Have you done any interesting or odd portraits?
Hi, I'm Ashley-Rahne, and I'm new here, but when I started my 365 this year, on Jan. 10, my boyfriend and I went on a date to Arby's, and I took a very unusual portrait of him for that day.
Note: I'm also posting a link because the image sourcing doesn't seem to be working on my browser right now. Day 10
I think it pretty much sums up the events of the day, but it was completely random and I didn't even plan on using that one. Honestly, though, I adore this portrait of him. So, have any of you taken any unorthodox or abnormal portraits like this?
@triciaanddazzle lol I love the doll one!!! It's so vivid! Do you have any others where they were just instantaneous and might not have been edited or planned? All of these are very unique and original, though, definitely never seen a Fonzie-Jesus!! XD Awesome!
Hi Ashley-Rahne! Welcome to 365 :) I have done a few portraits but none that i would consider to be particularly interesting haha.
I would recommend you check out Hila's project though. She's finished now but you can still see her pictures. She's about the same age as you and did a whole year of self portraits, and she had some really nice imaginative ideas over the year. Her profile is http://365project.org/hilafriman/365
@toxicalice92 I don't, really. All my portraits have been planned. Unless you count the millions of photos I have of my daughter, but they're not really unique.
I did these for my son's wedding save-the-date cards. Unfortunately, he has called off the wedding for now. It is killing me to lose such a fantastic young woman. It feels like a death in the family. The relationship isn't completely off right now, but I fear for the future of it.
Wow, most of these are astounding!!! And definitely inspiring! They're so full of idea and feeling... But most all of them aren't really anything that I was looking for at all. :(
What I wanted to see was like I described before; Portraits, something unusual and unplanned, something that happens spur of the moment, and NOT edited. I'm a fan of editing past contrast and colour, to be completely honest. I think works with a lot of post processing show reliance on programs to make a shot interesting and unique, and I don't like feeling like I can't do it on my own.
Most of these are self portraits with TONS of editing and effects to make them interesting, and it's not what I wanted to see. :( I wanted to see portraits of other people that you caught spur of the moment that are unique to what is usually captured.
Day 278 is close because it's a portrait that catches the moment and it's not the type of spontaneous portrait people usually see. But knowing that it was planned, it loses a lot of its spark and intensity, because when you know you're going to do something and you plan it out, you know exactly what you're getting. Sure you get the satisfaction of getting the shot that you envisioned, but there's no excitement in just getting a good shot out of nowhere!
Who Moved My Bowie! is pretty much what I was looking for. Unlike all the other candids she posted, this kind of thing isn't very processed; It's very simple and quick and it shows you exactly what was going on in that instant. It's the type of portrait you don't see very often, and while it's growing, it's still very unique and spontaneous!
Must Be Love is also, I think, exactly what I was looking for. It's in the moment; No fancy editing; not traditional in any way; Posed, but not planned; And it's a portrait of other people.
I really do hope I don't sound ungrateful for the activity and reply on this thread. I am, it was so exciting to see so much participation in my first thread ever and I've not been here very long, and it was so inspiring to see the kinds of works done here. They're just not what I was looking for, and they're not the type of photos I said I wanted to see in my very first post. =/ Do you all understand what I meant now, and what I was looking for? :(
@toxicalice92 you have to be more selective in your questioning on the site , if you want to see unedited portraits you have to ask for unusual unedited portraits and not just Odd portraits otherwise as you see you get a thread with picture you were not looking for
@asrai I apologize. I'm in the mindset that when a photo is heavily edited, it's no longer a photograph, but a photomanipulation, because of the heavy amount of computer work done on the photograph. So I didn't feel the need to specify no-manipulated photos, since those are a completely different type of art work to me because you no longer see the photo, you see the computer effects.
However, though, whenever "triciaanddazzle" posted hers, I specifically asked her "Do you have any others where they were just instantaneous and might not have been edited or planned?" Also, the example I showed of mine that made me wonder and begin this thread was very unedited, and most of these heavily-edited photos are self portraits anyway, which I clearly didn't ask for. If I have to squish everything together in the title from now on, though, I'll be sure to do that in the future and post no introduction at all. o.o It didn't seem to do much good, anyway. :(
@toxicalice92 no apology needed just saying that people interpret what is asked differently so if you what to see something specific you have to be pretty specific in your intial thread, although you didn't ask for self portraits the term portrait is a wide area and could mean anything from selfies to animals also you will probably find people term photography differently too, as what can be achieved through digital manipulation can also be replicated from film in a darkroom so I see photo manipulation just as valid a form of photography as a non edited shot
@toxicalice92 I removed my post since it doesn't fit your vision. You asked for portraits, which is exactly what you got. In the future it would suit you to be more specific. And fyi, my images are photographs.
