A photograph is shaped more by the person behind the camera...

[Byker28i]

This is a really interesting experiment by Canon on how a photograph is shaped more by the person behind the camera than by what’s in front of it.
6 photographers were asked to shoot an actor, only they were each told he was someone different, : a self-made millionaire, someone who has saved a life, an ex-inmate, a commercial fisherman, a self-proclaimed psychic, and a recovering alcoholic. Michael, an actor, did his best to take on the personality of each character.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-TyPfYMDK8

 

[PaulButler]

I think it would have been more interesting to see how the 6 images turned out if they had all been told the same info. The brief somewhat prejudiced their approach and this is borne out by their own comments.

 

[juggler]

I think it would have been more interesting to see how the 6 images turned out if they had all been told the same info. The brief somewhat prejudiced their approach and this is borne out by their own comments.

+1; it was a largely pointless exercise. The discussions they had with the actor about what he supposedly wanted from the photoshoot in the guise of each character will have had just as much of an impact.

 

[blakester]

+1; it was a largely pointless exercise. The discussions they had with the actor about what he supposedly wanted from the photoshoot in the guise of each character will have had just as much of an impact.

I agree. I think there were too many variables to make an accurate comparison of the portraits made.
Very interesting all the same, I enjoyed the short video.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I think it would have been more interesting to see how the 6 images turned out if they had all been told the same info.

Agreed. Basically, the photographers have been duped into thinking they're trying to capture something they're not, and some of them took really great shots with empathy nodding towards what they THOUGHT was the truth.

I'm not really sure what the point of the film was to be honest.

If they all were told the same thing... or merely the truth, THEN that would be interesting to see.

Ultimately though... I'm left a bit puzzled as to the point of it all.

[edit[ Apologies for double post.

[edit of edit].. double post seems to have gone... weird.

 

[simonblue]

with what others have said,a bit of an pointless excise IMO.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Just canon marketing blurb.

 

[Gary Coyle]

I think it would have been more interesting to see how the 6 images turned out if they had all been told the same info. The brief somewhat prejudiced their approach and this is borne out by their own comments.

 

[Gary Coyle]

Just canon marketing blurb.

 

[dizidav]

would have perhaps been more interesting if they had all used a selection of older cameras.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•
Of course, every photographer has an other eye…
but one can't steal what the subject is not giving
and this character had a very cool personality!

I don't think the exercise was pointless at all though…
and I too enjoyed it… even if it's a canon blurb

 

[Byker28i]

Ten minutes for the shoot, didn't really give the photographers time to really get to know the person, however, looking at the images, for the psychic an empty chair next to them? For the criminal, that mean moody look.
The final image does then appear to be shaped by the initial description.
I'd have been interested if the viewer could have suggested occupations before being told. I wonder if there were the only 6 photographers or whether there were more and those chosen suited the results/video best.

 

[steveo_mcg]

It's interesting, the photographers are told what to expect so arranged their poses accordingly, the actor obviously had a big part in making the photographer belive the brief. I think for me the take away message (sorry) is that a decent subject (probably actor maybe not) and photographer can tell what ever story they like.

 

[Phil V]

It's interesting, the photographers are told what to expect so arranged their poses accordingly, the actor obviously had a big part in making the photographer belive the brief. I think for me the take away message (sorry) is that a decent subject (probably actor maybe not) and photographer can tell what ever story they like.

This^

But back to the thread title - it should go without saying, otherwise what's the point in us doing it. Everything and everyone has already been photographed, if the photographer brings nothing to the shot, we have all the shots we need now. We'd just need an automated camera set up to shoot all the new things as they appear.

 

[BillN_33]

very interesting to listen what the photographers had to say and the expressions on their faces

 

[KIPAX]

Did anyone learn anyhting from this that wasnt blatently obvious beforehand.. if you did then great..otherwise..pointless..

 

[StewartR]

Did anyone learn anyhting from this that wasnt blatently obvious beforehand.. if you did then great..otherwise..pointless..

The opportunities to re-use this text are almost infinite. If I were you I'd be keeping it on speed-dial.