| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/23/2005 02:19:33 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
This picture is the one I scored highest out of the challenge.
And I have never bothered to anylyze it to know why. |
i could tell u why but i don't want to take the time right now....
safisated to say it was my highest rated and if there where an 11 on the scale i would have give it that.....
it is art and i am (IMHO) an artist....so i am atricted to it as something i honor and can relate to.....
besides it being so good photographicly.
_brando_
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:24:27 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by lagavulin:
Originally posted by lagavulin:
If the point of the shot is symmetry, then centering the image may be the way to go. |
For instance, how would keegbow's fine 6th place entry have fared, were its subject not horizontally centred?
Although, in the other axis, I wonder if it would have been stronger to shift the shoreline down in the frame, 1/3 up from the bottom rather than near centre? |
Hp all,
Just wanted to give some input into this topic and explain my composition.
First of all I agree with what most people are saying about the rule-of-thirds that is it is a good guideline but it is not a must.
With my image I did look at cropping it from the bottom and this was also suggested by e301 in his comments but I felt it had more impact having complete symmetry and I wanted to show as much water as possible.
With Brad's shot he has gained great impact by using the light reflection as a leading line as suggested in the title and as such the image is using a standard rule. This is a fantastic use of composition to get the viewer inside his image.
On side note it was intersting to see how many images in the top ten that were night shots or low light. Bridges really do look their best under lights. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:28:17 PM · #28 |
My top two shots during the challenge.
How's this for not following the rule of thirds and yet having impact:
And this one is just my personal taste:
Although it's personal taste and certainly not for everyone, that last one was really underrated, as these shots tend to be, as it got 20 ones. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:41:31 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
My top two shots during the challenge.
How's this for not following the rule of thirds and yet having impact:
|
that one along with this:
were my top two rated. Neither of them really follow rule of thirds. The second one is just really intriguing to me. Definitely the fisheye (i'm guessing?) helps the effect, but the bridge itself is also so unique. No gaurdrails and about as wide as a bikepath but really long. Thought it was cool, and loved the figure on it.
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 14:43:11. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:45:06 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
My top two shots during the challenge.
How's this for not following the rule of thirds and yet having impact:
. |
Look at the left. I'd say that that side is divided into thirds: the portion above the bridge, the portion between the bridge & its reflection and the portion below the reflection of the bridge. I also loved the way that all the lines lead away from there.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:54:07 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by AJAger:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
My top two shots during the challenge.
How's this for not following the rule of thirds and yet having impact:
. |
Look at the left. I'd say that that side is divided into thirds: the portion above the bridge, the portion between the bridge & its reflection and the portion below the reflection of the bridge. I also loved the way that all the lines lead away from there. |
I'd agree. This rule of thirds has never stated that the image should be divided into thirds vertically. The division horizontally or even diagonally is often as aesthetically pleasing and this image, like Brads, is divided into thirds on horizontal lines.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 03:20:49 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by utro:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
My top two shots during the challenge.
How's this for not following the rule of thirds and yet having impact:
|
that one along with this:
were my top two rated. Neither of them really follow rule of thirds. The second one is just really intriguing to me. Definitely the fisheye (i'm guessing?) helps the effect, but the bridge itself is also so unique. No gaurdrails and about as wide as a bikepath but really long. Thought it was cool, and loved the figure on it. |
My understanding of the rule of thirds is this: draw gridlines dividing the photo into thirds and place the focal point on or near the intersections of the grid lines.
I don't know if that compositional rule really applies to dividing an evenly distributed pattern in the photo itself into thirds, though I do, as a said, think the division works well here.
Just wondering if anyone else thinks that's a stretch to say that's following the rule of thirds? |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 03:20:53 PM · #33 |
I've always thought it to be this:
Make the image into a tic-tac-toe board. The major element or elements in the image should fall onto one or more of the lines on this board, not the spaces in between. Get it?
like this:
_________
| | | |
|__|___|__|a
| | | |
|__|___|__|b
| | | |
|__|___|__|
So if you had a straight on shot of a face, the eyes should fall onto line A, not above it.
That's what I learned, but i believe, like most, that the rules are definitely made to be broken.
EDIT:
well....that didn't work. :p
here's what i mean: //www.silverlight.co.uk/tutorials/compose_expose/thirds.html
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 15:21:58. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 03:23:43 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by utro:
I've always thought it to be this:
Make the image into a tic-tac-toe board. The major element or elements in the image should fall onto one or more of the lines on this board, not the spaces in between. Get it?
like this:
_________
| | | |
|__|___|__|a
| | | |
|__|___|__|b
| | | |
|__|___|__|
So if you had a straight on shot of a face, the eyes should fall onto line A, not above it.
That's what I learned, but i believe, like most, that the rules are definitely made to be broken.
EDIT:
well....that didn't work. :p
here's what i mean: //www.silverlight.co.uk/tutorials/compose_expose/thirds.html |
Does this description work for you: draw gridlines dividing the photo into thirds and place the focal point on or near the intersections of the grid lines.
