Photographing people is not what it seems to be, that is,
the capturing of form on film. What a photographer actually
wants to capture is the "flow pattern" of the person who is
making up the form. This flow pattern is their flow of thoughts
as they manifest themselves in facial expressions and movement.
A photographer must be able to recognize this flow of thoughts as
they influence the actual shape and form of a subject and be able
to push the shutter button at exactly the right moment.
In general, when the person is thinking out, that is,
extroverting his or her attention, this is the time to push the
shutter button. For some reason, you can see the difference in
the picture. Also, people can usually remember, sort of, what
they were thinking when they look at their proofs. You want to
give them a maximum amount of photographs of when they were
thinking out because while they are doing this, their attention
is more likely to be off their immediate problem(s), i.e., "I
wonder how I am doing," "When is he going to take the picture,"
"I hope he doesn't take it now, my hair doesn't feel right."
Thus, when a person is introverting on these thoughts, it shows
in the picture.
The best pictures are pictures where the subject is looking
at something in the environment and thinking about it or
considering it. This gives a picture of a person who looks
interested in something, this gives a picture of a person who is
more causative looking. The person does not look scared,
uncertain, covertly upset or covertly hostile, angry, meek,
stupid, incompetent, worried, owned or hunted. Instead they look
like they live in this universe and they know that they do and
that they have a right to be here as much as anything else that
happens to be in the same system of things.
I pretend to be ignoring the subject when I am filming them.
They can then get interested in me to start with. After all, it
is they who are at the focus of attention enough, and why should
I focus my attention on them too when the camera is pressure
enough. So I pretend to be "interested in" other things like the
camera itself, the lights, my light meter, etc. Then when I see
that the person is now extroverted, I dive in and get a series of
pictures. Of course, my full attention is ALWAYS on the subject,
but I do not want them to know that at the time of photography.
While I am getting a series of shots I keep careful tabs on
the person's flows. The second I see them starting to introvert,
I break away and start to "adjust" the lights or something. This
gives my subject time to re-extrovert.
In conjunction with the above, there is the technical aspect
of the photography. Basically, I feel that once the lights are
set up to give a reasonable contrast ratio with the desired
highlights, the rest of the motion and lighting should come from
the model. It is easier to move the model than the lights.
With the motion of the model turning and moving to and fro
comes the infinity of lighting possibilities. Photography is the
science of making instant decisions. The right times to hit the
shutter, from a technical point of view, come as the light makes
its momentary debuts upon the face or form of the subject. Only
so often will the exact moment of light and flows intersect to
create the beautiful forms that homo sapiens is capable of.
These moments cannot be contrived.
When the light falls on the face there is usually a
highlight and a shadow. Usually, the integration of these two
extremes to produce the final picture is best when they
(highlight and shadow) blend into each other in a logarithmic
exchange. If the highlight becomes shadow too abruptly at the
zone of their intersection, the result will be too high in
contrast for either the viewer or the film. If the highlight
becomes shadow in a "slow" fashion, the picture will be flat
looking. The best looking transitions between these two light
areas is one of a logarithm. This means that the density
increase, at uniform distance intervals, will plot a logarithmic
curve on graph paper. I realize that you cannot plot this while
you are shooting so you will just have to get used to what it
looks like and then nail down the picture when you see the
phenomenon. This skill could be compared to the ability
musicians develop when they can recognize exact pitches without
the need to look at the instrument or music. Mozart could
differentiate up to a quarter of a tone, so if he could do it,
you can do it with light which is much easier.
The reason you can never actually plot it out is this.
Considering that the lights are far enough away from the subject
to be considered to be parallel rays, they hit curved surfaces of
the cheeks, chin, neck, breasts, arms, nose and the rest. The
light level decays from highlight to shadow with respect to the
curvature of each portion of shape it wipes past. These exact
curvatures decay the light in accordance with basically two
factors: The width of the light source itself and the extra fill
(or ambient light) that supplements the key light. We're going
to forget the fill light for now. Turn it off.
The light coming in from a non-specular source will now form
a highlight or shadow decay only when the curvature of the
subject is in certain limited positions with respect to the
striking light rays. I am speaking of this logarithmic decay
only.
Since the human form is multi-varied in shape too infinite
to itemize, its response to the light bouncing off it will vary
with every twist and proximity to the light source. The
beautiful lighting comes when the body is moved, not the lights.
These little moments of perfect lighting manifest themselves in
accordance with what I have so far mentioned. You wait for the
correct flow to come, then you put your attention on these little
moments of light (this does not bother the model because she can
feel that your attention is on the light). When the two moments
are at your advantage - you nail the shot.