| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Annie Leibovitz Obama Family Portrait..are they serious???
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 1:55 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Have you seen it? Seriously...this is a snap shot with nice lighting, well nice lighting for Canon G10 snap shot. For many family-portrait photographers I know this shot would most likely be an outtake due to composition and other factors.
Fingers cropped on the left, odd placement of Malia on the right, the open door begin The Presidents' shoulder... is this a case of The Emperor's New Clothes?
Look for yourself here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/4035513827/ |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 2:31 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> I thought Malia's arm around Barack looked weirdly long.
Certainly not Leibovitz's best work, and by reading the comments under the Flickr photo you'd think NONE of them had ever seen Leibovitz's best work. |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 2:32 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Sorry, make that Sasha's arm. |
|
Luke Sharrett, Student/Intern
|
Forest | VA | United States | Posted: 2:38 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> As with most anything that comes out of the White House, any photo that Ms. Leibovitz took probably had to pass muster with about 10 different offices and advisors before it was approved. My guess is that 1 out of the 10 actually have any idea what makes a good photo. |
|
Jeff Martin, Photographer
|
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 2:49 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I'd expect better give photogenic subjects. |
|
Jeff Martin, Photographer
|
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 2:49 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I'd like an "n" Pat. |
|
Bradley Newton, Photographer
|
Carrollton | TX | | Posted: 2:50 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I totally agree with you, Steve. A plebeian effort at best. Looks like someone living off their reputation. The massive amount of positive comments on the flickr site is remarkable. Obviously, most people have instamatic sensibilities when it comes to portraiture...or their artistic judgment is shaded by their political leanings. |
|
Curtis Clegg, Photographer
|
Sycamore | IL | USA | Posted: 3:03 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> I have a theory about Flickr. I always wondered why it wasn't "Flicker"... where the heck did that "e" go?
But after reading various threads on photo forums I noticed another phenomena - the rampant and random addition of the letter "e" to the end of the word "lens". A quick Google search finds 283,000 pages on flickr.com that contain the word "lense".
My theory (and I'm sticking to it) is that they took the letter "e" from Flicker and gave us the word "lense" just to annoy me. |
|
Erik Markov, Photographer
|
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 3:43 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I like your theory Curtis thats why I marked you funny. I'm pretty sure there is a direct correlation between a person's intelligence and the fact they add the "e" |
|
Kevin Seale, Photographer
|
Crawfordsville | IN | United States | Posted: 3:49 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I'm guessing the big O left the door open so he could run out before Annie asked him for a loan. |
|
Eric Seals, Photographer
|
Detroit | MI | United States | Posted: 4:24 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> The bigger question is why didn't Pete Souza shoot the portrait, he would have done much, much better. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 4:29 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I like it. I like somewhat informal pictures like that. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 4:46 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Bet she got paid though.... |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 4:51 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Matthew,
You like awkward posing, open doors, cut off fingers, oddly posed bodies and other oddities?
I don't shoot family formals, even at weddings, because I know I can't shoot these shots. I know many family-portrait pro who however do them excellently...clearly Ms. Leibovitz isn't one of them.
This shoot ranks right up there with the $1mil snap-shot session with Suri Cruise for Vanity Fair that Leivovitz shot. 10 photo spread (and corresponding online gallery), consisting of 3 snap shots, 5 ho-hum family photos and 1 "Leibovitz" shot (not her best work, but at least it looked like her style of work): http://www.vanityfair.com/fame/features/2006/10/suri_portfolio0610#slide=1
I know the "wow" of the photos was the access, and the $1mil shoot fee was simply because that is what Vanity Fair pays Leibovitz for her name and access...but for the money she commands I'd really like to see something that makes me pause and say "That's Nice!" |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 4:52 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Mark,
You don't think she shot The President's Family Portrait for the Byline and the promise of future work? |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 5:00 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Mark, Reports I've heard is that the portrait was done gratis.
--Mark |
|
Bradly J. Boner, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Jackson | WY | USA | Posted: 5:11 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Mark L. - I hope you're right... t'would be a shame had they paid for that! |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 5:16 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> I would guess it was done quickly, with little time for prep, lighting, and probably something like a 10 minute window.
EXIF says a Canon 1DsMkIII, so at least it's in focus... :-) |
|
Tim Steadman, Photographer
|
Charlotte | NC | | Posted: 6:14 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Good to see it happens to the best of us! |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 7:08 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Steven E. Frischling
Do not know what to tell you man, I just like the natural feeling of the image. I like laid back family shots like this, sorry.
