Dancers who don't photograph well

[Ostrich]

I find that there are a number of great dancers whose artistic qualities and technical capabilities don't come across well on photos, whereas others can be captured well on photographs. Of course, this depends partly on how good the photographer is, but I have never, for example, seen a photo which truly shows the exceptional quality of Carla Fracci's dancing. Also, I used to think Makarova an awful dancer before I saw her on video, because she always looks angular and ungraceful on photos, whereas in movement she is very flowing.

Dancers who in my opinion don't photograph well:

Carla Fracci

Natalia Makarova

Vladimir Vasiliev

Andris Liepa

Dancers who do photograph well:

Margot Fonteyn

Anthony Dowell

Erik Bruhn

Nikolai Tsiskaridze

Vladimir Malakov

What is your list?

[Farrell Fan]

It depends on whether we're talking about performance photographs, studio portraits, or head shots. In the last of these categories, the photos of the principal dancers in the NYCB program too often resemble police mug shots.

[Old Fashioned]

I have yet to see a decent photograph of Mireille Hassenboehler (for example, the recent cover of Pointe magazine ). She's a lovely person and an even lovelier dancer, but her beauty never comes across in still images.

[bart]

Melissa Hayden. So very central to NYCB in the 50s and 60s, but relatively invisible in dance history books.

Also Maria Tallchief. Incandescent on the stage -- always appears badly lit in photos.

Edited March 6, 2005 by bart

[Paquita]

I think Suzanne Farrell is very photogenic.

In terms of technique, I am in awe of some of the photos of Susan Jaffe in the book "Classical Ballet Technique"!

[Ljonesxoxo]

I think Suzanne Farrell is very photogenic.

In terms of technique, I am in awe of some of the photos of Susan Jaffe in the book "Classical Ballet Technique"!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are some wonderful pictures of Susan Jaffe in that book.

[richard53dog]

Melissa Hayden.  So very central to NYCB in the 50s and 60s, but relatively invisible in dance history books.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've noticed the same thing on Hayden. I saw her a lot in her last few years at NYCB and her photos are odd. Sometimes I can't even recognize her.

But the few filmed/taped bits of material look more like her. I recently was watching a documentary, Dancing for Mr B and although she is obviously older, she looks like I remember her.

I also find her current place in history a bit unhappy. While I would never say that she was the finest dancer of her time, (how can you really make comparisons like that anyway?) I think she was much more important as a dancer than she seems to be regarded today.

Richard

[Marga]

I think she was much more important as a dancer than she seems to be regarded today.

I agree with you, Richard. She was a real star at City Ballet. As soon as she stepped onstage, she was accorded the thunderous applause due such luminaries. Everyone knew that Millie Hayden was crème de la crème!

As for the topic of this thread, my offering is Galina Mezentseva. She is really a striking woman in casual photos, and a superb technician and artist, but her ballet pics and videos just leave me cold. I have to urge myself to like her, and I don't know why since she is an incredibly talented ballerina. I've fallen in love with so many ballerinas, but I groan (yes, really) when she, and not some other dancer, is featured in a ballet video. It bothers me a great deal that I have this reaction to her. I wish I had seen her dance in person, without the hindrance of photographic or videographic representation.