Back to Assignment 1

When I go to a concert in Oxford it is usually in the staid environs of the Sheldonian, the Hollywell or similar places - though definitely not to the "New Theatre" as their sound system is very poor - but I had the opportunity to attend a concert at the O2 Academy in Oxford last night. A close knit ensemble of three strings, one percussion and a vocalist entertained the enthusiastic audience for some time with their energetic playing style and whose influence can be safely described as somewhere between Led Zeppelin and Edge of Sanity.

Six Bullet Chamber, to which my youngest son plays lead guitar and writes a good deal of the music were, thankfully, first on! I situated myself toward the front of the stage in order to get a decent, audience free, shot of my son just before the opening bars of their first ditty, culled from their latest CD,"Interpretation" wafted from the multitude of amplifiers.The instantaneous energy released from the speakers at that point encouraged my denim trousers to flap. I had thought that these jeans would be trendy, though I soon realised that darning the wear hole on the knee, as I had done to deter further damage, just didn't "cut-it" with the, generally, younger members of the audience who seemed to delight in exposing various parts of their torso's from what appeared to be self inflicted vandalism to their apparel. Not to be deterred from the soon to become overpowering odour of young males who hadn't appreciated the benefits of good hygiene, I stayed near to the front to record as many images of my son and his chums as they rattled, mercifully, through a shortish set before my wife and bade farewell to him, his friends and the various individuals in the audience whose uniform colour tones of drab black, coupled with skin tones the pallor of which suggesting a nocturnal life, situated mostly at zone 1 or zone 9 - they would have had Ansel pre-flashing methinks!

So, what did I learn from this exercise? Always support your children - no matter that they drive you to the edge of sanity! It was difficult to try and negotiate with the extremely bulky bouncer who was “protecting” the band from, well who knows what, during a performance which delivered more decibels in one sitting than is surely safe to consume over several sittings. Best to get there early and consider the angles, talk to the people in charge and prepare - though I suspect I won’t make a career out of this genre. Don’t be too put off by the smell of youth, whilst getting in close, or by the “old guys” who dress up in extremely tight t - shirts whilst adopting “moves” to seemingly attract the barely post pubescent females in some curious courtship ritual which dictates a lot of very vigorous head shaking and a great deal of wobbling in the stomach area.I did enjoy and was immensely proud of my son who seemed genuinely appreciative that his parents came to support him. And whilst his "contract" made him stay to the end of the concert, with all the associated bands, my wife and I bade him farewell and went to have a well earned cup of tea to the ringing in our ears of "I am yours" the closing number of Six Bullet Chamber's O2 Oxford gig May 26th 2012.

He seems happy and this set captures this I think, and will help form a wider pictorial portrait of Mark.

Confronting

Continuing the theme of trying to engage the subjects I shoot without an acknowledgement or request from me. Testing how far I can go. These shots in London - Houses of Westminster & Tate Britain.

I like this one a lot, she could see I was taking photographs and kept an eye on me as she walked past, fits very well into Assignment 8 of Angier's Train your gaze

These schoolgirls were very boisterous, bad technique on my part lost me a potentially interesting shot.

He saw me standing and composing with the camera and he continued to stare as he walked right on by.

Standing on guard outside the Houses of Parliament - I suspect they get quite a few tourists taking pictures of them.

Leading up to Tate Britain - "safe" shot.

Outside the Houses of Parliament, I noticed that he saw me pointing and his expression is just an accident, I don't think he was posing.

One of "The Burghers of Calais" by Rodin seems to be offering a gesture to this lady who had been taking pictures of them.

A portrait

Sporadically I have used Jeff as a sitter and over the past few years I have photographed him in various poses and places. Jeff has also featured greatly in the coverage I have made of "The Reunion". I have pulled these photographs together as an alternative "Portrait - assignment 1". The first shot, against a white paper background to isolate him - his brief was to wear something he felt comfortable in and stand relaxed. I had thought of cropping tighter - but that de-contextualises him in a somewhat barren context! The layout of these images have been carefully thought about, to try and make each level of shot "talk" to each other, as it were. For example the full frontal at the top, depicting "all" of Jeff, whereas shot 2 appears to watching himself perform.

