DISQUS

Jill · 7 months ago

Alec,

Superb!! The images are wonderfully 'colored' if you know what i mean. What a gift to have had the shower of natural light in the area. j

Jeff · 7 months ago

The shot of the guy with the hat is really nice. Great textures -- skin, stubble, hair, jacket, hat. It is hard to believe his eyes are as nicely lit as they are underneath the brim of the hat. I see something in the lower half of his eyes (a white table, white paper, or something unusually bright) that must be helping light him up so nicely. Wowee, nice shot.
When you asked people to take their photo, did you mention that you were "official" or asked to be there by the organizers? I've found people are more willing to participate if it is "official" rather than simply because the photographer likes their look. The exception is if you can fully engage them without talk of a photograph, but the claim of official status allows you to move around more quickly, at the expense of any sort of relationship, I guess.
Another question: could you tell at the time whether flash or natural light was producing better results? This is hard for me to tell via the camera LCD, which can lead to taking one of each, futzing with the camera each time.
The other 3 shots are nice as well, with the girl my 2nd fave, but the guy stands out.

Alec · 7 months ago

Hi Jeff,

THANK YOU for the wonderful comments.

1). YES, I watched the effect of his newspaper on the lighting of his face over the period of about a half hour during the scout. I was quite surprised by what it was doing. When I asked to take his picture he laid the paper on his lap and BAM! light right up under the brim of his hat. GOOD CALL! Exactly what was happening.

2) On Permission: There is a lot I can say on this issue, I've tried to write an response to this part of your comment three times but stopped. All I'll say for now is that in my experience shooting strangers, yes, a certain amount of legitimacy may be important for YOU/ME, but has less to do with the subject's willingness to let their picture be taken.

3) Great Question: In this particular scenario it was less about quality of results and more about shutter speed. In some areas, for example the clothing area, there was NO natural light falling so I had to shoot the first portrait all flash. The little boy in blue, the older man had plenty of light. The boy I decided to flash because I wanted a certain effect with the flash I couldn't get with natural light, that being the quality on his face. I wanted more contrast. The older man had all the contrast in the world already and I was looking for a more natural feel. So, there were some choices being made about quality, too.

Thanks again for the super thoughtful/provocative questions...

Amy · 7 months ago

Wonderful work Alec - I love seeing your gallery of portraits continue to grow, and getting to experience these people too through you.

Can you say a little more about getting permission from people to take their photos? I worry about what is truly informed consent. Do people realize when they agree that their images might show up online, or used any number of ways? I appreciate that people tend to be so generous with themselves, but I feel a certain responsibility to make sure they understand this, which I'm not sure how to do without changing the vibe. It's almost an obstacle for me. Your thoughts?

Alec · 7 months ago

Hi Amy,

Thanks, as always, for being here.

There are many directions from which to approach your question. So, I'll start with the easy one:

1. The Law: I probably don't have this 100% accurate, but from the numerous conversations I've had, here is the upshot: Think of the paparazzi, they shoot photos of stars, sell those images all over the place. They can do this because the law recognizes the concept of "expectation of privacy." If Robert Downey Jr. is sitting on a park bench snorting coke, there is probably no expectation of privacy because he's in the public domain and that image can be sold and distributed any way the creator (photographer) decides. Now, if RDJr. is on his penthouse balcony doing the same thing, expectation of privacy may be a little less clear, and if you use a special lens to shoot through the curtains, into his penthouse to see him doing this then RDjr. probably HAS expectation of privacy. In that case you can take the photo but can't do ANYTHING with it without his permission. So, the law says that if I photograph you walking your dog down Nicollet Mall I can pretty much do with it what I want. That's the nuts and bolts of if, of course there are nuances like any aspect of law. Again, something tells me I don't have this quite right, but pretty close.

2. You: So, now we're into a more interesting issue. The law allows me to shoot images and use them in a variety of ways. like the ones that are the subject of this post. No reasonable expectation of privacy. Do I have an obligation to inform the subject of my use or to ask permission for me to take the picture, to post it on my blog or to use it in a camera club talk? Do I think about this? Yes.

Good question. MY OPINION is that it comes down to intent and circumstance. You must decide for yourself on these issues and of course you get that.

Sometimes I have a fairly deep relationship with the subject, like George, Darryl or Nathan. In many cases the individual will ask and I'll tell them. In many cases they don't and I won't get into it.

3. Uncomfortableness: There are many reasons you are hesitant and nearly all if has to do with you, your value system, what you project on to the circumstance and subject. In my own experiences, having gone through all of that (and still do now and again), I have resorted to understanding my value system, my intent and going with that.

Two days ago I saw a new guy on Nicollet begging for money. He was dressed up like a clown and had a sign that said, "Another Clown gets laid off." or something like that. I want to go back and photograph him in the worst way. Why? Because he's dressed up like a clown and that's cute? NO! Because he feels so moved to present himself to the world in this manner, one which is maybe full of hurt or disappointment? There is a story there...one that goes with the image. The image alone to me is meaningless. But that's my style of portraits. I want the story and the provocative image to go with it. An image that stands on its own as story, but for me I need that connection with the subject. I"ll speak with him, get to know him a little, maybe go back a second or third time. Maybe I throw $10 in his bucket for his time. why shouldn't I? this is not how you or anyone else would operate, but its how I do and I'm really good with it. It has produced more amazing outcomes then you can image.

Ok, post is exceptionally long. Sorry.