There are two things that I like in photographs: (i) features of pictured subject and (ii) features of the picturing of the subject. A photograph must be good with respect to both of these things to satisfy my taste.

Let me say a little about the first thing -- the quality a photograph might take from the features of the pictured subject. At first, one thinks: things (broadly construed to include persons) can be interesting to look at (generally this is, for me, a matter beauty). The job of a photograph is picture the interesting thing, thereby making it available for appreciation. One imagines that the thing possesses its interesting feature independently of the photographing of it.

But this first thought is not quite right...

A pictured person is often enough _performing_ in some way. Thus, for example, the subject of a photograph might be a performance of some sort -- as for example, in journalistic photos of athletic performances. In this case, the athlete is a subject of the photo, but her performance is also a subject of the photo. This is quite enough to make photos of persons especially interesting: performances, exercises of agency, are interesting.

However, it sometimes seems to me that there is an additional kind of role played by performance in the aesthetics of photography. And it is why the first thought is not quite right. One reason why people are interesting subjects is that the picturing of the person and the pictured subject are not independent.

The aesthetic character of the pictured performance can partly derive from the fact that it is a pictured performance... put another way: part of the pictured performance _is_ being pictured in this or that way. Here is another way of putting it: a pose can be an unpictured way of producing a subject to be pictured (Fred reveals his muscled arm or whatever by posing), but the posing can itself be part of what is pictured.

A model need not merely provide an interesting subject, but can provide an interesting subject insofar as he or she is photographed. Here, then, the pictured subject can possess an interesting feature because it is pictured and not independently of it.

I wish I could be more concrete. Aiae's self-portraits seem to have this quality... as do But33's... Actually, now that I think about it, it seems that this is a quality that often attaches (for me) to self-portraits, especially. Mirjan Rooze's self-portraits have this quality for me. And not just self-portraits; mehmeturgut's portraits sometimes have it.

Johannes Schwab's nudes often have an impersonal feel to me, in part because the posing itself is a bit harshly presented. But, here with delightful comedic effect, is a pictured posing:

[link]