@asrai I guess I just have the view that if there are different terms for something, then they're there for a reason and mean different things. I've always thought of portrait as a likeness of another person, and a self portrait as a likeness of yourself. Otherwise, there'd be no reason to specify. And for photography vs photomanipulation, they're two completely and totally unrelated types of work to me. I guess probably because usually when you see examples of photomanipulation, you always see things like this and like this. Those effects you can take right off the bat; You have to use a lot of computer effects and a lot of work and programs to achieve that idea, and you don't even need a photo to create it. All of it can be created from scratch in a computer on its own; Taking a base photo just makes it easier, but the computer effects do all the work. Not to mention, tons of people mess with effects and illusions - It's not very unique or interesting anymore. Most popular works all have some sort of computer manipulated effect that makes it different than the photo on its own, and it's no longer a very unique things to see, to me. So I don't see it as a form of photography at all, and I believe if it were, then there would be no need for it to have a completely different title for the form. I suppose using a word for what it's intended for is much more generalized than what it means. =/
@foursides You didn't have to remove them, those were wonderful! I got self portraits, though, which weren't what I asked for. And I never said none of them were photographs; I only said that whenever I replied to "triciaanddazzle," I asked if there were any unedited, and that's what I was looking for. I realize that I should have been more specific in asking for unedited photos from the start, but I did ask for portraits and not self portraits, and give an example of someone else and not myself. I believe that if there's a separate title for Portraits and Self Portraits, then there's a reason for that, the reason being the very thing they Identify. Please, don't take offense, and understand that I'm still new to this site and I'm just learning that some people here interpret words much more generally than what they mean, and I'm trying to understand how photograph is thought of here. And again, I never, ever said that yours weren't photographs. So, to be honest, I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to say it in such a hostile way (or what seems hostile; This is only text after all. =/)
@pwallis I'm sorry, I'm still trying to understand how this site work and how the community converses and what they see as one thing or another. So I ended up elaborating a lot because it seems that somehow I wasn't specific enough, and that asking for "portraits" can include self-portrait, even when I didn't say "self-portraits," and that when I asked later on for any "not edited or planned," since I didn't say it from the start, lots of edited and planned self portraits were displayed. So today I ;earned that when you ask to see one thing, another can be considered, and when you specify a bit more shortly after, if it wasn't at the beginning, then you can mislead people. :)
It's totally fine:) I just think you shouldn't be too hasty to write off an entire genre of photography. There's a lot of different styles on this site and it's good to have an open mind and drink them all in! There's a LOT you can learn from the people on here, if you're willing:) Welcome, and enjoy yourself!!
@pwallis I'm not writing them off!! lol I just had one interesting photograph and wanted to see if there were anymore like the one I took. Just because it's not exactly what I was hoping to see doesn't mean I don't like it. This also helped me learn to be more specific than just using intended words for what I'm trying to say! :D But just because I personally don't consider it to be photography, specifically, I still see it as another type of art form, which is very interesting! Differentiating isn't writing it off, it's just how I see it, since they're different types of art. But I learned that some people here see different things much more generally as possibly the same! Learning party! *
@toxicalice92 You asked for portraits. Self portraits are still portraits. Your image doesn't even show up for me, so I have no clue what you posted, but again you said portraits. Which self portraits are. Portrait does not mean, only an image of someone other then yourself ;)
And you stated "I'm in the mindset that when a photo is heavily edited, it's no longer a photograph, but a photomanipulation, because of the heavy amount of computer work done on the photograph." Aaccording to this statement my images are really photomanipulation.
@foursides I also posted a link that takes you directly to it because I was aware that the image was not showing up for everyone. One extra click doesn't hurt.
And If you note, I also said, it's A - MY mindset, not a fact, but an opinion, and B - HEAVILY manipulated, which yours were not, yours were actually somewhat minimal.
Portrait can obviously be interpreted differently, and I have a different feeling of what that would consist of. As I stated before, please understand that I'm new to this site and still learning how people see and interpret things. It's different for everyone, and we all have different terminology. If I believed self portraits counted, I would have asked for self portraits; There's a reason why they have a different title, and I believe that it should be observed. I admitted, yes, I should have been more specific in asking for unedited. But we all misunderstood each other's meanings because we all have different opinions. So please, I'm asking politely, don't twist my words, and don't make it sound like there's any blame, and that it should all be on me. There's no blame, only misunderstanding, and I wasn't the only one who did so. You're taking personal offense to a very generalized opinion, instead of just accepting that we all see things differently and you're not acknowledging that I did admit that I should have been more specific in what I asked for, and to be honest, that's a very rude and selfish thing to do. You were not the only one I was referring to, and we all have different opinions - Simple as that.
@toxicalice92 I never said it was a FACT. I was simply referring to what you said. And according to YOU I don't post photographs. Simple as that.
And wow, I missed the link when I internally posted my photos. But you also didn't say here's an exact example of what I want. So much to still be left up to interpretation by your portrait request.
But since I'm now rude and selfish, hey I'm not the one throwing insults, I refuse to have anymore to do with this.
