portraits

I came across this portrait of celebrity-cum-actress Kate Beckinsale. At first it appeared to be just one of those typical photocall portraits, soft lighting/no harsh shadows etc etc. I was kind of bored, and about to pass over it. I could only see the top half of the image on my web browser, and as I scrolled down to see the rest of the image, all I could focus on were her hands. A pristine face marred by the veiny hands, which because of the angle, are very prominently featured. What an awesome portrait. To me, it makes a great statement about how women, particularly famous actresses, spend so much time and effort into their looks and staying young - and maybe rightly so because so much of their careers depend on it - but some things, some marks of aging, just cannot be hidden.

I love portraits. I love to study them. I love to make them, and I think it's something that I do quite well. While reading Barthes' Camera Lucida, he made a great point about how it is an automatic (modern society) human reaction to "pose" whenever there is a camera trained on a person. It made me think, how can a photographer possibly penetrate the essence of who that person is if the subject is just putting on an act for the camera? I was really quite disturbed. I talked this over with Iwan, a good friend, mentor, and one of my photography professors while at AU. After some discussion, I came to realise that a portrait only reflects a specific moment in time and moment, emotionally and/or physically. It can be revealing as an in your face or very subtle image. It should make the viewer want to think about that person. A good portrait, to me, makes the viewer take a second look after that first glance.