Man, I get the biggest kick out of Richard Avedon. You got your answer earlier so I won't be redundant. 8X10 wasn't big enough for me so I went to 11X14. Still, the clarity you can get with these large negatives is really astounding. I've been spooked by it as well. Have a nice d
From an optical standpoint there's certainly nothing wrong with using a "normal" lens for portraiture. The principal reason longer lenses are usually suggested is to be able to get a head and shoulders shot without having to get so close that you make the subject uncomforatable.
If you're Cecil Beaton or Richard Avedon et al I guess the subjects wouldn't care if you put the camera on their nose. If you're Joe Blow it might bother them.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
BrianThe reason longer than normal length lens are used is not because you stay further back to get head and shoulders-it is so the perspective of the face wil l be flattened and look more "realistic" not elongated in a forward direction as can happen with a wide-angle lens. The use of a normal lens is generally not re commended for portraits for that reason, althyough of course, wonderful portrait s can be made with any length lens. It isn't the lens that makes the photograph, it is the photographer. I have made portraits with lenses from 10" to 24".
Michael A. Smith
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks