| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/23/2005 11:43:57 AM · #1 |
So many of the bridge pictures were shot dead-center (both horizontally and vertically.) The posts were straight up center or straight across the horizon.
I always thought that was a no-no. Personally, for me, having just a slight angle from lens to subject gives a picture a bit of an edge. To catch it off to the side of center in either direction (no, not crooked!) makes it more interesting.
This sounds like a tutorial waiting to happen. How about taking that bridge of yours and taking a series of photo's, moving one big side-step for each one.
Thanks for any help from you all. k
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 11:44:45. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 11:47:40 AM · #2 |
There are no "no-no's". There are only rules-of-thumb. Bridges tend to be symmetrical objects by their nature, so you get a lot of shots of them that (justifiably) play off that symmetricality.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 11:48:01 AM · #3 |
| Rules were meant to be broken. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 11:51:16 AM · #4 |
the top 5 finishers used the rule of 3rds and i think it's reflected in where they placed
my opinion: the rule of 3rd is generally a rule that should be followed ... but perhaps i'll be trashed for saying so. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 12:45:54 PM · #5 |
Neither #1 nor #3 follow the rule of thirds, except somewhat incidentally. #1 especially does not, except inasmuch as the tower on the right happens to be on a 1/3 vertical. It's actually an example of leading lines composition.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 12:48:19 PM · #6 |
#3 is a stretch ... but #1 - the center of focus is directly on the the bottom left 1/3 cross point
Originally posted by bear_music:
Neither #1 nor #3 follow the rule of thirds, except somewhat incidentally. #1 especially does not, except inasmuch as the tower on the right happens to be on a 1/3 vertical. It's actually an example of leading lines composition.
Robt. |
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:00:43 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Kathy:
So many of the bridge pictures were shot dead-center (both horizontally and vertically.) The posts were straight up center or straight across the horizon.
I always thought that was a no-no. |
There are no rules. Only conformists follow rules and art is not a prosperous place for conformists. Art is about imagination and breaking boundaries (and imaginary rules). What matters in the end is end product; the result of the skill, talent, luck and work that went into the image. There is nothing else.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:06:25 PM · #8 |
that's right, no creativety has ever come from someone who used the rule of thirds. they aren't true artists.
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by Kathy:
So many of the bridge pictures were shot dead-center (both horizontally and vertically.) The posts were straight up center or straight across the horizon.
I always thought that was a no-no. |
There are no rules. Only conformists follow rules and art is not a prosperous place for conformists. Art is about imagination and breaking boundaries (and imaginary rules). What matters in the end is end product; the result of the skill, talent, luck and work that went into the image. There is nothing else. |
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:07:48 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
There are no rules. Only conformists follow rules and art is not a prosperous place for conformists. Art is about imagination and breaking boundaries (and imaginary rules). What matters in the end is end product; the result of the skill, talent, luck and work that went into the image. There is nothing else. |
it does help to have some decent pointers to help those of us at the begining of this quest. Then as we gain greater knowledge, understanding, and experience we will have both the confidence at our disposal and the tools to challenge, explore and "break" the rules
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 13:08:43. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:12:17 PM · #10 |
If the point of the shot is symmetry, then centering the image may be the way to go. Man Ray's 'Le Violon d'Ingres' comes to mind, although I'm sure there are better examples.
There can be other artistic reasons for deviating from the rule of thirds. Rineke Dijkstra did a series where her subjects were centred, leaving them looking isolated and vulnerable. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:15:39 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by hopper:
that's right, no creativety has ever come from someone who used the rule of thirds. they aren't true artists.
|
There is a difference between using something and following it religiously. I never liked the term rule of thirds because it implies something that must be followed. Golden Section works much better.
