Portrait Theory: The Psychological Portrait

Edward Steichen's 1903 photogravue of tycoon J.P. Morgan is frequently cited as a prime example of the psychological portrait, one that shows the inner man.  It is one of Steichen's most celebrated works.  The fierce expression, stiff posture and highlight on the chair arm looks at first glance like a  trench knife is thought by many critics to catch Morgan revealing himself as a sociopathic business man.  But is that the case?

I've been meaning for some time work through the general assertion that great portraits should all be a deep psychological study that reveals the soul or some deep inner truth about the subject.  This came to a head for me when my wife, Susan, read to me that John Updike, and others, criticized portraits by John Singer Seargent for "not being deep enough".  Irving Penn's portraits get a similar note, being called cool and distant.  What on earth could that mean?

In response to the idea of the phsychological portrait, I developed a thesis, which I found is not new or unique to my thinking, that a portrait cannot capture anything like the heart and soul of the subject.  In fact, I think the concept of the phychological portrait is fatuous.

My Exhibit A is this mug shot of actor Nick Nolte.  It has all the elements we associate with a psychological portrait.  We can see a man in apparent crisis, caught in a vulnerable moment, all pretense dropped.  There is a defiant resignation in his stare.  Would Sargent have painted a picture like this?  Highly unlikely.  Was the photographer seeking to capture the inner man?  Well, it is a mug shot, not a sitting for Vanity Fair.

Looking at examples critics hail as psychological portraits, they all seem to have these characteristics in common:

• The picture is not flattering.  J.P. Morgan rejected his portrait.
• The sitter must look fierce, uncomfortable, drunk, vulnerable and/or lecherous.
• The more severe the "hatchet job" is on the sitter, the more celebrated the picture is as being "deep"

I really think any powerful portrait reveals more about the artist and viewer than it does the subject.  Penn and Sargent don't enter the sitter's world - they pull the subjects into theirs, without apology.

I'll close with a quote by one of my favorite portrait photographers:

"I am convinced that any photographic attempt to show the complete man is nonsense. We can only show, as best we can, what the outer man reveals. The inner man is seldom revealed to anyone, sometimes not even the man himself." - Arnold Newman

Portrait Theory: Main Light

What do these portraits have in common?



Rembrandt self portrait

Al Pacino by Irving Penn

Boy Bitten by a Lizard, Caravaggio



Gary Cooper by Edward Steichen



There are seveal common elements here. First, did you notice that the light souce is to the sitter's right? I recently read a study that claims more than 75% of portraits are made with the main light to the left of the subject. My own less formal browsing definitely agrees. Why is this?

One theory I find intriguing is that most painters, like the rest of the population, are right handed. If the main light is a window, then having the canvas lit from the left avoids a shadow cast by the painter's hand. Rembrandt used a mirror for his self portrait, so the mirror image geometry fits the theory, too. By the time photography was on the scene, portraits lit from the right looked the most natural. Subjects lit from the left seem to convey a different emotional impact due entirely to a convention dictated by 600 year old practical concerns.

Another thing to note is the the light source is broad, yet directional, as if coming from a window slightly higher than the subject. The nose shadow does not cross the lip line. The contrast from lit side to shadow side is fairly sharp, which helps delineate form and reinforce overall design.

So, a classical portrait has a main light with these characteristics:

• The sitter is lit from the right
• The light source is slightly higher than the subject
• The light quality is fairly contrasty, like North window light
• In gneral, the main light is the only light on the subject
• The nose shadow never crosses the lip line
• Highlights in the eyes are symmetrical

These are the main light "rules" to be broken, and of course, they frequently are with great success. The point point is that the classical main light rules yeild the most natural looking portraity. Moving the main to a different position usually introduces a new tension and increases drama. For instance, moving the main light high and to the left creates a new classic, the beauty shot, like this Ricard Avedon portrait of Liz Taylor:



Moving the light low and to the left is yet another classic I like to call "Frankenstein Light":



The position of the main light conveys a great deal of nuance, so it one the many tools available to the portrait photographer.

Christina and Natalie, 1980

One of the older pictures from my book stars Christina Kemper, left, and Natalie Zimmerman in Oscar del la Renta for a Stix, Baer & Fuller newspaper ad.  It won a number of awards at the time, believe it or not.  We shot this at the Jefferson Memorial in Forest Park, several years before the renovation.  Christina was kind enough to fly in from Chicago for shoots.  Natalie started her modeling career in St. Louis, then moved to NYC.  I think she was visiting when we shot this.  The art director for this was the great Ranny Millier, who was always open to all my experiments.  This was a full page newspaper ad for a department store, so the grainy film and blurred movement were fairly brave decisions on his part.

Technical: Nikon F2, 105mm f2.5, Ilford HP5 @ ASA 400 processed in Durafine, f/8.0 @ 1/15s in norther skylight.  Printed on Ilford Multigrade FB, bleached in 5% potassium ferrocyanide, then soaked in Kodak Rapid Selenium 1:64 to get neutral whites and blue Zone III values, then drum ferro-typed.  Wow, did I do all that?  

Bridge Girder Study #3

An abstraction of the train bridge over the Meramec river near 44 and 141.  The fact that it is still functional despite decades of obvious neglect is a testament to the original builders.  RAW file cropped and processed in Lightroom 2.  Nikon D700, 60mm, ISO 200, f/8.0 @ 1/1000s, handheld. 

Egyptian Abstract - St. Louis Art Museum

On the lower level of the St. Louis Art Museum, there is a room with a sky light.  On a sunny afternoon, visitors are treated to interesting show shadows cast on the wall.  In the foreground is small Egyptian antiquity.  Nikon D100, ISO 1000, 24-85mm @ 85mm, f/5.6 @ 1/200s.  Selenium conversion in Lightroom 2.  

St Louis Sepia - SLAM

Nikon D100, IS0 200, 24-85mm @ 32mm, f/8, 1/400s.  Sepia conversion in Lightroom 2.