Questions

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 136609

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli <jlnbtr at y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Geoff Bannister <gbannister10 at a...> wrote:
> Crystalwolf:
> My other question is, don't the pictures of Headmasters talk?  Are
> they a little piece of the headmasters' souls?  The pictures of 
> Harry's parents don't talk, but the pictures on the walls at 
> Hogwarts often do. 

> Geoff: Yes, they do talk. There are several conversations between 
> Dumbledore and Phineas Nigellus in OOTP and some of the other Heads 
> also comment on occasions.
 
> Juli: Just wanted to add a little thing: Portraits talk ..., but
Pictures taken with a camara don't talk, they just move. Don't ask
why, my guess is the portrait is done my a wizard/witch, and the
Photograph is done by a machine
> 
> 
> Juli


bboyminn:

We know from JKR's own statements on the matter that Portraits are not
complete people. That is, Harry may now be able to talk to the
portrait of Dumbledore, but he will find it very lacking in depth,
analytical skill, and understanding. The personality will be there,
perhaps even the knowledge, but the depth of character will be missing.

Why?

I've many times speculated that Protraits are like actors playing a
role, they can have a deep understanding of the characters they play,
and in the Stage Play or Movie of a particular character's life, they
can play him with great depth and feeling, then, if you come to the
actor after the movie, and talk to him about the character, you will
find his performance was an illusion. He created a great and moving
representation of the character, but again, the real depth isn't there.

So, while a portrait of a character may play a great role, may very
accurately represent the personality of the character, the deeper
soul, understanding, and intelligence are not there.

So while a Protrait is like an actor in the movie which allows for a
great deal of time, knowledge, and insight into the character being
played, a Picture is like a 15 or 30 second TV commercial where every
person is an exaggerated characterization that we instantly recognise;
the cool kid, the smart housewife, the dolt of a husband. 

So, the point is that Picture are COMPLETELY lacking any depth of
character at all, they are simply an image, whereas a Portrait which
is a more meticulous and complex representation of a person. The
differnces between a Picture and a Portrait, are reflected in the
depth of character represented by each. Pictures are such a
superficial representation that they don't talk, they simply 'mug' for
the viewer.

Also, note the depth of the process for creating the character
representation. Pictures are simply film that has been processed in a
special way. Portraits, despite how quickly Dumbledore's portrait
appear, I must assume are made by a deeper process; enchanted paint,
talented artists, and a physical piece of the portraits subject is
added to the picture; a strand of hair, a bit of skin, or a nail
clipping, etc..... A portrait contains some true essense of the living
person.

So, 

Pictures - extremely superficial
Portraits - having depth of character, very able to accurately
represent the subject, but still lacking in true depth.

Just one man's opinion.

Steveb/bboyminn