I got an old lady to pose for me...

I dont particularly like it.

The fact that I dont like it makes no difference to the queen, Bailey or anybody else.

There are so called 'technical' reasons I dislike it. the focal length shot at, the way shes leaning 'out' of the frame etc.

Its a nice pleasing expression but I have no real knowledge or interest in the subject matter for that to elevate the portrait for me.

I feel no need to critique this image - Its shot by an 'artist' with more knowledge and
experience than me.


I cant help but think that this is perhaps the only shot with this expression? maybe the others are 'better' framed etc but this is the only one in which there is a genuine smile? I dunno.
 
big soft moose said:
True but he only gets away with it because he's david bailey - so its like art innit , if one of us took a picture like that of a standard client and then told them "well portraits don't hasve to be flattering y'know" by way of justification we wouldn't stay in business very long
Click to expand...

That's true.

But only if you are in the business of shooting Venture stylee, cookie cutter portraiture.
 
big soft moose said:
True but he only gets away with it because he's david bailey - so its like art innit , if one of us took a picture like that of a standard client and then told them "well portraits don't hasve to be flattering y'know" by way of justification we wouldn't stay in business very long
Click to expand...


What is he "getting away with" exactly? The only reason an "amateur" wouldn't "get away with it" is because their peers would also be obsessing over the technicalities and also missing the point. Bailey hasn't "got away" with anything at all. He's taken perhaps the most engaging portrait of the Queen I've seen to date. If that's getting away with it... then perhaps more people need to "get away" with not obsessing over technical details more.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
What is he "getting away with" exactly? The only reason an "amateur" wouldn't "get away with it" is because their peers would also be obsessing over the technicalities and also missing the point. Bailey hasn't "got away" with anything at all.
Click to expand...

So how many shots in that style did you take when you were working for venture ?

Never mind peers - clients generally expect their portraits to be flattering - bailey has 'got away' with taking a deeply unflattering portrait because of who he is , because a potrait by bailey has an inherent kudos , never mind whether its something you'd put on your wall if it want by a 'name'
 
I have been reading this thread with interest. I am reluctant to post as I don't want to get into a debate with the technicalities or whatever else people don't think works. I will say though that I, personally, do not find it unflattering at all. If someone had shot my grandmother like this (which she is to Princes Harry and William), I would think they had done an excellent job of bringing out a warm, friendly side to a person whom is usually portrayed in portraiture, both painted and photographically, as much more serious and 'regal'. I think it's marvellous. Also, as someone mentioned previously, it would have had to have been approved by the Queen herself before being released to the press/public so I am sure she doesn't find it an unflattering portrait of herself.
 
big soft moose said:
True but he only gets away with it because he's david bailey - so its like art innit , if one of us took a picture like that of a standard client and then told them "well portraits don't hasve to be flattering y'know" by way of justification we wouldn't stay in business very long
Click to expand...

Well, that and several rooms of the same types of portraits at the national portrait gallery...
 
gazmorton2000 said:
I have been reading this thread with interest. I am reluctant to post as I don't want to get into a debate with the technicalities or whatever else people don't think works. I will say though that I, personally, do not find it unflattering at all. If someone had shot my grandmother like this (which she is to Princes Harry and William), I would think they had done an excellent job of bringing out a warm, friendly side to a person whom is usually portrayed in portraiture, both painted and photographically, as much more serious and 'regal'. I think it's marvellous. Also, as someone mentioned previously, it would have had to have been approved by the Queen herself before being released to the press/public so I am sure she doesn't find it an unflattering portrait of herself.
Click to expand...


What he said really. Its the first time I've seen a photo of her that makes me think I may enjoy a cup of tea and a chinwag with her, rather then her looking so very unapproachable
 
big soft moose said:
So how many shots in that style did you take when you were working for venture ?
Click to expand...

None. But that doesn't answer my question - What is he getting away with?

big soft moose said:
Never mind peers - clients generally expect their portraits to be flattering - bailey has 'got away' with taking a deeply unflattering portrait because of who he is , because a portrait by bailey has an inherent kudos , never mind whether its something you'd put on your wall if it want by a 'name'
Click to expand...

How do you know the Queen finds it unflattering? :) He only got away with it if the client wasn't happy. Maybe she also saw it as a breath of fresh air. Maybe she's also tired of being portrayed as the Monarch and not as a person. There's a great deal of assumption on your behalf.

