Photogenic or not, originally uploaded by use2blost. Larger.
Photographableness is a linear umm...continuum. Everybody is somewhere on this scale. (This is just a theory... welcome to my thought process.) I photographed these kids twelve times. It seemed to me, in terms of who turned out the coolest, it was Tall Chick, M&M, and Redcoat. In that order... consistently in 3/4 of these shots. The photogenic level of these kids seems to be tightly grouped, but sometimes it's exagerated. One kid can come out relatively horrible compared to the others, even though he/she may be the cutest one. It's funny. Do we all know a Johnny Badpicture, and a Jane Goodpic? Or is this just some crap I feed myself? and if photographableness is a valid concept, what is it?