DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Discussion of Composition for Landscapes
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 13 of 13, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/02/2005 06:05:15 PM · #1
I posted this in the other thread for rule of thirds composition, but I think it deserves its own thread.

One issue close to my interests in particular is the subject of landscapes. Landscapes follow different rules for compositions.

I often hear people comment on landscapes that there's no focal point. Landscapes, from what little I know, don't need a focal point. However, there can be one and certainly it can make the photograph quite striking. For example, some of the works in David Muench's book Ancient America, use a wide angle lens and a sharp foreground object to provide a focal point with the landscape serving as a backdrop. By the way, I found the photos in that book inspiring and I highly recommend it.

I get and read outdoor photographer for several years now, but I can't recall ever reading a very good general guidelines for landscapes, or for that matter seeing any article in there that was a memorable set of rules/guidelines for composition.

So I'd love to hear the writings and thoughts of professional or well-read landscape photographers here.
 02/02/2005 06:25:32 PM · #2
I think in general landscape photography follows the same rules as other types of photography. You need a good subject, good light, and the talent to bring it all together into a pleasing image.

I would say that landscape photography does need a focal point but it can be most anything and of any size, from a single leaf to a giant mountain. Framing in landscapes for me seems to be the key, as well as perfect light. The very same landscape can look spectacular one day, or even one hour, and not the next.

I like this guyquite a bit. He does mostly Southwestern landscapes with a view camera. Poke around and see what you think.
 02/02/2005 06:45:36 PM · #3
When we went to Utah we stopped in at Michael Fatali's Gallery and I was not impressed at all and a few of the locals told me he was a fake :)

Edit:

I suppose it is like they say being a succesful Photographer is as much marketing as anything.

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 18:47:00.
 02/02/2005 06:48:24 PM · #4
Generally, in landscape photography you want a focal point that leads the viewers eye into the landscape. More common ways of doing this are using a fence or tree branch to guide the eyes.
 02/02/2005 06:52:43 PM · #5
Can anyone recommend a good book that discusses landscape composition?

02/02/2005 07:03:29 PM · #6
The making of Landscape Photographs by Charlie Waite
Seeing Landscapes by Charlie Waite

both excellent books by this photographer - see some of his work www.charliewaite.com/

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 19:03:42.
 02/02/2005 07:18:29 PM · #7
I've tried to force myself to learn aboutlandscape photography over tthe past six months or so, with some success I think. I've just tried writing about what i've learned, and it came out like a lecture, and wasn't really about compositional ideas, so i've binned it.

So here's a recent image, with which i'm quite pleased



And here's a couple of questions:

1. Does it work?

2. (and most seriously) If so, why?

And I shall write something about why i think it does...

e
 02/02/2005 07:26:12 PM · #8
Check this dude out. They used one of his books when I was in school. He has quite a few books out there and his work is quite good.

//www.johnshawphoto.com/

I believe he lives in Colorado still.

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 19:26:38.
 02/02/2005 07:28:03 PM · #9
Originally posted by e301:

And here's a couple of questions:

1. Does it work?

2. (and most seriously) If so, why?

And I shall write something about why i think it does...

e


Ed, it works for me! I think it's gorgeous.

But why is a good question. It has no focal point, which is one of the issues I've started this with. It does have a geometry to it, the nice lines of the trees, and the hill sort of leads you into the picture. Per a post below, I realize leading lines are very important in a landscape, but I've never equated them with a focal point (and don't know if that's correct or incorrect.)

So for me, it works because it has lovely colors and textures, even in the sky, presents a mood/emotion, and makes me want to be there. That's my only real rule for accepting my own landscapes now, other than trying some of the ideas I got from Ancient America, where there is a focal point, something in the foreground, and the gorgeous landscape is the backdrop for it.
 02/02/2005 07:36:22 PM · #10
I have a few of my landscapes in my portfolio. I think they're nice, and I've gotten nice comments, but I don't have any real rules of thumb to compose with other than composing for my own aesthetics. And they don't have focal points.