Left - at the first rehearsal shows Jeff focussing on the role, his director(s) and left, rehearsal five and "in role". Both shots below are again in role, showing disparate aspects of the character.















The next layer depicts Jeff listening to himself read?

 I've included this shot, despite the use of exotic technique (HDR) as it does seem to express a view of Jeff that is recognisable. This is a  pose and works best in isolation, however the feeling of confrontation is contrary to Jeff's natural character.

The next three shots come from rehearsal five and are taken in quick succession, depicting various "animations" in his role. The fourth shot in the quartet is a profile shot as he watches events on stage - I guess this is Jeff as much as the first photograph. The position of the profile shot appears to have him studying the various guises of his stage personna.

 A close up left, again in character, counter pointed with him in motion as part of the "Assignment 8" from Roswell Angier. Jeff left looks incredulously on at the right hand Jeff

 Whereas these last three images come from a single session using a single tungsten lamp, working with contrast. All of these photographs have the point of focus on the one eye or another. The technique was to use a narrow depth of field (all these are f2) and by the placement of the lamp to redact the facial elements from the image. I had made these studies before I read the text by Angier and his chapter on a self portrait without a face. I hadn't intended to remove any part of Jeff's face, rather to highlight particular elements of his face and continue with this process until it removes the recognisability of the subject.

I am still struggling with the concept that the portraitist can elicit a view of the subject that expresses to "a" viewer an "essence", an "air". I am still of the opinion that the viewer brings with them the "view".
If we look at Karsh and one of his most famous images that of Churchill. We are lucky that Karsh has written some accompanying text. But what do we who see Churchill "see"? We know of course of his role in the second war, we know less of his role in the Sidney Street siege, we know of his role as a senior statesman on the world stage.

The Sidney Street Siege, 1911 (b/w photo)

English Photographer, (20th century)

Private Collection - Bridgemam

 He had an "imperious"quality, he relished in the public view that he was a great leader and we see that in Karsh's portrait. I have seen the print in Ottawa, along with other Karsh portraits where they hang in the Chateaux Hotel (where he had a studio) nearby the Parliament building. It is set high and the viewer has to look up to view it, enhancing it's particular power. It has the appearance of a painting, it is set in a large frame emphasizing it's grandeur. There have been many formal painted portraits of Churchill, the approach that "Winnie" had to having his portrait made must have been relaxed - so maybe the view we have of him via Karsh's image is his "air" because of that. Some more portraits of Churchill:

Winston Churchill aged five, from 'A Roving Commission by Winston S. Churchill', published by...

English School, (19th century)

Private Collection - Bridgeman

Winston Spencer Churchill in 1904 (b/w photo)

English Photographer, (20th century)

Private Collection - Bridgeman

Winston Churchill with his mother, Lady Randolph Churchill (b/w photo)

English Photographer, (19th century)

Private Collect - Bridgeman

Sir Winston Churchill as a Lieutenant in the 4th Hussars in 1895 (photogravure)

English School, (19th century)

Private Collection - Bridgeman

At the time Karsh took his photograph Churchill was 65, there were already multiple portraits of him, painted and photographic as well as cartoon. I would think that he knew exactly how he would pose; Karsh was told, apparently in no uncertain terms, that he could expose one frame. I don't think Karsh captured Churchill's "essence" I think Churchill gave it to him. Certainly Karsh had set the lights, exposed correctly, printed it expertly - but that "hand on the hip" pose, looking slightly down the nose, looks practised to me.

Amitabh Bachchan - Bridgeman

I think therefore that all (formal) portraits of famous or infamous people are vested with a public "air". The persona that rests in the image has either been carefully nurtured or has entered the public consciousness via some circuitous route to inform us all. It might be worth some research to look at icons in other societies to see if, for example Amitabh Bachchan "Big B", the most famous film star on the planet "speaks" to us, delivers to us an "air" or whether because they are not known to us that their "essence" is invisible to us.
What does this (albeit small) portrait tell us? For most westerners probably not a lot; but for asians and especially in the sub-continent it is a huge story. With a life that reads like a soap opera and whose every move and image is precisely managed, all portraits of him are tethered to a specifically controlled message or meaning. The portraitist has no power whatsoever to delineate their own narrative and is only a tool in the wider process of image control. But the west has no real view of "BigB" so what do we (the westerners) read into his image, we who are free from subversion from the Indian media? A google search will produce a million images - try not to read any of the accompanying text if you do to see whether you "get" him. I have really enjoyed some of his movies, which are classics in the largest movie industry on the planet.