Just because you do not think it is solid does not mean I have to, cool? |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 7:26 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Matthew,
Just throwing the question out there. You know photogs, ask four photogs a question and get twelve answers :0) |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 7:39 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Sorry Steven if my post was rude, maybe I misread your post. |
|
David G. McIntyre, Photographer
|
Beijing | . | CHINA | Posted: 7:40 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> She shot the photo, and none of us did. The terms of doing were between them.
If one of us would of shot it, we would of been critiqued about it too. (Good or bad)
She has her style, and we have ours, and the first family has theirs.
So, whatever the outcome, it has been done and life moves on. |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Maryville | MO | USA | Posted: 7:44 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> I like the photo too. Perfect images aren't realistic. Imperfection creates value. It tells a story that perfection wouldn't communicate. |
|
Yamil Sued, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Peoria | AZ | USA | Posted: 8:56 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> What Annie Leibovitz works for Free??
Why is she screwing the Industry??
FWIW, the POTUS and his family got what they paid for!!
The Image is garbage!!
I know a group of High School Students that can do a better job.
Y |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:37 PM on 10.24.09 |
| ->> Not a great shot, but Ms L's best work comes when she has a lot of time to work with her subjects...sometimes hours from stories that have been published about her work style. My guess is was working way outside her comfort zone with a five to ten minute window to make an image. She probably shot 15-25 frames and turnover the files to the White House. Then, as Luke said above, 10 people looked the take and they all agreed on this one or it is the one the First Lady liked the best. |
|
Mark Peters, Photographer
|
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 11:15 PM on 10.24.09 |
->> Mark L. -
Say it ain't so. Didn't get paid AND reading the Exif data,it looks like she gave up her copyright too.
EXIF data intact - original file on white house flickr stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/4035513827/sizes/o/ |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 1:25 AM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> I have a few books of hers, none of them the amazing full set photos, but candid, simple ones. I have to say, those didn't impress me either. |
|
David Bailey, Photographer
|
Flower Mound | TX | USA | Posted: 2:34 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> ->> Mark, Reports I've heard is that the portrait was done gratis.
Therein lies the proof that without her $250,000 budget including assistants, set designers and someone to do everything except press the shutter release, she is at best average and over rated. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Princeton | IN | USA | Posted: 2:44 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> Thank you, David |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 3:43 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> Annie's style has been like this before. I am old enough to recall her shots of then President Carter complete with umbrellas reflecting off glass in the back ground. She varies what she does depending on the subject matter. With the Queen of England she did not with presidents it changes. To call her overrated because of this shot is not very deep thinking. She has a huge body of work. I see too many photographers do the same thing over and over. She has not. By the way how do you know how many people she had with her to help. David |
|
Vasiliy Baziuk, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 5:00 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> hummmm..... i'm not impressed!
my wife seems to like the photo. especially that they all have a nice smile on their face.
i'm thinking that if you are a President you can't have a family photo that makes you look too out of reach of the regular people (voters) in those terms the photo is perfect for that..... shows that Obamas are humble. |
|
Michael Ip, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 5:01 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> Looks like it was taken at Sears. |
|
Stew Milne, Photographer
|
Providence | RI | USA | Posted: 6:23 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> I second that. |
|
Nick Morris, Photographer
|
San Marcos | CA | United States | Posted: 6:26 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> You know we all have off days and we all have different circumstances that dictate how a shoot goes. This is the President of the United States. This guy is pressed for time... serious time. A.L. is known for spending time with her subjects to draw out their individual persona and capture that in a shot. I seriously doubt she had her usual time to spend with the Obama's and I can't imagine what the Secret Service did to restrict her shoot to boot. I'm not defending the shot it is what it is and without hearing from her personally on it I can't say too much other than, yeah she has done better and worse. I personally think the shot is weak on all sorts of technical levels but who the heck am I to critique Annie friggin Leibovits. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 6:44 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> Therein lies the proof that without her $250,000 budget including assistants, set designers and someone to do everything except press the shutter release, she is at best average and over rated.
The woman has accomplished a great deal in her career, at a lot of different levels - large crew and small crew. How many of us here could even begin to know what to do with a $250,000 budget and a crew of 30? How many could even land that deal to begin with? These are non-trivial things. Sometimes the most difficult shoots end with simply clicking the shutter.. All of the hard work is done before the camera and the subject are even in the room together, and a lot of that work has nothing to do with photographic geekery.
