The Moving Portrait: Perceiving personality through watching

We often think of still images or paintings when we think of portraiture. Freezing a moment and capturing someone's face at a specific time, and perhaps capturing some of that person's essence in that fraction of a second. Between 1964 and 1966, Screen Tests, a series of short, silent, black-and-white film portraits, was made by Andy Warhol.[1] Comparing still imagery and painting versus moving images on film as a means of creating portraiture raises questions about the difference in those mediums in terms of how we experience the outcome differently. What is the difference in the perceived effect of still versus moving portraiture?  
A movie camera rests on a tripod. Warhol uses two one or two lights against a black or white background.[2] He was interested in creating tension with the subject against a neutral background. He was also interested in changes happening with the subject in the duration of the sitting.[3]

The camera (not necessarily operated by Warhol) would record the subject on a single unedited one-hundred-foot 16 mm silent cartridge. The tests were shot at sound speed (twenty-four frames per second), but Warhol wanted them projected at silent speed (sixteen frames per second), so they take longer to see than they did to make: They retard time. (The viewing duration of each is four and a half minutes.) The sitter was often instructed not to move. Most disobeyed.[4]

Under Warhol's direction, the subjects, generally framed from shoulders up, sat (ideally motionless) for around three minutes while filmed. Warhol wanted the result projected in slow motion to give the effect of photography and film, representing a new kind of portraiture. In this moving image, changes are revealed but almost still.[5] Sitters responded to the screen tests in various ways

The first sitter mentioned here is Dennis Hopper, an American film actor. The subject is sitting in front of a dark background in hard light.[6] Seemingly with two side lights (light source to his left and right) casting a shadow in the middle of his face. The subject tilts his head slightly to the right with his chin down as he looks downward. Seventeen seconds in, his face turns directly towards the camera as he shuts his eyes and frowns his eyebrows. His forehead muscles contracted as if he is in deep thought (or reflective), but he does not seem relaxed. A few seconds later, the subject opens his eyes, looking down to the right and then slowly moving his gaze towards the camera, still holding a severe gaze, almost looking sad. The subject gives a short smile and looks down again and to the right. Still looking down, his eyes start moving from left to right. One min. twenty sec. into the sitting, the subject looks straight into the camera again, his facial expression seemingly sad now, almost as if he could start crying. The gaze into the lens is short, as he almost immediately moves his eyes a bit off-camera, and twenty-five seconds in, he starts looking down again, but his chin is not tilted downwards. He then closes his eyes, takes a deep breath, opens them again, continues his gaze downward for five seconds, and then looks straight into the lens. He frowns his eyebrows again, looks to the left, and blinks rapidly as if the light is shining right into his eyes. He looks straight into the lens (briefly), smiles, and nods his head. The last thirty seconds depict him mostly looking down but occasionally straight into the camera as a hint of a smile sometimes forms. After three minutes of sitting, the screen fades to white.

Andy Warhol, Dennis Hopper Screen Test, reel 4, number 5, 1964.

The second subject is Edie Sedgwick, a socialite and muse for Warhol in the '60s. The subject is sitting in front of a light background with hard lighting on her face.[7] The light is situated to her upper left, casting a harsh shadow on the background. The subject starts by staring straight into the lens. Her facial muscles seem relaxed as she occasionally parts her lips and slightly smiles. White dots appear on the film (which Warhol often used as a symbol for time in his art, as the dots often appear at the beginning or end of a standard film reel).[8] She shifts her gaze slightly downward (just below the lens) and keeps that gaze for twenty-seven seconds without moving noticeably, then she looks straight into the lens again, only for a couple of seconds, before lowering her gaze again. Her eyes are still wide open, and her facial expression shifts slightly, seemingly less concerned with the camera's presence. Her eyes have a stare that seems innocent. The last 30 seconds before the sitting is over, she gives an occasional slight smile and looks back into the lens briefly. Tiny movement is detected throughout her sitting.

Andy Warhol, Edie Sedgwick, Screen Test 3, 1965,

Andy Warhol points out the paradox of the subject in the sittings. Although faces are fascinating, and watching them is also interesting, we can wonder if being seen is an uncomfortable or positive experience. Depending on the subject, we experience the viewing differently, and the fact that we watch for a long time enables us to conceptualize from experience.[9] Warhol raises questions about whether being watched is a positive or a negative feeling, not just for the sitter but also for the viewer, as it can be shocking to face another face without breaking contact and render the viewer vulnerable.[10] The sittings, and the questions raised by the works, demonstrate Warhol´s curiosity about the nature of portraiture. He relied on personalities and repetition of imagery to compel the viewer, whether the experience turns out to be positive or not.[11]

Warhol´s project is a study of involuntary character revelation. We can experience a glimpse of outer appearances and the private lives of subjects [12] as we form our intuition on the subject when watching facial expressions, as they all give us clues about what is happening within the person (the sitter). The information we take in from watching creates a form of language, or social interaction between the sitter and the viewer, and leads us to, think that there is a dynamic between art and social interaction.[13] The potential psychological impact of three minutes in duration of the screen tests is therefore diminished for the viewer when turned into a still image.[14]

---

[1] Nick James, „Andy Warhol Screen Tests,“ 94.

[2] Reva Wolf and Gerard Malanga, „Collaboration as social exchange. Screen Tests/ A Diary by Gerard Malanga and Andy Warhol,“ 61.

[3] Nick James, „Andy Warhol Screen Tests,“ 94.

[4] Wayne Koestenbaum, „Andy Warhol: Screen Tests,“ 166,198.

[5] Mary Lea Bandy, Andy Warhol Screen Tests, 1.

[6] Dennis Hopper, Screen Test.

[7] Edie Sedgwick, Screen Test.

[8]  Reva Wolf and Gerard Malanga, „Collaboration as social exchange. Screen Tests/ A Diary by Gerard Malanga and Andy Warhol,“ 61. 

[9] Wayne Koestenbaum, „Andy Warhol: Screen Tests,“ 166,198.

[10] Reva Wolf and Gerard Malanga, „Collaboration as social exchange. Screen Tests/ A Diary by Gerard Malanga and Andy Warhol,“ 62.

[11] Mary Lea Bandy, Andy Warhol: Screen Tests, 2.

[12] Reva Wolf and Gerard Malanga, „Collaboration as social exchange. Screen Tests/ A Diary by Gerard Malanga and Andy Warhol,“ 62.

[13] Reva Wolf and Gerard Malanga, „Collaboration as social exchange. Screen Tests/ A Diary by Gerard Malanga and Andy Warhol,“ 66.

[14] Ibid., 64.