There is a link between Jeff and Bachchan, they both have grey beards and both can lay reasonable claim to be actors. But whilst Jeff wouldn't say he was close to penury, the riches BigB has had, lost, and has again, are beyond the dreams of not only his fellow citizens in India but also that of most of the world's population.

More to think about in the search for the truth behind the smile.

Assignment One

Assignment brief - … take (a photograph of) one person as a subject and create between five and seven different portraits.

Portrait.

Painting, picture, drawing, sketch, likeness, image, study, miniature, portrayal, representation, depiction, impression, account, profile. Oxford Thesaurus.

Representation of a person or animal, esp. of the face, made by drawing, painting, photography, etc. Oxford Concise Dictionary.

1

In his book – “Camera Lucida” - Roland Barthes describes the process of finding a photograph, of his deceased mother that has the “air” of her, as a momento. Barthes goes on to describe how this image is the essence of his mother, the one image that carries the “authenticated” version of his mother. The “Winter Garden” photograph he declares has the “air” of his deceased mother, it is an image taken of her as a young girl.

Dr. Cynthia Freeland in her book “Portraits and Persons” discusses a similar process whereby she and her mother, hunt through some photographs of her grandmother and when her mother asks ‘Isn’t this one just really her?’¹ Freeland writes “(I) knew exactly what she meant….. the photographer had caught some essential truth about her expression….” Daughter and granddaughter were equally convinced that this was “the” photograph.

2

Richard Brilliant in his book "Portraiture" states... "Portraits partake of the artificial nature of masks because they always impersonate the subject with some degree of conviction. What, if anything, lies behind he mask can only be inferred by the viewer from the clues provided by the mask, which may mislead as well as inform through the use of conventions of representation. Ultimately, the emergence of the subject revealed in the portrait must take into account the fact that self-effacement be hind the mask is consistent with the social nature of men and women, all of who (re) present themselves in public."⁵

I tend to favour Brilliant’s view, inasmuch as a sitter will adopt a pose, whether prescribed or not by the artist. A viewer perusing a portrait of any person, known or unknown, can only judge the "air" by their emotive response to the image in view. Seeing, for example, the Mona Lisa, the age old questions arise about smile, who and why?There has been a lot said about this lady, though no-one has definitively said what this portrait says about the model. Da Vinci hasn't elaborated and is unlikely to do so now. So we are left to derive for ourselves whether it is a smile, and if so, what is she smiling at? 

I have struggled with this concept that a (single) portrait can capture an essential truth, some expression of the “soul” of the person being portrayed, either as a painted or more specifically photographed portrait.

3

My contention is that a portrait works when the treatment of the subject offers a transcendence that elicits a metaphysical response from within the viewer, and it does this because the viewer comes to the image equipped with their own portfolio of emotions that are ready to be tapped. A “good” portrait is one which bridges this distance between the two dimensional object and the sub-conscious mind of the viewer. It is clearly easier to do this if the image is of someone known to the viewer, but a skilled portraitist is able to do this with an unknown subject. There is but one quality that a portrait needs and that is engagement. If the portrait (or for that matter any image) can capture some attention long enough for the narrative to develop between viewer and image then it has passed it's first hurdle. With a portrait there are further tools to be considered, whether there needs to be extraneous clues or whether like Avedon a white background suffices? If there are semiotic clues and if so how prominent should they be. My own portraits for this exercise make use of both animate and inanimate objects to "paint" a picture of my sitter.

