Barack Obama Official Portrait by Canon
January 14th, 2009 Posted in Photography
GJ Canon
The first presidential portrait ever taken with a digital camera. That camera was the 5D Mark II.
ÂÂ
cr
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 14th, 2009 at 5:06 pm and is filed under Photography.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
41 Responses to “Barack Obama Official Portrait by Canon”
Leave a Reply
Categories
- 5D Mark III (2)
- Ad Post (4)
- Business of Photography (8)
- Canon 1000D (21)
- Canon 1D Mark 4 (95)
- Canon 1Ds Mark 4 (43)
- Canon 2000D (18)
- Canon 3D (6)
- Canon 40D (5)
- Canon 450D (20)
- Canon 500D (34)
- Canon 50D (52)
- Canon 550D (19)
- Canon 5D Mark II (172)
- Canon 5D Mark III (3)
- Canon 60D (44)
- Canon 7D (51)
- Canon Accessories (1)
- Canon EVIL (4)
- Canon Firmware (45)
- Canon Flashes (23)
- Canon General (238)
- Canon General (22)
- Canon History (1)
- Canon Lenses (172)
- Canon Medium Format (3)
- Canon Micro (1)
- Canon Patents (6)
- Canon PowerShot (152)
- Canon Printers (7)
- Canon Rebates (7)
- Canon Recalls (1)
- Canon Reviews (6)
- Canon Rumors Site Information (19)
- Canon Service Advisory (1)
- Canon Software (6)
- Canon Video (7)
- Contests (7)
- Fun Stuff (12)
- Nikon (6)
- Other News (116)
- Photography (2)
- PMA 2009 (1)
- Polls (1)
- Third Party Accessories (1)
- Third Party Cameras (4)
- Third Party Lenses (23)
- Third Party Software (7)
- Uncategorized (4)
-
Recent Posts
- 5D Mark II Firmware 2.0.4 Available
- New Camera Around The Corner?
- 5D Mark II Firmware 2.0.3 Broken
- 1Ds4, 5D3 & Lenses
- Canon to begin acquisition of the “.canon” Top-Level Domain name
- 5D Mark II Firmware 2.0.3 Available.
- xxD Not Dead Yet? & More [CR1]
- Niche Lens News [CR2]
- EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II in Stock @ B&H & Adorama
- More Firmware Information [CR2]
January 14th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Yes, we can! :°)
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Nice to know! I’m sure (that) 5Dmk2 version is working fine. May have more patches than what’s on the market.
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
AWESOME!!!!!
Did you see the info?
He used a 24-105 at 105mm stopped down to f10 @ 1/125 sec and 100 ISO
This should make Canon happy as it will definitely boost their kit pairing reputation.
I thought for sure the new chief photog would have used a 135mmL or the 85mmL
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Is it just me, or is that kind of a lame portrait? I don’t like the choice of backgrounds at all. I think they could have done a little better.
But hey, I don’t get paid to do anything camera related.
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
From the engadget article:
f10 1/125@100 ISO – AND NO FLASH… Um… I don’t think so Tim.
The exif may not register it, but that had a flash.
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
You can see the umbrella in his eyes.
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
To see the umbrella look at the full version here:
http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/new_official_portrait_released/
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
yes,it’s a very lame portrait…very amateur lighting and bland set-up. Using a 24-105 f4 to photograph a president? What was he thinking?!!
I sold that lens because it wasn’t good enough for my line of work, let alone snapping the most iconic president (to be) for the past 50 years! Crazy.
Maybe, to cut the snapper some slack, he probably got the call that the time to do a portrait shot was NOW, and he just wasn’t prepared for it. It looks like he’s had to use a couple of 580EX flashes (light temp is very blue), one in a softbox top left and one set behind for the flag.
Hopefully he’ll get a second stab at it!
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
omg, BLACK DOTS!!!!
(sorry, couldnt help myself…)
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
It’s a bit soft…..
I kid, I kid!
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
That’s a really lame portrait. 24-105 is notoriously softest at 105. It’s not tastefully off center either. Nice to live in America and be able to criticize national portraits. I’m no expert, but I would have at least used the 85 1.8 or the 135 f2. Meh.
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Wow, look at all of those black dots on his face. Must not have the firmware upgrade yet!!!
Reply
January 14th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Those who can DO! Those who can’t become critics.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 1:22 am
Looks like the lighting setup includes an octabox (not umbrella) and a reflector.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 1:54 am
Om M-mode 1/125 with external flash (1/700s) evert picture looks sharp! Even with my 70/300 fout/4-5.6 IS USM its a succes! I agree on the lighting:)
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 2:23 am
I voted for him, but I do not like this picture of him.
He actually looks kinda funny… I do not like the lighting either, from the flash to the white balance. It just doesn’t look presidential.
It is sharp as a tack! a much larger version is avaiabel online (Click through the engadget story.)
I actually think Canon would be puzzled hgow tomarket this fact, that a 1Ds body wasn’t used… Talk about a pro saying 1Ds is overpriced!
Of course, you woudl think a prime would have been used…
M
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 3:27 am
A fair amount of criticism for those how have zero idea of the the circumstances surrounding the image.
Imagine…if…every image we now perceive as ‘iconic’ in this day in age….were simply not taken for the fear of criticism in it’s original age?