In our lifetimes few of us will ever accomplish half of what she's done. She is due some respect, even if you don't like this image. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 7:11 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> Well said David!
I think its very easy to be bitter and cynical towards someone because they might be given a $250,000 budget when when we personally have to spend a day busting our butt shooting football in the rain to make maybe $250.
When the work isn't any better than, and in fact less impressive IMHO, than what I see a lot of hobbyist on Flickr doing it certainly doesn't help matters either.
The point is not if we think Leibovitz is worth $250,000. Personally I've never seen anything she's done worth much over $25000, maybe $2500. Some stuff is nice but there are tons of people who could do the same or better.
What the point really is though that she has been able to get to a point in her career to be able to do those $250,000 shoots.
I don't care if your the worst photographer to ever pick up a camera, if you have the ability to market yourself in such a manner that someone will budget that type of money for you doing something right.
Thats the most impressive thing about Leibovitz and few if any will ever achieve anything close to that. (heck, with the way this industry is going Annie herself might never see that again) |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 7:32 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> so, what's wrong with the picture? lots of folks here think it's shit, but why? not judging the judgment, but it looks exactly like what i would expect of an obama family portrait in the white house. nothing too fancy or high-society-like. barack is humbled and just as surprised as everyone else that he is even IN the white house! he can't be going all annie leibovitz on your ass in the family portrait less than a year into the job- especially when there is much work to be done, and loads of proper criticism to answer.
why blame the messenger if you're not happy with the wishes of the family. i suspect they didn't give AL complete artistic license, or two hours. i'm guessing 10 minutes and instructions. this stuff is way too important to leave to chance- even if it's annie leibovitz.
this picture was probably going to look just like this whether it was souza or leibovitz or any of you. further, despite how cool we all think we are, nobody knows photographers names. NOBODY outside of the business knows who pete souza is, and few would deny that if there is a photographer who has a chance to become a household name, it's obama's personal snapper. if there is one name the public might identify, it's annie leibovitz. that's why she gets to do it.
sears shot? pa-leez. if you're going to criticize one of the most famous photogs alive, show some effort.
cheers. |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 8:59 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> "who the heck am I to critique Annie friggin Leibovits."
She's just someone (as is any other famous photographer or celebrity) who puts her pants on one leg at a time, and gets stuck in traffic just like the rest of us.
You have every right to critique her work, just as every single one of us do.
Personally, I don't care for her work. Doesn't mean I think I'm better than her, I just don't like her style. Never have. There are many photographers (99% if them are SS.com members) who blow my mind and and make me wish I was half the shooter they are. She's not one of them and probably never will be. I think one's attitude and frame of mind come through in their images, and frankly, I don't like what I see in hers.
Who am I? Absolutely no one, but I have my opinion, and I'm entitled to them - just as every one of us here is. If we don't feel we have the right to critique other people's work (no matter who they are), how can we expect to create our own vision?
Stepping off my soapbox now. :~) |
|
Jeff Martin, Photographer
|
wellington | OH | usa | Posted: 9:04 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> " he can't be going all annie leibovitz on your ass in the family portrait"
Actually he did go "all annie." It just seems that some people (me too) don't think it's a good image. |
|
Bryan Hulse, Photographer
|
Nashville | Tn | USA | Posted: 10:07 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> Maybe it was taken with her camera phone? That gives it a whole new level of genius! |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 10:13 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> Here's a ugly reality: Doesn't matter if you or I like it or don't like it.
What matters is if the client likes it.
That's a ugly reality we deal with every day. The question is this:
If it IS a bad image but the client is happy, then what?
Answer that question, and you'll have a grip on how to profit in a profitless age.
(FYI - I think Souza could have handled this better...) |
|
Jim Colburn, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
McAllen | TX | USA | Posted: 11:47 PM on 10.25.09 |
| ->> It's just a nice family portrait. What's the big deal? |
|
Mike Anzaldi, Photographer
|
Oak Park | IL | USA | Posted: 11:51 PM on 10.25.09 |
->> "Actually he did go "all annie." It just seems that some people (me too) don't think it's a good image."
jeff-
i respectfully disagree here. it is the basis of my argument. this is just not the type of shot- or shoot, that made annie leibovitz famous. just about everyone here agrees on this. it is considered here to be a relatively poor shot. i can't believe that everyone who commented is actually saying that she is a poor photographer. like her, dislike her. i don't think it would be accurate to conclude she is bad at taking pictures, or that loads of others could complete this assignment better.