Here's one example, though I guess you could argue the main mountain in the center is a focal point:



Here another, this one would be harder to argue there's a focal point other than to say it might be the extra bright orange tree in the light. Again, this was composed for aesthetics.



I'd love someone versed to tell me what I can do better.
 02/02/2005 08:04:50 PM · #11
You know, I think I don't know the answer? I can't suggest anything with either of those shots - though the fall colours one could have been sharpened some for web display at that size, I suppose. That's hardly compositional thinking though, is it?

Perhaps the perfect analysis of composition isn't actually any use; if we could resolve the difficulty into a series of neatly made points it would all be too simple to be worth bothering with?

The most useful trick I have developed for myself is to think of an image in terms of weight; something skin to, but not exactly, as though your frame were a tray, and the various points of interest scattered across it should balance that tray. I'm sure there are a million shots that don't work for this idea, but many of my own function that way: to take the example above:

To my eye there are six primary elements to it. The sweep of the ash trees and their white bark, the area of sky, the area of grassy path right lower, the tree on the hill, the stream. I would argue that there is a point of focus, a subject if you like, which is that sweep of trees, culminating in the two trees with the curved trunks. That is, I hope, what immediately draws a viewer into the shot. The sky and the grass area provide balance either side, the tree on the hill and the part of the stream provide vertical balance on that side of the frame to counter the strength of the light on the grass to the right.

The other thing I hope I've achieved, is a sense of a path through the iage for the eye to follow: I think that starts at top right, and follows the line of trees down to the stream, then up to the single tree on the hill, and then the strong curves of the main line of trees and the grass draw one back and across to the grass area, where there's enough interest in light and texture to draw one's eye down the right side of frame, and thus around to the bottom of the line of trees again. I may be wrong in this, as I obviously know the image so well, but I find it very difficult to make my eye wander through the image in an anti-clockwise direction.

Try aplying the thirds 'rule' to it, and you'll pretty much find that the final truck of the white trees is on one line, that that whole sweep of them fits into the top right two thirds, and that (and this is a difference with much landscape) that the sky and the grass almost fit another couple of sections each. Oh, and the shapes of the sky and the foreground grass have symmetry about the bottom-left to top-right diagonal.

That's enough for now, it's time for sensible UK people to be in bed. Way past time, actually.

Ed
 02/02/2005 09:00:04 PM · #12
I think that all successful landscapes have a focal point for me, but I think that it's sometimes more subtle than in many other forms of photography.

e301's example image has a clear focal point in the sweeping line of birch (or is it aspen?) trees, which is beautifully illuminated by magic hour lighting. A successful landscape is not a representation of nature... It's a representaton of what you feel when you're participating in nature. This image works (very well) for me in that respect.

As for books, I think Galen Rowell's Inner Game and Visions books are excellent in learning to see landscapes creatively. His books contain the typical inspirational works, but more importantly contain essays which I found great insight in... They made me think more about what I'm doing.

Search amazon for landscape photography and you'll see many books on the subject... but don't discount the value of finding works you want to emulate and then going out and trying to practice duplicating specific techniques.
 02/02/2005 09:03:24 PM · #13
Here's Ed's pic with lines superimposed:



Note that the left edge, which is the "base" of this composition, divides precisely into thirds. Note that the dominant white trunk is on the left 1/3 line. Note, finally, the extremely strong diagonal element and how its various foci fit within this grid.

Note also a subtle variation of the idea of thirds: the right third of the image, diagonally, is composed of a wedge/compressed arc of grass, with the dominant highlight 1/3 of the way up from bottom. the middle diagonal third of the image is a long, flattened arc of trees/stream. the left/upper third of the image, diagonally, is a wedge/compressed arc of sky, with the dominant focal point being the tree silhouetted against the sky on the upper 1/3 line.

So this image balances the bright grass against the silhouetted tree very symmetrically, and superimposes on the implied left-to-right diagonal of these two "minor" foci the major, and obverse, actual diagonal of the trees, anchored by the stream element, which gives the image a sense of depth and passage.
Robt.

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 21:23:31.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 03:34:10 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 03:34:10 AM EDT.