glasses would be a challenge for me. I think that it could be done but it may be above my pay grade. I think a lot of people would pass on this photo because of the glasses. There is information written on the do's and don't's of photographing people with glasses. The really tough ones are the large thick lenses which magnify and distort the eyes. I wish I had asked her to take them off.

I took only this one picture of the first hat lady. The one I was trying to get was the black lady. As I was taking some shots of her, she took me over to her friend, the first hat lady.

This next photo was close, but there is something about the way she is holding her mouth that doesn't look natural.

Oh, Mike, you are SO good!

I like the first post best! Perhaps you could repost that image in the "Photographing your subject" topic, as well as describing the light, time of day, how you managed to place your subject against such a strong backlight without losing any information, etc. (You know I just like to think up extra things to ask people to do on a Saturday morning.)

Administrator's note: Mike has posted details on the photgraphy of his subject at http://forum.portraitartist.com/show...threadid=1048. Thank you, Mike, great post.

Belize in yourself
 

All these little sayings regarding Belize are from the backs of my new T-shirts.

At Ms. Saper's suggestion, I have posted here one of the photos from my recent trip to Belize.

Since getting involved in these photo discussions, I have been giving more thought to just how I go about taking photos. No one ever asked before, so I didn't give it much thought. The thing that has surprised me a little is just how much I plan things out in my mind before I ever pick up the camera or approach the subject. I am constantly viewing the world with an opportunistic eye, not fully conscious that I am doing it until my eye latches onto that something.

In the case of this image, the thing that I latched onto was the color of the coconuts on the palm tree just off our front porch. I wanted that color and the abstraction of that image in the background of my subject. I began to formulate a plan for the photo immediately after that. Being more conscious of my thoughts, my mind composed that picture for 2 days before I suggested it to my friend. When she finally perched on the rail of the porch it was over in less than 5 minutes.

As you astutely point out, Chris, the challenge was the strong back lighting. But it was at midday that the sun would strike these coconuts and provide the glow that I liked. So I tried to use it to my advantage.

I use a film camera, a Nikon N90s. I try never to use a flash. This could have been a case for fill flash but I think you would have gotten a much different look. The film was ordinary Kodak 200 asa. The camera I use is not a new model, but it is a solid featured camera just under the professional grade. I think the body alone a few years ago was $750. Cameras today are half the price and just as well featured.

The feature which allowed me to get the detail in the face with strong back lighting was the "spot meter." Most all cameras have multiple metering systems. Mine has three. The first is a matrix system, which looks at the entire scene from top to bottom corner to corner and breaks down the frame into maybe 9 or a dozen independent sections. With the input you give the camera re: film speed, focus distance etc., its brain will go through a fairly complex calculus to try to make a well-balanced exposure. And it does a remarkable job, but had I used it, my subject would have been in darkness. The next metering option is called "center weighted metering" this forgets the edges and figures the exposure based on the center 1/4 (+-) of the viewfinder. Personally, my thinking is if I don't want the first option, I might as well go to the third which is the one that produced this picture "spot metering."

Spot metering allows you to create an "exposure" based only on the information in the center spot of the viewfinder. In my viewfinder, I place the center spot on that part of the subject that I want to expose for. I then lock in that exposure, recompose the scene and shoot. This most often will produce an over-exposed background situation. But you don't care, and in fact this can add to the illusion.

But technically speaking this is not tough duty. I place my camera in program portrait mode. By doing this I know the camera will select an open aperature, which will create the depth of field and the background that I want. I don't have to think about that anymore. I can make this adjustment to spot meter and back in one second. The trick, as you know Chris, is to recognize the problem in advance and plan for it.

And, as Vito Corleone said in The Godfather, "Someday, and that day may never come, I will learn to paint these images and then you guys can watch out." I think that's what he said.

Prettiest Girl?
 

I have one question: which pretty girl was the one you asked to go with you? And I love all the photos, but I too love the first one the best!

