Photographer
Searcher
Posts: 775
New York, New York, US
Dictionary.com wrote:
in·fat·u·ate
1 : to cause to be foolish : deprive of sound judgment
2 : to inspire with a foolish or extravagant love or admiration I was talking with a model late last night in a small basement wine bar in Grenwich Village, maybe it was on MacDougal Street, I'm not sure. There was a lot of good wine flowing past my tastebuds. But our conversation turned to what the model, also a very talented actress (and I don't say that lightly, this girl has the soul of a poet and therefore inate game in the emotion projection department), felt produced her best photographs. She said the best pictures came from moments when she had psyched herself into infatuation with the photographer. However brief the lock, she would do anything for him in that state, and the emotions rolling out of her skin produced the most powerful photographs in her portfolio. From the way she was speaking, it was not romantic love she described, but a love of something about the photographer that she could grip with her mind and focus her energies through.
Models: Is infatuation requisite for your best shots? Do you get less impressive images when you are not emotionally invested in the person holding the camera and directing you?
Photographers: Have you had any experience of this and do you have a sense of this? Is the reverse true as well? Do you get better pictures when you really fall in love with something about the person who walks in the door? Is this the definition of a muse?
Actors: Care to weigh in on this?
Model
Dances with Wolves
Posts: 25108
SHAWNEE ON DELAWARE, Pennsylvania, US
Searcher wrote:
Actors: Care to weigh in on this? I won't comment on this as a model. I've experienced it but it didn't make a difference so I have nothing to add.
However, what exactly are you asking of the actors? If there is a connection in real life, does that make the connection on stage better?
If that's the question, then the answer for me is yes...but I'd rather know if that's the question first.
Photographer
Searcher
Posts: 775
New York, New York, US
That question is to actors who model, whether they, as people with training and experience in projecting an emotional range, have found any truth to this in their own career.
Model
Nemesis73
Posts: 2442
Dayton, Alabama, US
Um .... I plead the 5th.
N.
Model
Shyly
Posts: 3870
Pasadena, California, US
Searcher wrote:
Models: Is infatuation requisite for your best shots? Do you get less impressive images when you are not emotionally invested in the person holding the camera and directing you? Emphatically, yes.
Photographer
Searcher
Posts: 775
New York, New York, US
Also, one more question: what is involved on the model's side in the seperation at the end of the shoot? How does that work in your head: pulling yourself away from total commitment?
Photographer
La Seine by the Hudson
Posts: 8587
New York, New York, US
Infatuation helps "art." (Whatever the word "art" means.) Unfortunately art and life itself are sometimes at odds.
Model
Lady_Death
Posts: 98
Most photographers I've shot with liked men... thats the way my luck runs... but we were all good friends so that made it a fun and worthwhile endeavor... now I've been guilty of dating the male models I've shot with... but you never heard that from me 
Photographer
Searcher
Posts: 775
New York, New York, US
Marko Cecic-Karuzic wrote:
"art." (Whatever the word "art" means.) That's easier than people think.
It means "flowing from the heart."
HeART, ARTery, ARTisnal, rampART, etc. share the same Greek root.
The French word "artist" can be translated as "one who works from the heart."
Model
Loretta Lightningbolt
Posts: 4127
DEVILS ELBOW, Missouri, US
Searcher wrote:
Also, one more question: what is involved on the model's side in the seperation at the end of the shoot? How does that work in your head: pulling yourself away from total commitment? It's rough.
That's why I prefer to shoot until I am completely exhausted(at least ten hours if possible). Keep telling myself that there will be a next time....and I've properly smothered the feelings by the time I get to my door.
Photographer
Jay Bowman
Posts: 6511
Los Angeles, California, US
Searcher wrote:
Photographers: Have you had any experience of this and do you have a sense of this? Is the reverse true as well? Do you get better pictures when you really fall in love with something about the person who walks in the door? Is this the definition of a muse? Never experienced this. Falling in love with the person who walks through the door is unnecessary for me; I've already fallen in love with the idea or concept that I'm shooting. That's what matters. And, no, it certainly isn't the definition of a muse to me. A different matter entirely.
While it might work for some people, in some instances, it isn't the way for everyone. Seems like it would have to cover a lot of ground to actually be effective, though. There are some here who seem to feel validated because this is their method. Fine. But if that's the only way you can get a good shot, then I call it a handicap.