Originally posted by Artan:
it does help to have some decent pointers to help those of us at the begining of this quest. Then as we gain greater knowledge, understanding, and experience we will have both the confidence at our disposal and the tools to challenge, explore and "break" the rules |
These can be called guidelines, or as Robert said: rules-of-thumb. Nothing ever hard and fast.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:20:04 PM · #12 |
i agree with you, nsbca7. i just think it's a more important "guideline" than some give it credit for being. if i was teaching a newbie about composition and didn't teach this "guideline", i'd be doing that person a great injustice.
it almost always improves the composition to use it ... there are exceptions, of course |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:32:26 PM · #13 |
At the risk of offending Bradp (I hope I don't), I'd like to discuss the composition of BradP's shot. We all sometimes have fun teasing Brad's success, but I seriously want to discuss that photo and hope he understands my good intentions.
To me, this photo doesn't follow any real compositional plan--not even one for a "geometric based" shot. Other than nice deep blues and a few color reflections, what is it that works so well for people here?
Personally, it's not composed according to the rule of thirds, there's no leading lines in the composition. I think I would have at least gone for a fully symmetrical crop, using the bridge and its reflection. It's kind of in-between as is.
Yet reading the comments, it was a 10 for many people. Perfect. Including Robert (bear_music). So I'm curious what you saw in it, and why you thought it could not be improved.
Again, I am a little hesitant to pick on any photo in a forum, but I think it might be interesting to discuss. I didn't enter this challenge, so it's just an academic exercise for me. And I truly think BradP is secure enough in his talents that he won't mind (he says while looking behind him for men swinging large automotive repair tools)
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:33:10 PM · #14 |
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? |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:41:21 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
To me, this photo doesn't follow any real compositional plan--not even one for a "geometric based" shot. Other than nice deep blues and a few color reflections, what is it that works so well for people here?
Personally, it's not composed according to the rule of thirds, there's no leading lines in the composition. I think I would have at least gone for a fully symmetrical crop, using the bridge and its reflection. It's kind of in-between as is.
|
But it does break perfectly into thirds and has a very strong leading line. Look at the image in horizonal terms to see the division and follow the bridge in from the center left, around and back towards the horizon. It's all there.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:44:01 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
... what is it that works so well for people here? ... it's kind of in-between as is. |
Thanks for asking these questions. I saw beauty in it, but thought the composition was awkward. I think that's the main reason that I scored it a 6, which is what I normally score an above average, but unexceptional entry. I hope others who saw it differently weigh in.
typo fix
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 13:45:21. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:44:35 PM · #17 |
| Rules are ment to be broken, that's why I have never one a ribbon. :) |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:44:42 PM · #18 |
i didn't vote on these, but this is what i see:
the turn in the bridge is more or less the anchor of the photo and it falls very loosely on the bottom right 3rd cross point, then the bridge and the reflections lead back to the main shore. so for me it loosely uses 3rds AND leading lines
however, i agree with neil that perhaps the composition could have been even better than it is.
Originally posted by nshapiro:
At the risk of offending Bradp (I hope I don't), I'd like to discuss the composition of BradP's shot. We all sometimes have fun teasing Brad's success, but I seriously want to discuss that photo and hope he understands my good intentions.
To me, this photo doesn't follow any real compositional plan--not even one for a "geometric based" shot. Other than nice deep blues and a few color reflections, what is it that works so well for people here?
Personally, it's not composed according to the rule of thirds, there's no leading lines in the composition. I think I would have at least gone for a fully symmetrical crop, using the bridge and its reflection. It's kind of in-between as is.
Yet reading the comments, it was a 10 for many people. Perfect. Including Robert (bear_music). So I'm curious what you saw in it, and why you thought it could not be improved.
Again, I am a little hesitant to pick on any photo in a forum, but I think it might be interesting to discuss. I didn't enter this challenge, so it's just an academic exercise for me. And I truly think BradP is secure enough in his talents that he won't mind (he says while looking behind him for men swinging large automotive repair tools) |
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 13:46:43. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:46:57 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by hopper:
#3 is a stretch ... but #1 - the center of focus is directly on the the bottom left 1/3 cross point
Originally posted by bear_music:
Neither #1 nor #3 follow the rule of thirds, except somewhat incidentally. #1 especially does not, except inasmuch as the tower on the right happens to be on a 1/3 vertical. It's actually an example of leading lines composition.