When I DID work at Venture, I was often amazed by what people DID find flattering. You have to remember, I was there to oversee what was shot, what was sold in order to better service client needs. You'd be surprised what the client wanted and how crap it was.
 
Byker28i said:
Well, that and several rooms of the same types of portraits at the national portrait gallery...
Click to expand...

exactly its bailey so its art innit - doesn't change the point that if it wasn't bailey the client would fall off their chair laughing, right before they refused to pay the bill and the tog got torn apart by the daily mail / mumsnet
 
DemiLion said:
He's got a point though, whether you take the comment as an insult or not. The shot is archetypical Bailey, saying you don't like his processing is a bit like saying you like Van Gogh but not the swirly bits.
Click to expand...

I don't like the shot at all, I mean. I think the expression is bad, the perspective is bad and the PP is bad. "Bad" in this instance meaning, "bad" to me! lol
 
big soft moose said:
exactly its bailey so its art innit - doesn't change the point that if it wasn't bailey the client would fall off their chair laughing, right before they refused to pay the bill and the tog got torn apart by the daily mail / mumsnet
Click to expand...

Did you see the exhibition? It's actually really interesting seeing a room full of the same processing, strong blacks on white background.
As I said, a portrait should show the character. This does it in bucketloads.

But, that's the point of art, it's subjective. I can explain to you why I like it, you can explain why you don't. It doesn't make either of us right though, and that's the bit that some people struggle with :)
 
As a complete amateur (like haven't even brought a decent camera yet amateur) I like it. It seems genuine, friendly and a photo that shows some cheer. Yes it's not "technically" correct, but I think photographers can get caught up in the "technicality" over the "art" in photography sometimes. After all, it is a form of art...
 
big soft moose said:
exactly its bailey so its art innit - doesn't change the point that if it wasn't bailey the client would fall off their chair laughing, right before they refused to pay the bill and the tog got torn apart by the daily mail / mumsnet
Click to expand...

Why re you comparing this to the kind of stuff someone on Mumsnet would want? Why are you comparing Apples to Oranges, and then assuming that one size fits all. Why are you assuming that the stuff someone on Mumsnet would want is exemplar? Why are you ignoring the awkward questions? :)

Sure... someone wanting to be flattered and made to look more than they are wouldn't like it, but the assumption that everyone wants that from a portrait is a little naive I think. There's more to portraiture than what the average person in the street wants. This is clearly not an example of what the man in the street wants, so why are you using those standards to judge it?
 
I like it. It's a lot more flattering than the last photo I took of my 80 y/o Mum. I've never seen the Queen up close, but she seems remarkably less wrinkly with no skin blemishes than my poor Mum. Not sure if she is, or the photo is flattering

What is wrong with catchlights in eyes? I never knew they were 'wrong'. Every studio portrait I have ever taken has them. In fact I get disappointed when they are not as prominent as I like. I'm going to carry on ensuring they have catchlights in the future as I like them (yep....no accounting for taste I guess).....just not sure what 'rule' I am breaking
 
Steve said:
I like it. It's a lot more flattering than the last photo I took of my 80 y/o Mum. I've never seen the Queen up close, but she seems remarkably less wrinkly with no skin blemishes than my poor Mum. Not sure if she is, or the photo is flattering

What is wrong with catchlights in eyes? I never knew they were 'wrong'. Every studio portrait I have ever taken has them. In fact I get disappointed when they are not as prominent as I like. I'm going to carry on ensuring they have catchlights in the future as I like them (yep....no accounting for taste I guess).....just not sure what 'rule' I am breaking
Click to expand...

Multiple catchlights. Nowt wrong with them in my eyes though.
 
They aren't multiple catch lights. It's a window.
 
This thread delivers :D

I like the photograph. It's a nice photograph of an old lady.
 
Pookyhead is bang on, I'm a member of a number of forums, and this is the only one where so many have their heads up their backsides !

I have no interest in who took the portrait, when, where or why. What kit they used, what pp they applied, how much black there is or how many catch lights in the eyes (ffs) it's just a good picture.

After a lifetime of dedicated public service, and a carefully managed persona it's great to finally see HRH portrayed as a normal cheerful great grandma !
The technical merits of this picture are completely irrevalent, which is the whole point !!!!!!!

I'm sure that if Bailey read some of the comments on here he'd be wetting himself ! So many so called photographers and so little idea.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN !!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top