So it's been nine years since I updated my author photo. There are all kinds of reasons why I've taken so long to do that.

1. Really good photographers are expensive, so doing them more frequently than maybe five to seven years just isn't cost-effective.

2. I moved a couple thousand miles away from my really good photographer.

3. I had an appointment with my really good photographer when I was in Florida a couple of years ago and he forgot. He's at least seventy. It happens, but I need to find somebody in my time zone who keeps up with his appointment book.

4. I'm older and I've gained weight. I've lost some of it lately, but the clock keeps ticking. This problem ain't going away. Last month, a bookseller said that she recognized me from my photo, which was good, since authors often no longer look like their head shots in her experience. I do not ever want to be that person, so I have to do something.

5. My time for such things as photo shoots is simply limited. While chasing tenure, I've written five books, published a sh*t-ton of shorter pieces, taught an overload every freakin' semester, and sat on some time-consuming committees. There's a reason beyond the ticking of the clock that I look older and you can see that I've been stress eating.

So. I have a brief appointment with a photographer on Friday who's doing quickie studio shots at a conference. Maybe a ten-minute session will miraculously generate something usable. Probably not. But if I like him, I can drive back down to Dallas and do a full session.

In the meantime, this seems to be my week for experiments in how I might come up with something presentable. A dear friend is in town and she said, "Let's go out to a scenic place and I'll take some pictures. If you like them, good. If they're good but not professional enough for the media, you'll know whether you want to get a pro to go to the same place and take some shots."

So we did. I like the ones I'm posting here reasonably well. They aren't filtered or touched up at all, although a couple of them have been cropped.

So here's the input I need. I can put multiple shots on my website and I'm often asked by websites, print media, and event promoters to send shots they can use for publicity. I'm pretty sure I need a professional headshot for most of those uses, but more candid shots could certainly be on my site for media folk to choose from.

Are any of those good for those purposes? Would you consider cropping any of them to use for a headshot? Could they be made presentable with filters or Photoshop or something? Do they have potential, but I need to get a pro to take something similar?

We had fun making them and they cost me nothing, so it's okay to say, "No sweetie. None of these." I just need some neutral eyes. And thank you!

One.

Two.

It's Oklahoma. The wind was blowing and the sun was really bright. Do the shots with my hair in my face work at all? (They do have the advantage of hiding part of my mumblety-something-year-old face.) Interestingly, I don't think all of the stuff you see in my face is actually hair. I think some of it is shadows of my hair from that incredibly bright sun that is making me squint.

Three.

Four.

Five.

Six.

Just want to quickly say,

Omg, I *love* them. ❤️

I don’t think there is any reason you can’t get the photo you need from your friend taking the pictures.

But I have to think about your questions. Not sure sunglasses are a good idea. More later. (On my way out the door.)

And I also want to say, you look fabulous. Seriously. And I’m not just saying that to make you feel better. I love the attitude, your personality, that shines through in these photos. Fantastic.

And I ♥️ That red jacket. That might be my favorite photo. Also like the one where you are not wearing sun glasses.

Aw thanks, Jodi.

I wasn't so sure about the sunglasses, either, but my friend and Quirt really liked them. Honestly, I think the shades look like I'm hiding something.

They're actually my real glasses, which get dark in the sun. Vanity-wise, I didn't plan to wear my glasses in the photos, as I didn't wear glasses in the earlier ones and I was afraid they would be aging. And also, I think they give off an egghead look that Quirt says he likes but I dunno.

As sunglasses, they're not so eggheady, and they have the advantage of hiding half my face. This observation is not as low-self-esteem as it sounds. Posing for photos is hard for a non-pro, and sometimes the eyes look good and the mouth looks dopey or vice versa. Hiding half the face cuts the dopey factor in half.

Like the first one but not the sunglasses so much. Still, it could work. The rest look too posed or too much attitude.

Your smile is very winning - like sunshine. I’d go that way.

You've posted six pictures. For my money, I would go with door number three (picture with petroglyphs, and the branch that artfully crosses the frame).

I like the framing in that picture. I think you're the "right size" in the frame. There is enough background for interest, but you remain the center of attention. Also, I just prefer pictures that aren't full body. Your legs below the knees aren't in the picture, and that works again to focus attention instead of having the eye wander up and down. I also like how the pattern on your jeans peeks out from the shadow on the rock face. And lastly, the rock face has lots of nice contrasts that show off your face, which is in sunshine.

You look great, but I side with Mik.

quote:

Originally posted by Mikhailoh:
Like the first one but not the sunglasses so much. Still, it could work. The rest look too posed or too much attitude.