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 6:51 am
>Ed Says:
>January 14th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
>Those who can DO! Those who can’t become critics
Precisely. Most of these critics probably cannot even take a half decent portrait shot themselves.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 8:55 am
I think it looks good, and sharp enough for anyone
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 9:14 am
i just saw the original and it looks good
here’s the link: http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/new_official_portrait_released/
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 9:24 am
I would expect the background to be more in focus, I know that “bokeh” is desired, but come on, it IS the American Flag. He is quite far from the background also….It the very least they could have backed him up, and used the 85mm(my personal pref for portraits. I think an advanced college student would do much better work than this. IMVHO, but you may think differently……
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 9:35 am
It was lit with an octabank.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 11:41 am
You guys realize that he probably took hundreds to have some pr (not artist) person pick the one that would appear. I doubt that they are going for senior photo type stuff here…
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
On the news last night it was reported that he spent four hours setting up and was only allowed about 5-10 minutes with Obama, whihc is very little time to make sure your subject is properly photographed. (I agree that most pro photographers work fast, but that is too much fast even for something so important.)
M
P.S. Just because so many people critise an image doesn’t mean they do not know how to photograph, it just means a lot of people do not like the image.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
It’s an official portrait, which means its’ purpose is very functional–they hang these portraits in federal buildings. It’s not meant to be a work of art. Pure function, nothing more.
Reply
January 15th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Don’t be too picky. It’s an official portrait, which means its’ purpose is very functional–they hang these portraits in federal buildings. It’s not meant to be a work of art. Pure function, nothing more.
Reply
January 16th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Bad picture, bad choice for President!
Reply
January 16th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
One of The worst portraits I’ve ever seen. The lighting is crap and the framing worse. The photo has no character and no DOF.
Probably Canon paid to use the 5D2 kit and boost sales.
Very sad, indeed
Reply
January 16th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Bigdaddym, if that many people don’t like the image it means it’s bad.
Reply
January 16th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Oh he must have been so short of time. Posing is probably the worst in this photo. I would expect his body lean towards the centre of the frame rather than just fall out to the right while keeping his head so straight. The flag could be set up in a more careful way I suppose.
The lens looks sharp, but I would have used 100mm macro USM at 5.6, which works great for portraits like this. That huge black spot on his face definitely needed some attention before the session.
Oh well, better luck next time.
Reply
January 16th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
ppdix – Yeah, that is what I said…
M
Reply
January 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Actually, I rather like the portrait. Obama’s relaxed expression, combined with a very determined gaze, sends quite a powerful visual message. The flag being blurred by a shallow DOF is an excellent touch to guide the viewer’s focus to his face. And the angle of his shoulders in relation to the frame and the flag I find quite balanced visually. The choice of a plain background is nice too (a clean, modern look, rather than, say, a jumble of book spines on a shelf).
The only part I don’t like is the grey colour of background. I’m guessing that it was a white background that was lit by the falloff of the key light. To me, it just looks kind of overcast and dull. I think if it was fully lit, it wouldn’t work either (his shirt and the flag’s stripes would blend into the background too much). Maybe using a tinted background might have been a better choice?
Aside from the background colour, I do like the portrait.
Reply
January 18th, 2009 at 5:29 am
mediocre portrait…why they could not better photographer. Think about Annie Leibovitz or Bruce Weber etc.
Reply
January 18th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
according to the exif the copyright holder is pete souza
http://www.petesouza.com
Reply
January 19th, 2009 at 2:02 am
I think the quality of this image is really nice. Yes, it’s not a breathtaking image, but I like its simplicity and the fact that you can see ever pore of his skin, and all his little grey hairs and the sharpness of his eyes. It gets the job done. This image is not for Vanity Fair or Vogue; it’s merely the official Presidential portrait. I don’t think I have ever seen an amazing presidential portrait taken, but being this is Barack Obama, I think we just want to see the best.
Reply
January 20th, 2009 at 10:47 am
The derogatory comments are very interesting because it shows much more about the person making them than the subject of the bashing.
Sometimes they become so — let’s say — neurotic that they can’t even be objective and see the big picture. And that’s a way bigger fault than a supposedly “lame lighting” or a “poor lens choice”.
Reply
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:29 am
In all honesty the sharpness if fine. People moaning about how they would have used a sharper lens, why? You bum the guy so much you want to see the individual pores on his cheek in even more clarity?
What bothers me is everything else. The composition is shocking.
Someone earlier said that he had 4 hours to prepare. Honestly? Most professional get all of about two hours for a shot like this. You sure as hell should have been able to get something better than this in four.
And what’s with all the noise on his jacket? That must just be down to compression, right?
Reply
January 23rd, 2009 at 2:57 am
it is not creative! nothing special! How can u shoot the president with only the 24-105?
Reply
January 25th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Not a good quality picture.
Something you find at Kmart Stores!
Lighting is flat like what you use on children, background too bright, the flag should be slightly more behind him.
Since Obama is a tall & skinny fellow, the photographier should have posed him differently by sitting him slightly more square to the camera to give the impression of size.
Really folks I haven’t seen so much wild enthusiasm over a US President since the Beany Baby Craze!
Are we counting our eggs before they hatch?
The guy has been our President less than a week and we are laying on our laurels too soon in my opinion.
This hero worship is giving me heebie geebies.
Remember Obama is a mere man, not the Sun God.
I’m just waiting for pictures like this…
http://img.inkfrog.com/pix/sandrachan/c221106.JPG
Let the guy accomplish his four year term and then we can evaluate his accomplishments.
Counting your eggs before they hatch…is bad juju!
Retired Navy Photographier
Reply
January 25th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Navy photographers in general suck, especially those that can’t spell photographer.
Retired Navy Spellchecker
Reply
Robert Reply:
January 31st, 2009 at 12:48 am
Okay Genius
Sticks and Stones may break my bones…but spellcheckers will never harm me.
Have a good day
And Jesus Loves You
Reply