In the feedback session with my tutor we discussed the process of collaborating with the sitters to produce the text as well as the images and he suggested writing a post to reflect upon this in more depth.

With the exception of candid shots, all portraits are collaborations between the photographer and the sitter. In the images I produced for assignment five I took this approach slightly further by asking the sitters to chose a place to be photographed that they thought of as being representative of them; background as context, and also to give me some text that I would combine with the images. Although I did not think of it at the time, this represented a relinquishing of control that I had not previously undertaken and it meant that final result was not wholly in my hands.

The first part of the input from the subjects being photographed was the choice of location. For the most part this was straight-forward as I had asked them to think about this in advance. The only person who did not get the idea of the background of the image offering information about them was my father, Colin, so I chose where to photograph him partly based on the objects in the background and partly based on the lighting in the room. Because all the images were shot at the homes of the sitters, the decision about where to be photographed made the process easier for me as all I needed to think about was the lighting and how to position the individuals within the frame. Rather than a loss of control this element felt very collaborative.

The area that was by definition less collaborative was the text given to me by the people I photographed. The objective of this part of the work was that it represented self-identity which would contrast with the identity shown in the photograph. I think this element is less successful than I hoped it would be and I believe this is because of a lack of clarity on my part. Originally I asked each individual to give me five words that described them. I then expanded this to five words of a short sentence. What I got back were five words, five word sentences and a slightly longer sentence. In retrospect I should have been clearer and firmer about what I wanted, either five words, a five word sentence or a sentence without a limit and I should have given an example so that there was no ambiguity.

What I was pleased about with regard to the text, was that I did not edit it. When talking with my father about words that represented him there was almost a process of negotiation, particularly around his choice of the word thoughtful. I included the word as I realised that this was how he sees himself and whilst it is not one of the five words that I would have chosen, it was not my choice to make.

I enjoyed the process of engaging with my family and producing the images and text. I think if I were to do something similar again I would need to be clearer with the people I was collaborating with about what I needed from them. Just because an idea is clear in my mind, it does not mean that somebody else will understand it straight away so I should spend more time up front explaining what I need from them and give them time to ask questions and clarify to avoid misunderstandings later.