I think the first photographer that really got me excited about photography(other than Bob Thayer of the Providence Journal) was Ed Steichen. Stiechen started the whole Family of Man photographic concept--a concept that is really the corner stone of documentary photography still practiced today. Steichen was an all-round photographer doing assignments in portraiture, commercial products, fine arts and magazine work. He and Alfred Steiglitz are discussed hand in hand with the photo secession movement which brought photography into discussion among artist and the art world in the early 1900's. My favorite Steichen images were his portraits. His use of soft greys and even softer light to me created atmosphere which led to a greater mood in the photographs. I loved the off lighting and how hints of the persons features led me me to imagine and fill in the gaps of the subjects personality. Its not a portraiture for people who don't want to take the time to enjoy and experience a photograph, but would rather see the person quick and easy. Its a portraiture that makes you wonder. When I came across this image from a recent photo shoot I was thinking about this sort of portraiture and wondering if it still has a place. Some of the old portraiture of Steichen was due to a process that wasn't developed fully and the resulting images were a direct result of how an image could be made then. Today we certainly have tools to produce, without much fuss at all, high quality well lit and technically superior images, but is there something in the 'style' of these to still explore? We could certainly go through the old processes with film, but that is time consuming and messy. So I'm wondering if the aesthetic alone is something pursue or is it only valid through the process? I might try experimenting further with this to see if I can achieve a 'look' that isn't contrived, but helpful in making a good modern portrait work.