Why do people like studio portraits so much?

Donki said:
Be intresting to see what some of the pros made of that there is pretty strong catch lights in her eyes and a whole lot of pop.
Click to expand...

already has been lots of discussion on it,

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=141059&highlight=audrey+woulard


for the record just google audrey woulard to see her stuff, she has a bit of a thing with defined eyes and big catchlights.


I use natural light with all my portrait and commercial sessions 100% of the time

interestingly she lives in chicago and says that although she has a studio she does most of her work on location. Chicago is pretty sunny and warm in the summer but hella cold in the winter so it's not like she lives in the Caribbean and is blessed with year round conditions yet pulls off natural shoots over studio shoots the majority of the time
 
and by the way, you don't have to have flash to get serious catchlights, this was taken on an overcast day with no reflectors. I've enhanced the eyes deliberately for this example- the shot I have isn't as dramatic as this by a long shot - i just dodged and burned the eyes to bring out the catchlights to show what can be done. I don't claim to be anywhere near the quality of someone like audrey woulard, but with careful positioning and good pp you can get great catchlights outside in natural light

IMG_9543.jpg
 
Thanks for the link Joe and I see what you mean by the eyes very nicely done. I have seen her work before, the kind of standard I can only hope to achieve.
 
Donki said:
Thanks for the link Joe and I see what you mean by the eyes very nicely done. I have seen her work before, the kind of standard I can only hope to achieve.
Click to expand...

why not attend one of her seminars next year - it's only $800 :eek: and since you live 100 miles outside of chicago you qualify :wave:
 
My experience is that the studio pro is usually able to get the very best pose out of the client, something I am not very good at. I can take good candids, but struggle to get the 'best' pose. When I attended a studio workshop, the models were fantastic and all you really had to do was point the camera, but getting a non-model to perform the same is beyond me - so studio pro for me if I want family portraits.
 
jim_j said:
My experience is that the studio pro is usually able to get the very best pose out of the client, something I am not very good at. I can take good candids, but struggle to get the 'best' pose. When I attended a studio workshop, the models were fantastic and all you really had to do was point the camera, but getting a non-model to perform the same is beyond me - so studio pro for me if I want family portraits.
Click to expand...

it wasn't really a question of who took the shots. The 'pro' can do studio or on location. It was more about why people were choosing to have the shot with the plain background rather than a natural shot. The pro can still do the posing etc
 
chip said:
As others have said many times, it seems to be the photographers that are tired of the white background, but most of MY clients are not!
Click to expand...

This is true for me too.

At the viewing, I'll have a mixture of pure white, dark/black, brick wall and off white backgrounds, and it's the pure white shots that sell far more than any others.
 
Wobbler said:
This is true for me too.

At the viewing, I'll have a mixture of pure white, dark/black, brick wall and off white backgrounds, and it's the pure white shots that sell far more than any others.
Click to expand...

I guess I lump these all with the same category - it's either plain background (no matter the colour) or it's natural on location background
 
joescrivens said:
it wasn't really a question of who took the shots. The 'pro' can do studio or on location. It was more about why people were choosing to have the shot with the plain background rather than a natural shot. The pro can still do the posing etc
Click to expand...

Sorry my mistake, jumping in without properly reading the post:bang: doh!!
 
I have been thinking about this since I saw the thread, I think that people associate a studio portrait as being professional and location portraits as not so professional and more as a "snap" that anyone can take ( I know this is not true but....)They also associate the ammount of equipment needed with better images, again not true, as we all know. Personally I like clean backgrounds more than location portraits, but this is just me. :shrug:
 
This is a very topical issue in photography at the moment. Nearly everyone seems to own a DSLR these days yet studios are still foreign places for most amateur photographers. People do enjoy going into a studio and I can understand the argument from some people here that it generates more income as a result.

In my opinion we need to find different words for portraits done in a studio and those outside. Shooting someone in their natural habitat often brings out more of their personality than a studio shoot. We don't live with white canvases behind us do we? People are also more relaxed outside a studio and those shots are more "in the moment". Imagine shooting a rock star on stage or in a studio. You do lose something about the musician's personality and essence if you shoot him in a studio.

However, in a studio you can focus more on the person's appearance. All the background noise is removed, the lighting is perfect, the make up and hair is done and the entire day and final photo is focussed on their appearance.

There is merit and value to both and they serve different purposes.
 
I agree with much of what has been said her from both sides of the fence and only have this to add.... I was recently asked "Do you do that venture type stuff"... to which I tried not to roll my eyes and said "what is it about venture that appeals to you? The white backgrounds?"...the client replied..."Oh no, it's the sense of fun, colour, movement, spontaneity".... so some venture photographer out there somewhere is getting it right!
 
Indoor /outdoor. Togs should show and offer everything. Then the client chooses.

No one Joe loks great. fill flash would bring he eyes outand highlight. But the outdoor one looks really nice.

Venture has moved on to location and pop art type work now. They still do the white bg.

Have you seen what they charge for their 'Life Style' theycall it?


£££££££££££££££££££££
 
Last edited:
Donki said:
Be intresting to see what some of the pros made of that there is pretty strong catch lights in her eyes and a whole lot of pop.
Click to expand...

....and you can do all of that with a single silver reflector, even on a pretty overcast day.... judicious use of exposure also helps a lot.
 
Last edited:
I know this has been mentioned already but a studio does have that unattainable at home quality what ever the background and a client generally is put at ease by your running around making invisible alterations to your lighting. The perception of location work for a member of the public is that they think they could do the shots themselves, which as we all know would rarely be the case but maybe this can be overcome a bit with the rise of off camera flash which when not overdone can create some outstanding studio feel shots in the middle of no-where.

I like both the images and they both have their place but I agree its the studio shot that people want to PAY for.
 
If you put the first shot on a canvas and put it on the wall, People who come round will love the shot and comment, but will probably think it is a "lucky" shapshot that you have taken, because they have taken similar shots just without quite the same result.

However, the second shot says "I was taken in a studio by a Pro and I cost lots of Cash" so straight away people are going to comment on it, ask who took it and be impressed, both at the shot but also cos they know you have spent money on it. They don't even have to ask, they know it was a pro shot. And that is something which people like.

This is assuming people don't know your a tog.
 
could have written that better!
 
lawrie29 said:
If you put the first shot on a canvas and put it on the wall, People who come round will love the shot and comment, but will probably think it is a "lucky" shapshot that you have taken, because they have taken similar shots just without quite the same result.

However, the second shot says "I was taken in a studio by a Pro and I cost lots of Cash" so straight away people are going to comment on it, ask who took it and be impressed, both at the shot but also cos they know you have spent money on it. They don't even have to ask, they know it was a pro shot. And that is something which people like.

This is assuming people don't know your a tog.
Click to expand...

Do people buy photography because of what they think others will say when they see it though? I certainly just choose what I like to look at most.
 
Also I think people are wrong about when they think people look at a location shot and think it is one they could take. I have shots like this peppered everywhere around the house and on fb and we get comments always about them and that they wish they could take shots like this etc etc so I think the quality of the image speaks for itself enough to know that it's been taken by someone who knows what they are doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top