@foursides I'm still amazed that you choose to completely overlook where I A - Admitted that I should have been more specific, B - Stated that yours were NOT heavilg edited, which is what I said, and C - You're still making this about you. You-you-you-you-you. Acting as if I said your photos were wrong, you didn't do it right, you didn't give me what I want. Despite how I admitted that I yes, should have bee more specific, and I replied and referred to many other people other than just you. Yes, you're being selfish. It's not an insult, it's a matter of observation, because you are. You're acting as if I said your photos, specifically, were bad or horrible, and in no way did I do such a thing, or even single your photos out. I constantly tried to stay polite and fair, and you're acting the way my 10 year old sister did when my mom proves her wrong about something. Yes, now I'm being rude, but at least I'm also admitting to it.Again, I'm sorry if you got offended, but please, stop making it out to be as if I meant to offend you personally. Because I didn't. So I again politely and maturely ask you to calm down and stop twisting my words and taking this so personally. Being a successful mother, one would believe and hope that you're more understanding about a simple misunderstanding. I'll just leave as well, however this wasn't about just you. This was about what I, being NEW, apparently and admittedly failed to specify and how everyone interpreted it differently due to difference of opinion.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
You get the idea, haha.
I would recommend you check out Hila's project though. She's finished now but you can still see her pictures. She's about the same age as you and did a whole year of self portraits, and she had some really nice imaginative ideas over the year. Her profile is http://365project.org/hilafriman/365
Good luck! :)
All stuff is available here http://365project.org/tags/mikhasus-selfie
And maybe that's the oddest portrait (my friends are not fans of the usual type of portraits...):
BSG Cylon
Legend of the Seeker
i won't hit you up with ALL of them, but you get the picture:)
That'll do for now..... They're ALL selfies
Get the picture....on a picture site. HA!
Brilliant my dear.
Wow, most of these are astounding!!! And definitely inspiring! They're so full of idea and feeling... But most all of them aren't really anything that I was looking for at all. :(
What I wanted to see was like I described before; Portraits, something unusual and unplanned, something that happens spur of the moment, and NOT edited. I'm a fan of editing past contrast and colour, to be completely honest. I think works with a lot of post processing show reliance on programs to make a shot interesting and unique, and I don't like feeling like I can't do it on my own.
Most of these are self portraits with TONS of editing and effects to make them interesting, and it's not what I wanted to see. :( I wanted to see portraits of other people that you caught spur of the moment that are unique to what is usually captured.
Day 278 is close because it's a portrait that catches the moment and it's not the type of spontaneous portrait people usually see. But knowing that it was planned, it loses a lot of its spark and intensity, because when you know you're going to do something and you plan it out, you know exactly what you're getting. Sure you get the satisfaction of getting the shot that you envisioned, but there's no excitement in just getting a good shot out of nowhere!
Who Moved My Bowie! is pretty much what I was looking for. Unlike all the other candids she posted, this kind of thing isn't very processed; It's very simple and quick and it shows you exactly what was going on in that instant. It's the type of portrait you don't see very often, and while it's growing, it's still very unique and spontaneous!
Must Be Love is also, I think, exactly what I was looking for. It's in the moment; No fancy editing; not traditional in any way; Posed, but not planned; And it's a portrait of other people.
I really do hope I don't sound ungrateful for the activity and reply on this thread. I am, it was so exciting to see so much participation in my first thread ever and I've not been here very long, and it was so inspiring to see the kinds of works done here. They're just not what I was looking for, and they're not the type of photos I said I wanted to see in my very first post. =/ Do you all understand what I meant now, and what I was looking for? :(
However, though, whenever "triciaanddazzle" posted hers, I specifically asked her "Do you have any others where they were just instantaneous and might not have been edited or planned?" Also, the example I showed of mine that made me wonder and begin this thread was very unedited, and most of these heavily-edited photos are self portraits anyway, which I clearly didn't ask for. If I have to squish everything together in the title from now on, though, I'll be sure to do that in the future and post no introduction at all. o.o It didn't seem to do much good, anyway. :(
And you stated "I'm in the mindset that when a photo is heavily edited, it's no longer a photograph, but a photomanipulation, because of the heavy amount of computer work done on the photograph." Aaccording to this statement my images are really photomanipulation.
And If you note, I also said, it's A - MY mindset, not a fact, but an opinion, and B - HEAVILY manipulated, which yours were not, yours were actually somewhat minimal.
Portrait can obviously be interpreted differently, and I have a different feeling of what that would consist of. As I stated before, please understand that I'm new to this site and still learning how people see and interpret things. It's different for everyone, and we all have different terminology. If I believed self portraits counted, I would have asked for self portraits; There's a reason why they have a different title, and I believe that it should be observed. I admitted, yes, I should have been more specific in asking for unedited. But we all misunderstood each other's meanings because we all have different opinions. So please, I'm asking politely, don't twist my words, and don't make it sound like there's any blame, and that it should all be on me. There's no blame, only misunderstanding, and I wasn't the only one who did so. You're taking personal offense to a very generalized opinion, instead of just accepting that we all see things differently and you're not acknowledging that I did admit that I should have been more specific in what I asked for, and to be honest, that's a very rude and selfish thing to do. You were not the only one I was referring to, and we all have different opinions - Simple as that.
And wow, I missed the link when I internally posted my photos. But you also didn't say here's an exact example of what I want. So much to still be left up to interpretation by your portrait request.
But since I'm now rude and selfish, hey I'm not the one throwing insults, I refuse to have anymore to do with this.