The Portrait

CEBU, Philippines — If you hold in your hand two images of the same person, what differences would you expect to see between the two? If the two images are both photographs taken at exactly the same time and place, not much difference could be expected. Especially so if these are simply two prints of the same shot.

For the most part, photographs of a person taken within one short stretch of time, even if taken from different angles would still be realistic – and thus authentic – representations of the person. Especially so in the eyes of people who only see the objective value of things, and does not care about the unique marks of the photographer taking the picture.

The subtle points that could only come from the skills of a very good photographer may not hold value to an objective viewer. Those points are pretty subjective values. Those are a kind of beauty that would not strike the untrained eyes of a lay beholder.

For an objectively accurate representation, a photograph for passport or driver’s license is it. In the same way, a mug shot and photo for medical record are taken for objective purpose, no matter how awful one looks in those. The value of such photographs stops there.

But there is also such thing as portrait photography, which by its very name implies depicting its subject in a better (meaning beautiful) light. Portrait photography actually picks up where the painting art was when interrupted by the invention of photography itself.  It is said that by the time photography was invented, water color painting and oil painting techniques were about to be perfected, but these were overtaken by the new technology.

Soon, realistic painting started to lose its appreciated value. And then, photography also loosened in capturing objective images. Objective photography eventually veered more and more towards journalistic pursuits. Portraiture began to have a distinct meaning in both photography and painting.

It makes sense how one artist explains it: “Art is about getting rid of or manipulating certain elements, so attention is steered in a certain manner. For example, for a painting or photograph to drive home its message it has to go through a deduction process – a refinement process, if you will – so that the viewer, for example, will notice the small shell in the grains of sand.”

There are now artists specializing in portraiture – the so-called portrait painters and photographers. The images they produce are embellished with ‘special effects’ or have gone through extensive enhancement process. The output pictures are often perspective-altered, staged, manipulated, airbrushed or overlaid; these are not really accurate representations.

Especially with today’s Photoshop technology, portrait photography has distanced farther from reality. It has become all the more subjective… often subject to the dictates of clients. Portrait painting has always been like that too – subjective… subject to the creative ideas of the artists or the vanity of the human subjects.

Some people prefer portrait painting over portrait photography. They cite the ‘classical’ flair of a painting that tends to evoke nostalgia, a kind of inexplicable longing for a time past. Portrait painting is more dramatic, they say, more haunting even.

Others prefer portrait photography. It’s more glamorous, they say. And with Photoshop, it is now possible to look any way one wants to.

Interestingly, some artists seamlessly combine photography and painting in a portrait. They do it by painting over the photograph to give it a certain ‘classical’ look. At times they do it by actually painting on the photograph; at other times they virtually do it on the computer by using an app.

In the end, which is better – portrait painting or portrait photography? Who can say? Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.