Why?
What are you going to do if your subject is suddenly the same sex as you and heterosexual? What happens when you need the model to project something like anger or any other emotion? What if you meet the model and don't like him or her at all? What if he or she doesn't fit your personal preference on beauty?
What do you do in these situations? Refuse to shoot them because you two can't fall in love?
Sounds like a very limiting method indeed...
Model
CrazyRussianHelicopter
Posts: 3256
Madison, Alabama, US
Yes, I find my photos better (or at least I like them better) when there is a certain "connection". I guees I always try to convice myself for the sake and for the time of the shoot that I like the photogropher for this or the other reason . Or just make it up in my head - the reason. But it does helps to at least imagine that there is something about the person behind the camera. My favorite photos that I've got now are from photogrophers who I "love" or "like" whatever you call it. After the shoot? I just keep getting on photogropher's nerves If it was imaginary "realtionship" for the sake of the shoot - I just forget it, as I walk out of the door. ___ Did I understand the question right? 
Photographer
nevar
Posts: 14670
Fort Smith, Arkansas, US
I invest a lot of myself into the muses that move me. I spend time trying to get into their heats and heads... To know what it us that makes them.
Some allow me past all the walls that they have erected... They chose to be vulnerable with me... They chose to be broken with me.
It is a beautiful experience to go into another person, to think and feel the way that they do. My strongest work is a reflection of those who have let me look inside them.
It is not an infactiation, but a deeply held intimate interest between artist and muse.
Photographer
Searcher
Posts: 775
New York, New York, US
Madcitychel wrote:
Did I understand the question right? I do believe you did.
ravens laughter wrote:
I invest a lot of myself into the muses that move me. I spend time trying to get into their heats and heads... To know what it us that makes them.
Some allow me past all the walls that they have erected... They chose to be vulnerable with me... They chose to be broken with me.
It is a beautiful experience to go into another person, to think and feel the way that they do. My strongest work is a reflection of those who have let me look inside them. This makes a lot of sense to me. I feel, as you seem to as well, that the best images come from the model and the photographer both choosing to be vulnerable with eachother. I feel it brings a glaze of humanity to the atmosphere of the shoot, and that really does get captured in the photographs. If you're going for that feeling in a picture, then it means everything.
Model
jade83
Posts: 2253
Columbia, Missouri, US
It's genuine openness and intimacy between minds, not infatuation or personal love.
Model
NC17
Posts: 1739
Baltimore, Maryland, US
I have to agree with Ravens Laughter, its a deep intimate connection. And it really only gets shared with a select few. I have to TRUST the photographer on a pretty deep level before that can even be thought of, and I have to respect the photographer's work and attitude after that. The best images for me come out of a deep desire to create whatever vision the photographer has in mind. That comes out of me really trusting the photographer and respecting what they create. I become their art.
But I'm also submissive, so that puts a different spin on it...
I can definately say that if I don't respect the photographer's work and don't trust them to create something that on my terms is quality, then I rarely allow myself to get emotionally involved, and often, to a degree, shut down during the shoot. Probably not the best, but oh well...
Model
Sarah Ellis
Posts: 1285
Portland, Oregon, US
Searcher wrote:
That's easier than people think.
It means "flowing from the heart."
HeART, ARTery, ARTisnal, rampART, etc. share the same Greek root.
The French word "artist" can be translated as "one who works from the heart." That's just silly. The word "heart" has a middle english root which is very close to the german root her-. Latin would be cor-, greek kard-. The word "art" is taken from the latin artem, for craft or skill. The french word "artist" or "artiste" (fem) has no meaning other than from its original derivation, ie one who practices art (latin).
Model
Sarah Ellis
Posts: 1285
Portland, Oregon, US
Also, artisnal is not an english word.
Photographer
vanscottie
Posts: 1190
Winnetka, California, US
Sarah Ellis wrote:
Also, artisnal is not an english word. God I love smart women!
that's not sarcasm!
Photographer
vanscottie
Posts: 1190
Winnetka, California, US
Photographer
vanscottie
Posts: 1190
Winnetka, California, US
Searcher wrote:
Photographers: Have you had any experience of this and do you have a sense of this? Is the reverse true as well? Do you get better pictures when you really fall in love with something about the person who walks in the door? Is this the definition of a muse? Its a definition of a muse sure, and yes I've gotten a few "crushes" here and there with models I've photographed more than once. But it's not romantic love or sexual love or friendship love is more less and like nothing else I guess..but it sure is
neat-o!