so again, obama clearly DIDN'T let annie be annie. she's an artist, not a snapshot gal. they needed a high-quality snap of the family, as opposed to say...an iconic portrait from a renowned artisan.
i'm not arguing that it is a good picture. i'm arguing that it is what was likely requested.
it like asking spielberg to shoot your kid's bat mitzvah. yeah, he could probably do a very fine job indeed. portfolio material? no. |
|
Vasiliy Baziuk, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 12:49 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> it seems that for the most part the image seems to work and the general public likes it. (i personally think it could have been better.)
photographers judge photos differently then the general population does.... we look for something extra in the photo then a non photographer would. this photo was probably not shot for the Vogue or shot to capture any photography awards. as far as the general public in concerned the portrait works and that is how they would probably like to see their leader and his family. to them seeing Barack and his family lookin' nice with smiles on their faces is probably a great family portrait.
anytime i'm stuck with making a photo choice between two or three similar photos i call in a reporter or whoever is walking by the photo office, or my wife at home and get their opinion. why? they fit the demographic who are newspaper readers... and that demographic is my audience not a bunch of photographers and editors. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 1:49 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> The whole thing was about Annie Leibovitz showing respect for the White House by lending her considerable reputation to a White House portrait. Like it or not, she is the single most famous living photographer in the world.
It was also about the White House recognizing her popular significance by offering her the opportunity.
Clearly, the White House was looking only for a plain vanilla portrait. The situation allowed no leeway for ANY photographer to demonstrate their artistic skill.
Any image produced by any photographer in such a situation would be criticized by many professionals. An exception here might be Pete Souza, who is considered one of "our own" on SportsShooter.
--Mark |
|
Phil Hawkins, Photographer
|
Fresno | ca | usa | Posted: 2:48 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> I shoot lots and lots of portraits. When look at this shot, several things jump out at me that I assume made Fisch post his original observations. Let's say for a second, giving her the benefit of the doubt, they called at 8am and said "...be here in an hour and you have 5 minutes".
Assuming that she had absolutely NO control over anything you see in the shot, NO staff, NO assistants, no help at all.... did she not see that she had a very cluttered background and could have at least set her aperture at 2.8 or larger and moved in closer to gain DOF? And while she was re-setting her aperture, did she not also have time to switch the kids places? Two people in near black clothing, two in white. The placement of the kids was way bad. Again, assuming she had no control over wardrobe, she could have had them switch to help balance the colors. Could she not have also thrown on an on-board flash and done some ceiling-bounce fill-flash with the First Lady to reduce the obvious problem of two dark-skinned people in dark clothes against a dark background in near shade??
I think what people are saying is that someone of Leibovits' acumen and experience should have dealt with these issues so quickly and easily, you are left to wonder; what are we missing? What could possibly have transpired to have kept her from doing even the most basic of portrait adjustments to her subjects and background? No one is criticizing Annie; her work speaks for itself, but how is it that what we are seeing is so void of even the most basic of good portrait photography practice? Obviously, de-facto, we don't have all the story...
Great thing about the shot is the expressions on the subjects faces; they are all obviously happy and relaxed, Annie had that much going for her... It's a challenge to get 4 people all smiling and looking their best in a single shot, especially when children are involved. That much she did right, but as for the rest... wow, what is the rest of the story? |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 8:21 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> What I'm most curious about is the disclaimer below the photo:
"This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House."
On what legal grounds is this made? I did not think the Federal government could claim copyright (note there is no claim of copyright on the page that I can see). |
|
Dave Breen, Photographer
|
Somerset | PA | USA | Posted: 10:11 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> It wasn't Annie who shot it!!
John Korduner called the White House, disguising his voice. They jumped at the chance for the Obama family to be photographed by the same famous photographer who did (almost) nude shots of Miley Cyrus. (They had forgotten about the Queen of England flap.)
Anyway, when John showed up in a Halloween wig, it was too late to cancel the session. But Pete had told them about the attack on John by SS members, and the family decided it would be nice to let him do a photo.
And lest anyone forget (and thankfully no one has), don't download and retouch John's shot and post it here to show how it could have been improved. |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
|
Dallas | TX | Lower 48 | Posted: 10:22 AM on 10.26.09 |
| ->> What a great discussion. I am so, so sorry to see it end. No really ... I am. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 10:24 AM on 10.26.09 |
->> Chuck,
The disclaimer that you saw has nothing to do with copyright. The First Family does not give up their right to the commercial use of their likenesses. You cannot, for example, come out with a product called "Michelle Obama Rustproofing" without the First Lady's permission.
--Mark |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|