I was always taught to avoid moire effects like that silk wall covering like the plague. It can look like it is springing out of the wall, but it looks okay here. This is not a great photograph, but perfectly adequate. Ansel Adams had over 10,000 negatives in his kept collection. He only printed a few hundred regularly. Liebowitz did okay here. Her John Lennon naked against Yoko Ono for the cover of Rolling Stone gets her a lifetime pass in my opinion. It was artistic genius in the pure sense of the word.
The family looks great; if the girls’ positions or the parents’ positions had been reversed, the clothing colors would have had a better composition. The problem I have with the picture is the background. The walls are a little too dark to contrast with the darker clothing and hair, and the open room to the left is sloppy and distracting. I understand the spontaneous look she’s going for, but somebody should have closed that door. It’s like leaving the closet door open. Maybe removed the chair between Michele and Sasha, too. The clutter is too much.
Why is she even involved in this in the first place? There’s already a professional White House photographer who knows the visual composition of the rooms.
No, she’s always missing stuff in the background. Look at her photo of Yoko Ono. What an amateur.
Fair enough. The photo looks, to me, like she had 5 minutes and no options to put it together. You find I was “rationalizing my opinion” and that I was claiming to be smarter than Liebowitz. I did no such thing. I’m stating that there are many elements of this photo that I have a problem with, and Liebowitz should too. You think it’s brilliant. I’m not the one calling you or your opinions “preposterous.” Or “ludicrous.” Or “outrageous.” I’m sure you know a whole lot about portarit photography, just like me. I can stick to the details of the photo without claiming your opinions are somehow unhinged & insane.
If you want to believe she chose the placement of that picture frame, or that statue by the fireplace, you go right ahead. I’ll go on thinking that you are quite wrong. If you think its brilliant, that’s fine. I don’t, and I don’t know any portrait photographers who happen to agree with you.
For the record, I love the Queen Elizabeth shot.
This, I laughed at.
:dubious: You have to admit she captured her personality.
I never suggested that she chose them; only that she accepted them as an accurate–and aesthetically acceptable–part of the context she was trying to convey. These are the mundane things that surround a family living in a house.
I think one of the biggest disconnects, as represented by your responses and many others, is the continued harping on the concept of “portrait photography.” Portrait, portrait, portrait. All of your criticisms, specifically, seem to start from an assumption of the basic expectations put forth by that concept.
Let it go.
It’s not a conventional portrait; it’s a moment in the life of a family. “Portrait” carries so much baggage, and that baggage seems to be the core of much of the objection voiced in this thread.
Keep in mind that “official” only means it’s been approved for release. It will surely not be the last photo taken of them.
The oldest one is going to be supermodel gorgeous when she grows up.
Very likely.
Annie herself on how she works: Annie Gets Her Shot | Vanity Fair
Only problem is, that’s not a man. When I zoom in, the figure seems to have breasts.
You guys are insanely picky. Memo to self: never post one my photos for critique on the SDMB 
Overall decent picture, and it captures the “spirit” of the first family well.
Regarding the “Sears” look: We don’t know what she was instructed to produce. Maybe Obama told her they don’t want a highly conceptual art piece, but a basic family portrait.
My one critique is that Michelle looks like she is bending over a bit too much because her daughter is leaning a bit too much on her.
Here’s the thing, I couldn’t care less about the “day in the life” aspect. They could all be wearing sweats watching the Bears game for all I care. It’s just not a well done picture. It’s not bad, it’s just okay. Same quality as a beginning photo student.
If the Obama’s weren’t famous and Liebowitz wasn’t famous, would you spend more than 2 seconds looking at the picture? Probably not. I certainly wouldn’t look at it and go, “I want her to take my portrait.”
There’s something really wrong with his smile. I’m not a huge Obama fan, but he has a Cary-Grant million-watt smile. This? Looks like he’s smiling with clenched teeth and saying “Dear, what do you think they put in this dressing?”
The picture’s fine. The first family looks lovely. For those who don’t like the picture, bear in mind that the President and the First Lady had a hand in choosing it, so they must have thought it was fine too.
That just means this was the best of the lot.
As opposed to her photograph of the queen which was well done.
Oh, I don’t know. If I were President of the United States or the First Lady and I don’t like any of the photographs in front of me that will be deemed the Official Family Portrait, I would have no problem saying do it again. Why wouldn’t I? You don’t have to even publicize the redo, so the artist would not be embarrassed. I think people just want to see what they want to see, not what is, or what matters to the people in the picture. I still think the portrait shows a lovely family in a natural setting.
Your conjecture that the President wanted a natural setting does not address the poor quality of the photograph. Assuming this was the only setting, I think the picture represents the best of what the photographer could do in the time allotted. I feel bad for her because she was chosen as a renowned professional and this sub-par for even a good hobbyist.
When I read historical accounts of famous people or events, I’m often struck by the mundane reasons behind historic occurrences, so I can believe almost anything regarding high level decisions.
Not that this is really an important matter, but there could be dozens of reasons why the picture came out the way it did and why it didn’t get redone.
Here’s a scenario:
Michelle asked for Annie. White House staff discouraged Leibowitz from moving any furniture, and restricted her choice of rooms. Annie’s been depressed about her financial problems and had trouble focusing on the assignment until the morning of the shoot and then turned hyperactive. Barack had a high priority meeting that morning that ran late and the pictures had to be done in 12 minutes. The photos came out so-so, Michelle picked the one that was best of her and Barack said okay.
Is any of that true? I don’t know, but not a bit of it would surprise me if it had actually happened.
And there could well be embarrassment for Leibowitz if the pictures got rejected. Keeping it completely under wraps might not be easy, and trying to hide a redo might be even more embarrassing for all concerned.
Malia is a lovely young girl – every time I see her I think it’s funny how she looks very much like her father but at the same time very beautiful. Not that Obama isn’t a good-looking man, but I wouldn’t look at him and think “He’d be gorgeous as a girl!”