The internet is furious over the Vanity Fair Trump cabinet portraits. But the photographer says the goal was “to reveal something more real”

Celebrities and politicians are often presented to the world in heavily orchestrated, Photoshopped portraits. A photographer wanted to create a more intimate portrait of reality when photographing the Vanity Fair Trump cabinet portraits – but the internet is not happy.

This week, Vanity Fair published a series of images of White House officials captured by photographer Christopher Anderson, including White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and others.

The series includes several extreme close-ups that appear to make no effort to hide pores, wrinkles, and eyeliner smears. The publication’s posts were quickly filled with negative comments, with the internet describing the images using words from “diabolical” to “done dirty.”

Anderson has spoken out against the backlash, telling The Independent that very close-up portrait is part of his style, with the idea of “penetrating the theater of politics.”

The photographer told Newsweek that the portraits are meant to cut through the theatrics and represent something real. “Style is for others to judge,” he said. “My objective, when photographing the political world, is to make photographs that cut through the stage-managed image to reveal something more real, and for the images to honestly portray the encounter that I had at the moment. Being very close is part of how I have been doing this for many years now.”

As a photographer – and an American – I have to admit that the close-up portraits feel unusual But, that’s exactly what photographers need to do to cut through the noise. A Photoshopped portrait without pores and wrinkles would not have gotten the viral attention that Anderson’s close-ups are earning, because that’s too normal, too expected.

There seems to be a trend in American politics towards candidates who feel more “real.” There has been an uptick in non-traditional candidates. As a Michigander, I still remember the shock when now-Governor Gretchen Whitmer used the word “damn” in her campaign in 2018. The New York Times counted at least 1,787 four-letter words during Trump’s 2024 political campaign.

Perhaps you are wondering what swear words and extreme close-ups have in common – but I think both speak more to a less polished political stage. Real people have pores. They have wrinkles. They may have smudged makeup. Have we become so accustomed to Photoshopped images of celebrities that a politician with pores is shocking?

Did I react with an “ooph” when I saw the Vanity Fair Trump cabinet portraits? Well, yes, but that’s kind of the point. Politics in America does not feel pretty right now, so why should political portraits be pretty?

You may also like

Browse the best portrait lenses.