Photographer
Exedor
Posts: 88
TARZANA, California, US
This reminds me of another thread about whether you would work with an ugly photographer. Most of the posts stated it makes no difference...maybe that's not really relevant to this topic. I just thought I would throw that in.
Photographer
Jay Bowman
Posts: 6511
Los Angeles, California, US
Exedor wrote:
This reminds me of another thread about whether you would work with an ugly photographer. Most of the posts stated it makes no difference...maybe that's not really relevant to this topic. I just thought I would throw that in. Actually, I think that's a good point.
The photographer could be amazing at what he/she does. But that same person could be physically repulsive. What happens then? Does the model say "Um, sorry, but I just can't cause myself to fall in love with you and do my part in front of the camera. It's not you, it's me... No, no... Really you're wonderful... Can we just be friends?"
I shoot men and women. I shoot them laughing, crying, angry, and seductive. I don't have to fool myself into being in love with the model to get my shots. And I'm sure a number of models probably thought I was ugly. Or an ass. Or a dork. ::they'd be correct on all counts:: But we did what we needed to do. I just know how to get what I want without that.
On the other hand, my work is shit. Maybe I need to starting falling in love with each one of my models...
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
Searcher wrote:
I was talking with a model late last night in a small basement wine bar in Grenwich Village, maybe it was on MacDougal Street, I'm not sure. There was a lot of good wine flowing past my tastebuds. But our conversation turned to what the model, also a very talented actress (and I don't say that lightly, this girl has the soul of a poet and therefore inate game in the emotion projection department), felt produced her best photographs. She said the best pictures came from moments when she had psyched herself into infatuation with the photographer. However brief the lock, she would do anything for him in that state, and the emotions rolling out of her skin produced the most powerful photographs in her portfolio. From the way she was speaking, it was not romantic love she described, but a love of something about the photographer that she could grip with her mind and focus her energies through.
Models: Is infatuation requisite for your best shots? Do you get less impressive images when you are not emotionally invested in the person holding the camera and directing you?
Photographers: Have you had any experience of this and do you have a sense of this? Is the reverse true as well? Do you get better pictures when you really fall in love with something about the person who walks in the door? Is this the definition of a muse?
Actors: Care to weigh in on this? A long time ago, my best images were from a model I had a realtionship with.
I haven't had anything close to that since.
But I know they get enfatuated with the money they get paid!
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
SickShooter wrote:
It's rough.
That's why I prefer to shoot until I am completely exhausted(at least ten hours if possible). Keep telling myself that there will be a next time....and I've properly smothered the feelings by the time I get to my door. This is very interesting subject.
Is it that hard for you to separate yourself from the role once the shoot is done?
Photographer
Tom Holoubek
Posts: 342
Rockford, Illinois, US
...I'd worked with so many models that I never thought I could fall for one. Photographers are just not suppose to do it, right?
But I did. Over time, she grew more and more special to me and every time I photographed her, I simply melted.
Unable to keep my gushing mouth shut, I admitted it to her because I couldn't hold it in any longer.
The empty look I received after pouring my feelings out, will probably last longer in my mind then all the images she gave me.
I'm embarressed and hurt.
I guess the heart wants what the heart wants no matter how it hurts?
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
Jay Bowman wrote:
Never experienced this. Falling in love with the person who walks through the door is unnecessary for me; I've already fallen in love with the idea or concept that I'm shooting. That's what matters. And, no, it certainly isn't the definition of a muse to me. A different matter entirely.
While it might work for some people, in some instances, it isn't the way for everyone. Seems like it would have to cover a lot of ground to actually be effective, though. There are some here who seem to feel validated because this is their method. Fine. But if that's the only way you can get a good shot, then I call it a handicap.
Why?
What are you going to do if your subject is suddenly the same sex as you and heterosexual? What happens when you need the model to project something like anger or any other emotion? What if you meet the model and don't like him or her at all? What if he or she doesn't fit your personal preference on beauty?
What do you do in these situations? Refuse to shoot them because you two can't fall in love?
Sounds like a very limiting method indeed... I don't think your alanogy here works.
You're referring to photographers "falling in love " with their subject, right?
