Skip to main content

Featured in Oct. 2010 Popular Photography Issue

I was fortunate enough to be featured in the October issue of Popular Photography! I was one of 8 professional photographer to be interviewed about taking intimate candid photographs of family members. I remember flipping through that magazine when I was starting up, learning everything I can about photography.

They usually run more 'techy' articles so I was surprised that they were planning to publish more 'personal approach' story.




This was the photo that ran in the article. This was shot with a Hassleblad 500cm with 80 2.8 CF

Below is my answer to all the questions that Popular Photography has asked me about photographing candids of family members. Enjoy! 

• pleasures you take in shooting candids
• background selection
• background manipulation or improving
• composing thoughts
• establishing relationships with subject(s).
• conversational tactics
• strategies for coaxing photogenic behavior (especially from children)
• observation techniques
•  specific shooting techniques

I take pleasure in shooting candids because I love to tell stories. The showing of the relationship between the subjects, the space that they’re in and of course, a bit about myself is also included in the picture. Family life is intimate, and very familiar to all of us so the viewers can relate to them no matter what culture they are from.

In candids, I like to show the space that they are in, when I can. The room that they’re in shows their characters and what they value in their life.  To show the space I like to use fast wide angle lens. Wide angle is a bit tricky to use because if you don’t establish layers (foreground, background) you can lose the subject in the clutter. I like to establish the foreground with the subject, which means get closer! Rober Capa said it the best, ‘If it’s not good enough, you weren’t close enough’. This will give dominance to the subjects while still showing the background that will complete the story.

I will almost always look for elements that goes with the subject matter. If it doesn't add to the story, then I'll try a different angle so it is either eliminated or subdued. As far as manipulating or altering the background, I usually don’t, since I take a "documentary" approach. I do improve the background by "dodging and burning" though, to get the viewer's attention to the areas that I want them to focus on.

My Composition is done mostly instinctively when shooting candids. When I compose, I have in my mind what I think it is interesting in that particular scene. Only then, I can know if it’s okay to cut off this or that, or if this should be shown completely. I compose with my feet and my back. I’m constantly moving around, stooping, tiptoeing. I get sore after a shoot. There’s no other way to compose. You cannot move a wall, or place that person next to that person without interrupting the moment. It’s about where your lens is in relation to the subject.  Once I  have the image in my  viewfinder, I start asking questions. ‘What’s important here?’ and what is not? Then the walking, bobbing and weaving starts.  All this movement is clarifying what I want to show, and hiding what I don’t want to show.

One technique that I use frequently is that I frame the shot around the subjects first and wait for the "moment" to happen. Anticipation is a great tool in candid photography. When people see you pointing the camera at nowhere for few minutes they start to think, ‘oh he's not taking a picture of me’ and they go on with their business.

I’ve also noticed that the very act of lifting the camera up to my eyes gets people’s attention and can make the subjects nervous. I sometimes lift the camera and point it in some direction away from my intended subject. They'll think I'm photographing something else. Then using my peripheral vision, I rotate the camera to the intended subject and snap quickly and rotate the camera back to somewhere else. If you do this smoothly enough, they'll think I was just scanning the area. This technique is used more for strangers or in the streets. If you establish good relationships with your subjects, and they know what you're doing, you won’t have to use this technique.

A good ice breaker is to show your subject one of your shots (make sure it’s a good one) on your LCD screen. People are always self-conscious about how they look in pictures. If you can make them look natural, flattering and interesting, they'll be eager to be in your photos. Some photographers, back in the day, used to carry Polaroid cameras just for this purpose. Showing the pictures to your subjects engages your subject as  "participants" not as "victims".

I don't like to "coax" my subjects for photography. For some photographers they are experts at it and gets great results. But for me I'm more of an observer.  I do however tell them what I'm doing and take interest in what they are doing. This has to be genuine, of course. This gets them talking and they see you as a friend. Once you’re a friend, what you do with your camera is not offensive, you’re expressing interest in their lives, not exposing them. 

"Letting it unfold" is my motto when observing. You need to listen for the cues also. Sometimes you'll get warnings before the action happens. Somebody saying, "let’s cut the cake" means You know something good is going to happen. With candids, you need to be there before something interesting happens. Observing only allows you to see the rhythm of what’s going on in front of you, so you can anticipate the shot. If you react, then you'll be too late. It’s very much like shooting sports, you need to be quick and see it coming before it happens.