4

5

Portraits have, for the greatest amount of “image making history”, largely been the domain of the painter and their benefactor. Painters have been commissioned to portray the royal and the regal, the statesmen and the nobility. The rich and powerful have, for many reasons, needed to present portraits of themselves which are hung in prominent positions – those reasons will be left unexplored here. The other chief protagonists of the portrait have been the domain of the non-secular members of society, whether to create icons in the guise of particular religious figures, or to create icons of the members of the church establishments. These portraits, painted in increasing technical brilliance, have portrayed people in the likeness as described by the benefactor, more usually the subject. These portraits are likely therefore to deliver whatever was the demand delivered to artist. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

7

6

Whereas the rich, the landed and the establishment, had the wherewithal to have the portraits painted in the style that best suited their “view” of themselves; the eventual democratization of the portrait didn’t happen until the invention of the “physiognotrace”, a device that enabled the tracing of a person’s silhouette in quick order such that the price became within the means of (at least the wealthier end) on the general public. It was said that whilst a painted portrait might cost about $50 the “shade” might cost about 6c! ² At its peak, studios were producing 1000’s of these “likenesses” a year. This volume of imagery was further dwarfed by the development of the daguerreotype, which reproduced the likeness of the sitter in a way that surpassed even the most skillful fine artist in terms of veracity and so popular were they that by 1853 there were eighty six galleries producing a total of three million images a year in New York city alone³ – such was the demand for likenesses to be created and for all the same reasons we take pictures today. Eastman Kodak with the Brownie and then the advent of digital technology have taken these “early adopter” numbers and stretched them beyond anyone’s wildest imagination. Flickr – just one of the social networks specializing in image storage - had about 5 billion uploaded images in 2011 and it’s community were uploading more, at a rate of 3000 per minute; what percentage of these were portraits probably isn’t known, but it is probably safe to suggest that about a quarter have people in them?

8

The portrait is now no longer a domain defined by the size on one’s estate, though it is still a sociological remnant that the painted portrait continues to carry a level of authority that a photograph cannot aspire to, at least not yet. The painter edits the portrayal “off canvas”, the inclusion of any stroke of the pen, brush, charcoal is a determined effort; whilst the photographer aims to do this by exclusion of extraneous imagery and by technique to engage with the viewer. However the painted portrait still carries a “status” imbued by history as an emblem, almost fetishized in halls of power and privilege as recognition of achievement. The need for people to have “portraits” of themselves or of their loved ones, was demonstrable even before the availability of even reasonable mirrors that could discern for the sitter whether the likeness was indeed very strong, leaving the third party viewer to impart the affirmation of whether the portrait had the “air” of the sitter.

10

9

“Our social personality is a creation of the minds of others.” Marcel Proust, 1918 “⁴. I would contend that Freeman is at best optimistic in her being able to obtain “a” photograph that depicts a universal “air” of her grandmother that anyone might deduce from the portrait. Barthes decides not to publish his memento of his mother, claiming it has significance only for him. Brilliant goes close by his corollary of the mask.

The first pass at a “portrait” of Mark was done a few weeks ago – I had a few things in mind – son, father, husband, musician – different traits of a young man that I hoped I could depict. Most of the images I had in mind seemed to work and I have added a few more. To test my theory I printed the images chosen for this assignment and sought answers from people. I can’t say that this process is in any way scientific, the sample size is way too small, but the findings are as below and interesting only as far as they go. The photographs that I added were the husband and wife shot, the brother shot, the hand shot. I asked everyone the same question; “pick out one photograph that shows the “air” of Mark, his “essence”. I said that no-one could pick more than one – it did produce some interesting conversations!

The first person I asked was his mother, my wife. Isn’t it true “no-one knows her son better than his mother”?? Well Alison’s choice was number 4. Closer still to the subject (at least to a different side) is probably his wife, Natalie chose 6. Nana chose 9, Granddad chose 8, Grandma chose 6, Auntie Lynn chose 4, Cousin Helen chose 1. I did ask Mark himself and for interest only, it was also 6 – his choice will be discounted as choosing your own “air” smacks of self delusion. I jest. I did not choose as I have the full back catalogue in my possession and can peruse at will.

Mmm, not entirely convincing evidence for the Freeman argument, that “a” photograph could provide an essential image that conveyed the “air” of a subject. These were all “close family”. I may ask people who have never seen Mark, whether the same question and see at least whether any of them choose the majority shot.

A photographic portrait is a limited tool to deliver a sitter’s personality, but a series could possibly do so. The range of shots of Mark cover certain aspects of his life, display some of his character.

1/2/3 - Portraits and Persons – Cynthia Freeman – OUP 2010 p42,43/64/69

4 - Face. The new photographic portrait - Thames and Hudson, William A Ewing, 2008, p106 

5 - Portraiture - Richard Brilliant - Reaktion - 1991, p89