Easier than drawing it ;) |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 03:24:56 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Does this description work for you: draw gridlines dividing the photo into thirds and place the focal point on or near the intersections of the grid lines.
Easier than drawing it ;) |
haha, Yes! Thank you. I couldn't put it into words. hehe. But that's what I meant. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 03:58:20 PM · #36 |
| Thank you for comments on my photo,the guy on the bridge in black & white. Not a lot to add. Rules or no rules, digital is a lot more fun than film, Just the freedom to see your work immediately, and then process it on the computer, fantastic! I love walking around a city with camera looking for pictures. Its a bit like a hunter ,the predatory instinct perhaps. Does anyone else have this affliction? |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 04:07:25 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by H R Verry:
Does anyone else have this affliction? |
No. You're the only one. The rest of us are normal.
.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 04:11:23 PM · #38 |
.
One question though, Hayden, where was this image taken? What city? Definatly looks europe.
.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 04:19:56 PM · #39 |
| Thanks for Humour. In Berlin. Its a very gray and cold place in the winter. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 05:24:03 PM · #40 |
Meantime my photo seems to have garnered universal dislike because the composition obscured the child's head.
But if I'd included it, I'm sure it would have been dumped on for being a "snapshot" of my kid at the park.
Only ... this isn't my kid, and everyone "knows" that these days you don't just go around taking and posting pictures of other people's kids (especially if you look as "suspicious" as I often do). Additionally, she's just learning to walk, and with the context of the challenge being to explore both the physical and metaphorical aspects of "bridges," I wanted her to represent ANY kid who's facing an early challenge, and so obscuring her head served a dual purpose.
Besides, I thought I was doing pretty well to get a picture of my subject(s) isolated, without any of the numerous other kids and parents who were running around : )
 |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 05:35:15 PM · #41 |
Basically, "rule of thirds" mandates that your compositional nexus is on one of those intersection, yes. Lacking a focal point for the image (frequently the case in landscape photography), rule of thirds suggests that the horizon be on the top or the bottom 1/3 line.
Neither Brad's picture nor the image posted with the vertical tower "follows" rule of thirds, even though you can divide them both on the left margin into 3 equal horizontal components, because rule of thirds would have the "subject" component straddling one of these lines, and in both cases the "subject" is filling the space between the lines. In other words, the subject is placed in the vertical center of the image, and this is NOT rule of thirds.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 17:35:57.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 07:06:18 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by H R Verry:
Thank you for comments on my photo,the guy on the bridge in black & white. Not a lot to add. Rules or no rules, digital is a lot more fun than film, Just the freedom to see your work immediately, and then process it on the computer, fantastic! I love walking around a city with camera looking for pictures. Its a bit like a hunter ,the predatory instinct perhaps. Does anyone else have this affliction? |
Affliction? There's something bad about this? Well then yes, I'm a sufferer too.
e |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 10:10:35 PM · #43 |
Great response to my original question. And, the answer is.... follow the Rule of Thirds - or don't. And, the clear of the RofTs is.... well, there is no clear definition.
What I learned is what I've always known - follow the Rule unless it looks better if you don't.
For me though, sometimes it just takes an 18-inch step to the left - or to the right - to add that extra sense of curve, or to see an more exiting pattern in one of the elements, or to create movement within the image or one of elements. The same goes for the up or down line.
That's where my question came from - so many of the bridges were shot straight on and/or up. I found myself moving over to get a different perspective, before I realized that wouldn't work on my monitor!
Man, this is like sitting at the feet of Socrates - and learning by question. Thank you. k |
|
|
|
02/24/2005 04:37:50 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Neither Brad's picture nor the image posted with the vertical tower "follows" rule of thirds, even though you can divide them both on the left margin into 3 equal horizontal components, because rule of thirds would have the "subject" component straddling one of these lines, and in both cases the "subject" is filling the space between the lines. In other words, the subject is placed in the vertical center of the image, and this is NOT rule of thirds.
Robt. |
What is the "subject" component in Brad's picture? Is it the space between the lines or is it the lines themselves? I saw the primary subject as the reflection of the row of lights, and the secondary as the actual rail of the highway and the row of lights above. Both of these focal points fall loosely on a division of the horizontal plane that divides the image into three sections.
|
|
|
|
02/24/2005 04:42:15 AM · #45 |
Brad's picture is dominated by a very strong horizontal component consisting of the bridge itself and the shoreline behind it, which more-or-less precisely bisects the picture.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/24/2005 04:50:26 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Brad's picture is dominated by a very strong horizontal component consisting of the bridge itself and the shoreline behind it, which more-or-less precisely bisects the picture.
Robt. |
I know that. But when I first look at the image, that is one of the last things I am drawn to after I follow either the bridge or the lights around to get there. I know not eveyone looks at things the same, but I see the shoreline as supporting element and not the focal point.
I don't see the shoreline as dominating at all.
Message edited by author 2005-02-24 04:59:54.
|
|
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: 06/28/2025 03:23:43 AM EDT.
