Why does slight facial asymmetry look obvious in a photo when nobody notices it in person?
Something I keep running into taking pictures of friends and family. In person their face reads as normal. In a photo, one eye looks smaller, or the smile pulls to one side, and they immediately say they hate the picture.
Everyone's face is asymmetric — that part I know. What I do not understand is why a still image makes something visible that a moving, three-dimensional person does not.
What I would like to understand, mostly so I can take better pictures of people who dislike being photographed:
- What is actually different about a photo that makes the asymmetry pop out?
- Is the mirror thing relevant — do people dislike photos because they are used to their reflection?
- Is there anything I can do while shooting to make this less pronounced?
@roll_of_36_rin · yesterday · 2 replies
Three separate things are happening and they compound.
A photo is one instant, frozen. A real face is constantly moving, and your brain builds an average from thousands of micro-expressions. A photo hands you one of those samples at random. If the shutter caught the moment one side of the smile was ahead of the other — and it usually is, because faces are not synchronised — you get a lopsidedness that never existed as a sustained state.
A photo is flat. In person, depth cues from binocular vision and your own movement tell you a cheek is turned slightly away. Flattened into two dimensions, that turn reads as a smaller eye or a shorter side rather than a rotation.
A photo can be stared at. You never study a face for thirty seconds in life. Any feature survives a glance and very few survive scrutiny.
So it is not that the camera revealed something. It sampled, flattened and then invited inspection.
Reply
Report
@catchlight_cato · yesterday
The sampling point is the one I had not considered. I had been assuming the camera was showing something continuously true rather than catching one frame of something in motion.
Reply
Report