Robt. |
|
It's possible to draw lines on any decent image and see where something important coincides with a nexus. That's not really the issue though. If an image borrows from 2 or more compositional models, the question would be "which is the dominant one?" For example, a symmetrically-framed elevation of a temple, where the bottom of the building is on the bottom 1/3 line, the top of it on the top 1/3 line, each edge on its respective 1'3 line — in toher words, the subject itself fills the central box of the overlay, everything else is surround. But it's still a composition based on a symmetrical modality.
All of this is after the fact anyway; just as poets use prosody to analyze already-written poems, we use compositional models to study already-created images. It's a poor poet who writes from rules rather than his ear, and a poor photographer who composes from rules rather than his eye. The rules have pedagogical validity, admitted; if we are TEACHING people about composition we have to teach the "rules". But it's the artist's job to internalize the rules so they no longer come between him and his subject.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:50:34 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
All of this is after the fact anyway; just as poets use prosody to analyze already-written poems, we use compositional models to study already-created images. It's a poor poet who writes from rules rather than his ear, and a poor photographer who composes from rules rather than his eye. The rules have pedagogical validity, admitted; if we are TEACHING people about composition we have to teach the "rules". But it's the artist's job to internalize the rules so they no longer come between him and his subject.
Robt. |
Applause.
.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:51:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
To me, this photo doesn't follow any real compositional plan--not even one for a "geometric based" shot. Other than nice deep blues and a few color reflections, what is it that works so well for people here?
Personally, it's not composed according to the rule of thirds, there's no leading lines in the composition. I think I would have at least gone for a fully symmetrical crop, using the bridge and its reflection. It's kind of in-between as is.
|
But it does break perfectly into thirds and has a very strong leading line. Look at the image in horizonal terms to see the division and follow the bridge in from the center left, around and back towards the horizon. It's all there. |
I just downloaded it and looked in PS. No, there's more sky than on the bottom. Moreover, the dark foreground also contributes to additional perceived imbalance, where there appears to be even more sky than water (there is, but this adds even further to that.)
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 01:51:20 PM · #22 |
makes me a poor photographer i guess (i already knew i was poor poet)
:)
Originally posted by bear_music:
It's a poor poet who writes from rules rather than his ear, and a poor photographer who composes from rules rather than his eye. |
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:09:35 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I just downloaded it and looked in PS. No, there's more sky than on the bottom. Moreover, the dark foreground also contributes to additional perceived imbalance, where there appears to be even more sky than water (there is, but this adds even further to that.) |
But you are dividing this image along the horizon. Look at it like this:
The bottom edge to the shadow of the bridge = foreground.
The shadow to the actual bridge = center.
The bridge to the top of the picture = sky or background.
Now if you were to take a ruler to these sections I'm sure they wouldn't come close to being equal, but neither is the Golden Section a true third.
To be honest I am not defending the aesthetics of Brad's picture. I gave it a 7. But I think because I thought it was too dark and too blue for my personal taste, not because of any lack of compositional values.
This picture is the one I scored highest out of the challenge.
And I have never bothered to anylyze it to know why.
|
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:10:52 PM · #24 |
Just for discussion, hopefully BradP doesn't mind:
Symmetrical Crop (Horizon)
An alternative crop, trying to focus on symmetry and pattern of lights emerging from left and diverging:
Of course, a bit small because I don't have the original. ;)
Brad, I'll remove these unauthorized copies in a day or so, or if you want, sooner.
Edit: Thought text was misleading. Symmetrical around the horizon, not "Horizontal Symmetrical Crop".
Message edited by author 2005-02-23 14:15:16. |
|
|
|
02/23/2005 02:13:07 PM · #25 |
I don't go by any rules. I just shoot what looks good to my eye. Usually that is about 20 shots to get that one photo I like. I took about 50 of my bridge challenge entry and only came up with one that I like which is the one I entered.
|
|
