Party photography

I covered a Christmas party last week. A classy venue, a masked ball theme (well... some people had masks), and a free bar. It's hard to deny that this kind of event photography is a long way from fine art, documentary or studio portraiture. Not many relevant 'principles of photography' here, surely (other than avoiding getting beer onto your camera). It's pushing through the crowd, snapping away, and moving on, isn't it? Monkey work. Bread and butter. Is there anything really to it?

Turns out, there is.

 

The biggest consideration is how, in a busy party, how can you see anything? It's all backs of heads. And the further you are away from the people you want to photograph, the more people there are blocking your view. And so you find yourself pinned and confined to the walls of the room, looking in. And the view, no matter where you are, is the same from every position. And when you do see something, you're pushing and excusing your way through the middle of conversations, trying to get closer, elbowing for space. And once you're close enough, the candid shots you saw are harder to take - it's not easy to be discreet with a big camera. 

So, one solution is to go around and pose people in their pairs and groups. Though happy to oblige any requests, for this event I wasn't really in the mood for setting shots up, to be honest. It's not really my style as a rule - I don't like to have too many of those society-type pictures. Some photographers prefer doing it this way: lots of faces, lots of smiles. Everyone gets a picture. It's a lot of work, interrupting and arranging group after group.

For me, set-up photos are not so much evocative as descriptive. It's more a record of who was there, and less of how it was. So unless I'm requested to shoot this way, I prefer to stay out of the action and get on with it. Nonetheless, I took a few for variety:

Typically I prefer to 'pick people out'. Fortunately, there were a few chairs and low tables upon which I could stand. Even a slight elevation gives a better vantage point. Being able to see all everything from above gives options: you can look around and choose whom to photograph:

A few pictures of people out of context can work, too:

When you do have a little space, you can use a long lens to focus in, or zoom out to get a wider view. Both work:

The picture on the right has three people, but you can only see one. I don't have a problem with this. So, Rule#1: Unless people are posing for the camera, you will always have backs of heads, no matter where you go. You cannot always see everyone. Don't worry about it! The other people in shot provide a context, and can act as framing devices:

 

I find, as the evening goes on, I get closer and closer. People are used to your being there, and more relaxed after a drink or two. It's not such a big deal to stick a camera into a circle, and you can use a wider lens. It has a certain immediacy, it can allow for more faces, and it can also show what else is going on:

Thinking about wide shots brings me to Rule#2: Shots showing everything show nothing. They tend to be boring. Again, descriptive, not evocative. You always need a point of interest, which can be hard when there is so much in frame eg. a shot of the whole party, usually from afar or above. You must always take one* - but it is rarely the best picture.

Rule#3: It's not usually a good shot that catches someone mid-sip from a glass. It's never a good shot if they're eating. So if a waiter is going round with canapes, go in the other direction. Except - perhaps - for a quick snap of people eagerly choosing small delicacies from a tray brought around by a waiter, which gives a sense of the party. But not eating. It looks awful.

Rule#4: Timing. It's all about the timing. Catching a gesture, expression or laughter can make or break the picture. With a little practice, you get to feel the flow of conversations, even from afar. And you wait for the moment:

 *Known as a "GV", or General View.