BULLSHITTERS
Last night, the portrait assignment was due in my Beginning Color Photography class. Each student needed to bring 5 slides. One was identified for critique.

Most people took snapshots of a person, an animal or, at the most, 3 people. Since it is a beginning class, the images weren't too thought out. But, overall, the majority of the class shot photographs of people.

Except for one girl.

Before the teacher flashed her pictures on the screen, she mentioned she is not fond of taking portraits. She found it boring and not her style. She prefered taking candid shoots. Fine.

The girl took a picture of an elephant figurine. She held it in front of the camera and you can see her fingertips. She narrated with a pseudo-funny excuse to claim it's a "portrait." The class know she was really reaching for this image to be a portrait. Snickers filled the room. The teacher even told her it was a reach. The overall vibe of the class did not take her work seriously.

Two other images were of people in a TV set: a woman taking about Crisis Prevention (it said so on the screen). There was a flash glare over the woman's shoulder. She said it was there on purpose, to evoke some holiness to the shot. Someone in the class said it was like an angel sitting on the woman's shoulder. Yeah, right. The other TV image could pass for a portrait. It was a screenshot of that psycho heaven's gate suicide cult guy from San Diego.

One image was of her dog. Cool.

Another photo showed a clipping of the first American female serial killer sitting on top of a butter knife, which sits on top of yellow plate smeared with butter. She tried to use a "bread and butter" analogy of someone in prison. Huh? She pulled that one out of her ass.

A foreign guy (French?) commented, "It would have been nice to see you explore pictures of people." And a huge discussion covered her intentions or "photographic style." The vibe changed. Of course, she got defensive. Of course, her friends defended her. The foreign guy asserted, "People put meanings to words and there is meaning to the word 'portrait.'" He was explaining the is a definition and her images do not fall under that definition. The teacher stayed neutral and offered explanation: the assignment is a Portrait, with loose interpretations (the teacher did not say "take a picture of a person" only "take a portrait"). The objective is to explore what it means to make a portrait.

After 5 minutes, my tolerance of the girl's BS escaped me. The frustration was in my voice, "These pictures are not portraits and that is the bottom line." When she got defensive I told her, "I do like your pictures, they are just more documentary or like a photo essay."

More debate raged on. A few people started talking about how photography is subjective. One guy said he looked up the word "portrait," then looked up the word "photograph." I think he tried to point out there is a distinction. The teacher stayed neutral. This frustrated me more.

Amongst the beginning students, I am intermediate level. This does not make me more or less better than anyone - just more informed. I asked the teacher, "If an editor from a magazine assigned a photographer a portrait assignment, there is an understanding or expectation on what a portrait is. If someone returned with a very subjective image (with no person in it), that would suck for the photographer because they weren't taught what a portrait is." The teacher understood my point. She did not want to do a dis-service to the class. She explained that some classes are more structured, others loose. She intends for all the assignments to allow the student to explore photography so each person can find what style they like.

The girl said, "It's not like I am shooting for Esquire."

That's not the point, I thought. Your pictures are not portraits. Stop with the bullshit.

ON A LIGHTER NOTE
Frankie gave me Nemo when I returned from Toronto. It's as big as a pillow! Frankie took Nemo, put its face next to mine and laughed. I'll post a picture soon. Tell me what you think.