The Love of Eyes.

[lambbottomphotos]

Hi everyone. I has always found that photographers usually fill up there packages with
A LOT of eye contact pictures. I know the eyes have profound stories to tell but isn't it also beautiful to see people in there natural poses and natural state?
For instance, children playing with acorns and looking down at the mud; its a curiousity we have all experienced. When I see portraits on people looking staright at the camera in every pose, I tend to not be able to know who they are and what the picture says about them anymore. The way we move, the way we interact, the way we see life thru all sorts of emotions is also as important as looking at the camera to get a pretty picture of someone's eyes and posture. Would you agree?

[Sam]

Different types of photography need different aspects to bring out the artists vision.

I personally like eye contact. I will sit and wait for my kids to look at me naturally if I am out watching them play then take the shot.

Photojournalistic pictures will get you more of what I think you are looking for. Try researching that type of photography and you'll probably find what you want. Portraiture usually has some eye contact going on, not always but if you are selling yourself as a portrait photographer you'll have a eye contact in your portfolio.

[lambbottomphotos]

Yes, natural eye contact says more to me.

Thanks for the info.

[Sam]

I posted a shot for you in the kids forum. I think it shows what I was getting at.

I almost always choose the shots that are natural over the posed ones when I am sitting and looking through my shots for the day. Those are the ones that tend to suck me into the moment.

[Tracon]

I don't mean to plug my own photo, but take a look at this test "portrait" style shot of my sister during a shoot on a beach in the park near my house. How would you define that sort of style? Clearly she is not looking at me or the camera. I would still define this as a portrait however, but like you, I believe there is a lot of emotion to gather from the indirect style. I'm sorry it's out of focus.
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d29/PSVA_Tracon/IMG_4873edit.jpg

[Sam]

I don't mean to plug my own photo, but take a look at this test "portrait" style shot of my sister during a shoot on a beach in the park near my house. How would you define that sort of style? Clearly she is not looking at me or the camera. I would still define this as a portrait however, but like you, I believe there is a lot of emotion to gather from the indirect style. I'm sorry it's out of focus.


I don't think this question was directed at me however I'd like to answer.

I don't get much emotion out of the posted shot. I look first to the out of focus shore and then to the barrettes in her hair before I look to the face. You're right that some photographers can pull you right into the shot with their compositions and lighting without any eye contact what so ever but you said it yourself, this is a test shot. It looks like a quick grab shot while checking lighting to me.

[Tracon]

Yup, that's about all it was. I wasn't checking lighting, but it was quick. Thanks for the honesty!

[Sam]

Yup, that's about all it was. I wasn't checking lighting, but it was quick. Thanks for the honesty!

I think because she is looking in that direction and is in focus more or less and the stick is also in focus my brain just zoned in on the shore that's framed by the two? I was in no was implying anything about your skill though.

[Tracon]

I understand. You are right, however, and I appreciate your honesty. I didn't mean to hijack the convo. The eyes always tell a story, so it only makes sense to include them in your own photographic story. A story about a story, if you will.