I use Canon 5d MKII. It does the job. It’s not too big, not too loud and I like the full size chip for the wide angles. Low light capability is great too, since a lot of canidid shots happen indoors. The Live View is nice for low or high angles shots. I like fast prime lenses. They are small, light and image qualities are excellent. The fastest zooms are 2.8's and are pretty big and heavy. They look like an elephant eye. Can you imagine being on the other side of that lens? I use 28mm 1.8, 50mm 1.2 and 100mm 2.0. without hoods, since they make the lens look bigger. They all fit in my small belt bag. I try to minimize my visual footprint, both with the camera and myself. I use simple black strap or thin wrist strap on the camera and the belt bag on my belly. I used to use a shoulder bag but I found myself always pushing it around.  As I shoot more and more I know what works for me and what doesn’t.  Your gear should reflect the way you work. It should help you not hinder you.

I usually use Program Time value or Aperature value. If I have time Manual. Since I handhold and sometimes walking backwards, high shutter speed gets things sharp. I tend to shoot with pretty open aperture since I want the viewer's attention on where I want it to be. The advanced metering in modern cameras and the ability to salvage highlight details when shooting RAW has simplified metering for me. But it is important to get it right as much as possible in camera first, of coarse.

I almost always shoot natural light, thanks to great low light sensitivity of the 5D. I like to see the light with my own eyes. Never liked using the on camera flash too much. If I use a studio flash, I will bounce the light on the ceiling or the wall. I’ll try to mimic natural lighting as much as I can.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Large Format ...Slight Return

Took out my Linhof 4x5 field camera out for a spin. Tripod, cable release, focusing cloth, loupe, lightmeter, and film holders! The gang's all here. Linhof Technica III, (circa 1940's) with Fujinon 150mm 5.6 a modern lens design.  Bull Run Park near Manassas VA.The camera is wonderfully made with machined aluminum with German engineering. Like Butter. Working with a 4x5 is a whole different world. It takes long to set up and there are so many things that you can screw up. "Did I cock the shutter? check focus?, meter reading, dark slide out? lock the movements?... There are like 13 different steps that you have to make to take a picture.  So why do it when I can just point my 5d and shoot in easy one two steps?  Reasons may vary, but I do it because of the camera movements. The tilts, swings, shifts. These cameras were made so you can technically control how the image hits the film plane. You can achieve "technically perfect" images, whatever that means. 

Boston: B&W Architecture with Leica Q2M: From a Purist Perspective.

I swear I was going to switch out my black and white ONLY Leica Q2M to a regular Q2 color camera before going to this trip.  I"m glad I didn't.   Oh, before I forget, take a look at my icandy slide shows .  I will be making slideshows that is designed for big screen TV's.  Take a look at this one: Ok, back to the topic on hand.  So one of the most asked question about the Leica Q2M is, 'why limit yourself to just black and white when you can easily convert color photos to BW?'  Very good question.  My answer is,  if you know with certainty you want the best quality BW image possible, you want the dedicated monochrome camera.  Am I being a staunch purist? or is there a practical argument for it? Let's talk about it.  Beacon Street Boston,  MA One of many beautiful architecture on that hill.   First, this camera doesn't have any moire filter on the sensor.  Moire filters are on most color camera sensors to get rid of those annoying repeating patterns that loo

Polaroid Negative?

I've been wanting to do color large format for awhile. When there were photo labs around the corner, it wasn't hard to do a E-6 process in a day or two. Now that process has gotten expensive and if you're doing sheet film, its even more pain. So my solution... Polaroid! well technically, it should be called "instant film" since Polaroid is trademarked term. I'm using  Fuji FP 100c45. But here's the twist. I wanted a different look. If I want true colors, I wouldn't bother with the cost of 2 bucks per shot.  I also was fascinated with some surface texture that I saw on polaroids.  I recently came across some sites that talks about turning a polaroid into negatives. Its true that Polariod years ago did have those positive/negative film, but they've discontinued all instant film a couple of years ago.   The process is simple. you take bleach and take off the black stuff on the part that you throw away.  Once the black part is off, you have a negati