Well...I don't think it matters much, the photographer just captures the look, but the model has to project it, create it, express it....LIVE it in order to be shot.
As a photographer, I don't think it makes much of a difference what I feel.
However, on the subject of falling into the role....I don't think this works for all situations as well. But I think for images created from personal works...it could be interesting.
Photographer
Veteres Vitri
Posts: 1994
MAYLENE, Alabama, US
Isn't this called method acting
Model
Sarah Ellis
Posts: 1285
Portland, Oregon, US
Searcher wrote:
She said the best pictures came from moments when she had psyched herself into infatuation with the photographer. However brief the lock, she would do anything for him in that state, and the emotions rolling out of her skin produced the most powerful photographs in her portfolio. I don't think that the responses so far have addressed the point that Searcher's model made. She described a forced and brief infatuation. I can definitely identify with that; I think I try to do what she does at many shoots, often with good results. In these situations, I (and probably she) am not actually infatuated with the photographer, nor do I have any difficulty in turning off my momentary ardour.
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
Tom Holoubek wrote:
...I'd worked with so many models that I never thought I could fall for one. Photographers are just not suppose to do it, right?
But I did. Over time, she grew more and more special to me and every time I photographed her, I simply melted.
Unable to keep my gushing mouth shut, I admitted it to her because I couldn't hold it in any longer.
The empty look I received after pouring my feelings out, will probably last longer in my mind then all the images she gave me.
I'm embarressed and hurt.
I guess the heart wants what the heart wants no matter how it hurts? LOL....Tom...welcome to the club.
It's happened to me but not with a model.
It's called LIFE.
You're hurt but you will heal. We all do.
Model
Sarah Ellis
Posts: 1285
Portland, Oregon, US
Cecil Sharps wrote:
Isn't this called method acting You type faster than I do 
Photographer
Tom Holoubek
Posts: 342
Rockford, Illinois, US
Howard Garcia wrote:
LOL....Tom...welcome to the club.
It's happened to me but not with a model.
It's called LIFE.
You're hurt but you will heal. We all do. You're right. But when do we smarten up?
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
Tom Holoubek wrote:
You're right. But when do we smarten up? We never do.
Model
soma_stardust
Posts: 611
Emeryville, California, US
Sarah Ellis wrote:
I don't think that the responses so far have addressed the point that Searcher's model made. She described a forced and brief infatuation. I can definitely identify with that; I think I try to do what she does at many shoots, often with good results. In these situations, I (and probably she) am not actually infatuated with the photographer, nor do I have any difficulty in turning off my momentary ardour. same here. sometimes, being new to this, i forget that i am a person and am supposed to emote through the pictures. i'm a passionate person, so it's rather easy for me to turn it on and off (once i remember to do it.) it's not directed at the photographer, but more like feeling the camera is delving into my heart.
however, it is easier if i feel some sort of connection with the photographer.
~soma~
Model
Sarah Ellis
Posts: 1285
Portland, Oregon, US
Soma Stardust wrote:
same here. sometimes, being new to this, i forget that i am a person and am supposed to emote through the pictures. i'm a passionate person, so it's rather easy for me to turn it on and off (once i remember to do it.) it's not directed at the photographer, but more like feeling the camera is delving into my heart. Soma-
Your passion is definitely evident in your images - they're wonderful
Model
Kaitlin Lara
Posts: 6467
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
I actually quite often do the same sort of thing...it's not intentional though. If a photographer is a cool person, and an amazing artist I can't help but be infatuated with them...particularly with their talent. I use that strong feeling of respect and I suppose...infatuation...to bring out the strongest emotions I'm capable of.
Photographer
Phil Edelstein
Posts: 663
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Fall in love with your images, not your models (unless you are already married to your model.) Whatever you need to do to get perfect images, that's what you do....but dream it up in your head. The passion is in your craft, and a love affair with your art.
Photographer
Howard Garcia
Posts: 2210
New York, New York, US
Kaitlin Lara wrote:
If a photographer is a cool person, and an amazing artist I can't help but be infatuated with them... And goodlooking too, right? 
Photographer
Jose Luis
Posts: 2890
Dallas, Texas, US
I fall in love with every one of my subjects. But, Im fickle and lose interest just moments after that last shot. This is probably why I suck at shooting men and ugly people. :-)
-Jose
|
