The Reverse Silouette.... what?

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Veteran
So I was doing some deep thinking and thought to myself : "If a silouette is extreme contrast between subject and background, where the subject is extremely dark and the background bright or properly exposed.... can't there be an opposite? What do we call it?

Of course there are countless and common situations where a subject is lit brighter then the background.... but ever so much to the point of the subject being almost completely blown out while the background is darker or properly exposed?

Are there any examples of a reverse silhouette?
 
I like the word inverse. While I can't think of any examples right away, I don't think the subject has to be overexposed at all for the shot to fall into this category. The background would just have to be extremely underexposed, which is pretty common. Or not ridiculously uncommon.
 
Yes I agree. But the term silhouette is usually reserved for the more extreme examples of the subject being almost all underexposed... so there is an inverse, but it isn't used often. I think the subject does, in this case, need to be overexposed to count as an inverse silhouette. Not just a regular properly exposed or slightly over exposed subject on a dim background. Otherwise most dinner scenes would count! :P
 
Yeah I dont really agree with the idea of a reverse silhouette. A silhouette is specific to talent under exposed. The inverse wouldnt be nearly as extreme unless you want to blow someone out which never looks good. Just my opinion.
 
Since the definition of a silhouette is "a view of an object or scene consisting of the outline and a featureless interior, with the silhouetted object usually being black". (crude def from wiki), there is obviously an opposite: 'A form of an object or scene consisting of a featureless interior, with the silhouetted object usually being white.'

Although not common, and perhaps not pleasing, this is a way to display an image and is just as capable of evoking equal amount of mood or emotion, adding to a story.

I'm not sure why people think the opposite of a silhouette is simply a lit subject upon a darker background... we wouldn't call a slightly underexposed subject a silhouette would we? So yes there is such as thing. Perhaps not used much at all but if physics and cinematography has taught me anything, it is that for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. For every type of visual tool, the opposite can be applied for another use of story telling.

So thanks for everyone who thought about it. Obviously my question is a bust, but I would not have asked it, if it didn't stretch the mind to find an answer.
 
Last edited:
The reason I say that's what it is is because of what the original is.

A silhouette has underexposed subject and, most often normal exposed background. If you go the opposite, such as pressing ctrl+I in Photoshop, you get a black background and normally lit subject.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
So I was doing some deep thinking and thought to myself : "If a silouette is extreme contrast between subject and background, where the subject is extremely dark and the background bright or properly exposed.... can't there be an opposite? What do we call it?

Of course there are countless and common situations where a subject is lit brighter then the background.... but ever so much to the point of the subject being almost completely blown out while the background is darker or properly exposed?

Are there any examples of a reverse silhouette?
Click to expand...


The 'closest' that comes to my mind, is stage work, where the performer is hot under the spotlights, but the background is essentially black.

I don't think I've seen the term 'inverse silhouette' though...
 
the other night i was hiding in a hole in a tree and looking out the full moon was inversely silhouetted before my eyes adjusted and i could see the holes in the cheese, then it just looked normally exposed.
 
Offhand, I can’t really think any examples where the ‘interior’ of an overexposed subject’s outline is ENTIRELY without detail. Even when the source is completely frontal, we can usually make out the eyes, nostrils, lips…

The only instances I can currently think of that might lack even those small but significant details would be depictions of deities or other supernatural beings in religious artwork.

In film, I guess the types of scenes that are likely to include something close would be interrogation scenes, paparazzi-swarm scenes, looking-up-as-the-spaceship-as-it-lands-and/or-takes-off scenes, and deer (not literally) in the headlights (literally) shots.

It’s an interesting train of thought, though, and definitely something worth pondering…

For instance, showing an ‘inverse silhouette’ of a potentially threatening figure as he approaches the protagonist’s car—having successfully flagged down her vehicle on a quiet country road at night—is not only a decent tactic in the war against cliché; it is also far more relatable than the reverse angle, and potentially more suspenseful.

Definitely something worth thinking about…

Cheers,

DP
 
There is a word for this (or a similar concept), and I've been wracking my brain trying to remember it since the start of this thread. French or Italian (maybe German), and from the silent era.... Doh! Stupid brain! It'll come eventually. Look for this thread to revive in a few years.
 
pmark23 said:
There is a word for this (or a similar concept), and I've been wracking my brain trying to remember it since the start of this thread. French or Italian (maybe German), and from the silent era.... Doh! Stupid brain! It'll come eventually. Look for this thread to revive in a few years.
Click to expand...

'Chiaroscuro' is perhaps the term you're thinking of.
 
Blue_Food said:
Offhand, I can’t really think any examples where the ‘interior’ of an overexposed subject’s outline is ENTIRELY without detail. Even when the source is completely frontal, we can usually make out the eyes, nostrils, lips…

The only instances I can currently think of that might lack even those small but significant details would be depictions of deities or other supernatural beings in religious artwork.

In film, I guess the types of scenes that are likely to include something close would be interrogation scenes, paparazzi-swarm scenes, looking-up-as-the-spaceship-as-it-lands-and/or-takes-off scenes, and deer (not literally) in the headlights (literally) shots.

It’s an interesting train of thought, though, and definitely something worth pondering…

For instance, showing an ‘inverse silhouette’ of a potentially threatening figure as he approaches the protagonist’s car—having successfully flagged down her vehicle on a quiet country road at night—is not only a decent tactic in the war against cliché; it is also far more relatable than the reverse angle, and potentially more suspenseful.

Definitely something worth thinking about…
Click to expand...

You are definitely on the right trail. I'm not claiming it has been done before in quite the way I'm thinking of. The examples you give are quite possibly the closest thing to such example... which is simply a very overexposed, yet still exposed image. I think with careful shot design, a reverse silhouette (pure white figure) could be a unique and different shot. I will be devising a way to create one, one day soon. I'm thinking of testing it out at a studio situation... somewhere I can light a set or something, and then blast the subject with a 20k :P

I want a properly exposed or slightly under set with a motivated silhouette of complete blown out nature. A true reverse silhouette, not over exposed. It might be completely wrong looking and unmotivated, but I'm hoping to get that pure white clean figure that darkened silhouettes get.

Thanks for everyone's input, and I'll be sure to post back when I do the experiment.
 
Blue_Food said:
'Chiaroscuro' is perhaps the term you're thinking of.
Click to expand...

It may be, but I don't see how it describes this idea, as chiaroscuro is simply the use of light and shadow to convey a three dimensional form... as where a reverse silhouette has none of that. It's a two dimensional representation.
 
Well an easy way to do this would be to take a light out into a very dark field of some sort, shine the light on the subject, expose properly and frame from the chest up or something so you don't catch any of the ground.

edit: I didn't see the second page where this was mentioned.. sorry.
 
That is actually an almost perfect example. They do it all the time in the graphic novel, and occasionally in the film. I forgot all about SinCity! :beer:Nice call.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top