Tawha l-“Helena Dalli” look.

You can hardly compare the painting of Henry VIII with a photograph of our President. Whereas one is an artistic interpretation created on an otherwise blank canvas by an artist, and which automatically lends itself to minor embellishment and artistic interpretation (in order to please the monarch), the other is supposed to be a photograph, a true likeness of our President.

If Coleiro Preca wants to be touched up, then she can commission an artist to paint her portrait, hanging this behind the closed doors of San Anton or her personal residence if she must. But for a photo that bears so little resemblance to her real self, to be placed in government offices, hospitals, schools etc. goes way beyond the mere embellishment of a portrait intended for a monarch, and starts to sound like a lie.

I will not go into the merits for or against the Office of the President. My mind has long since been made up on that particular issue. However, if we are to have a president, who claims to be a down to earth person, who dislikes pomp and ceremony, and who intends to embellish her presidency with a social conscience, then this is yet another faux pas that follows her ‘low key’ installation ceremony.

Forgive me for thinking that she would be fine if photographed as the woman that she really is. And whilst you are at it, forgive me for thinking that the fact that she must have had a say in this matter not only detracts from her appeal as a person, but also reeks of vanity.

Her Excellency should understand that it’s okay for a woman to look older than 35.

Paddy, whether the picture is to your liking or not, is entirely subjective.

But bokeh and the transition from focussed to unfocussed depends on the aperture selected, the distance to the subject, and the difference between the distance to the subject and the background. The preceding control the depth of field, or simply what range of distance from the lens is in focus, and yes, that picture is certainly possible.

You can take portraits where the depth of field is so shallow that only (say) the subject’s eyes are in focus and the other parts of the face that lie in the same plane, anything nearer or further is blurred.

Sometimes you have to be careful not to overdo it, such as when taking pictures of (say) a flower and only the stamens are in focus, when the intention was to make the entire flower (in sharp focus) stand out from it’s background.

Paddy, what the photographer is likely to have done is blur everything except the main subject using the same Photoshop setting.

Very amateur indeed.

Portraits have always been ‘touched up’. Do you think Henry VIII really looked the way artists like Holbein portrayed him?

El Bandido, there are the flags which are important – all they needed was a very light touch of blurring. So different amounts of blurring were required, something that could have been easily done in Photoshop.

But there is little one could do with this photo as the composition and background choice are very wrong. This a presidential photo not a poster for Tarzan.