Tammy,

It was this one...

I remembered ...
 

Hi, Mike,

I remembered after I'd posted, that you have a beautiful daughter. And that's another wonderful photo. Let us see the paintings that develop from this trip. Tammy

Tammy,

You remember right, I do have a beautiful daughter, but this isn't her.

Here is another example of the use of spot metering. Even a stronger back lit condition that turned out pretty good.

One of the advantages I had in the previous photo was that the subject was under a porch and not completely bathed in sunlight.

This example, while a pleasing enough photo, does not give the interesting lights and darks on the face that the previous photo does. This is more of what you can expect of a photo taken out in the open with the subject completely bathed in light. I would call this more of a nice vacation snap shot.

THE TRAP...

Be forewarned, I'm about to express an opinion.

I believe that the out-of-doors, for the less than proficient portrait painter, is a trap. The experienced professionals can do wonders with nothing but a suggestion. I'm talking here about the rest of us.

I believe that as the face becomes smaller, as a percentage of the canvas, your chances of success become smaller. The out-of-doors begs for this to happen. One example is the post above of the girl standing in her bathing suit, next to the palm tree, to the left and down from the palm leaves, just left of the pretty rocks in the water on the right, all against the beautiful Caribbean and sky. When confronted with all of this, how can you not arrange it thus? And so the trap is sprung. The face (portrait part) has been reduced to 4% of the total. Unless your canvas is life size this is going to be difficult. This trap can easily be sprung in your own back yard; you don't have to buy a plane ticket.

Personally I have tried to concentrate on keeping the face big as percentages go. My thinking is that what I need to be about is learning flesh tones and likeness, not about palm leaves and ocean. That doesn't mean that you can't get pretty artsy by sticking to this plan. The first post above could easily be something that I would consider. You just need to be aware and not let yourself be so inclusive (trapped).

I would love to hear other opinions on this argument. Mine is a reasoning born out of one citizen's simple experiences, da.

Well, I do have an opinion on this, and it results from some recent professional advice given to me. I was told that I should spend some time on landscapes and it would improve the portrait painting process. So, I've been doing that and learning a tremendous amount about composition, perspective and color. My view has become less myopic and I've actually broadened my horizons. So, I say keep the palm tree,ocean and the girl with a perfect figure for a figurative painting. Or have I completely missed the point? :D

Doreen,

I think it all depends on where you are positioned along the experience path. Before committing to portraits, I painted a fair amount of landscapes. There is a great deal to learn by doing that. For me, it gave me an understanding of how paint goes from the tube to the canvas. It taught color harmony and composition. I learned all these things and more from landscapes, still lifes and just slopping paint on the canvas and watching how it sticks there. I probably discount those lessons a little too much.

Although valuable information, I don't think it prepare me completely for painting aunt Edna's hair, Amber's teeth, or getting convincing skin tones. These are the things I need. Perhaps it prepared me to begin.

The "trap" that kept me from those goals was allowing those features to become too small at the expense of an interesting tree, bridge, flower or lapping water. I don't mean that these things aren't valuable. Life would be pretty boring without them. What I'm saying is that my beautiful lapping waters will never carry the day for my mediocre portrait. But, if I create a beautiful painted image of a person, you can bet that I will come up to speed on that lapping water after a couple of weeks. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that learning to paint portraits well is difficult. Especially without instruction.

A few years ago, being frustrated in regards to these very issues, I decided to teach myself to create artful portrait photo images. I still believe that the camera can teach so much in the area of composition. I know some think that using photos is just wrong. I'm not going to argue that point here. It seemed clear to me that I could not make artful paintings from common snapshots. For me in my space and in my time this was my answer.

Just an aside, I think the girl in the swimsuit is a beautiful image. The image of the beautiful girl in a swimsuit is so common. We get bombarded with this image it seems (maybe it's just the places I'm hanging out). It's almost too pass