Dogman
Veteran
My wife and I were visiting friends yesterday and I was showing some recent prints. The friends--the female is an artist and her husband is a psychologist--looked through the prints carefully and both commented on how the elements were composed. The photos were all either candid pictures of people or scenes and objects "found", not arranged.
The psychologist took one of the photos and pointed out the various elements and inquired about how I went through the process of composing them for the photo. The artist then asked, "Do you even realize you're doing this at the time?"
Interesting. Fact is, most of the time, I don't really think about it--I just do it. I'm responding to what I see instinctively. And I can't even articulate why a subject interests me, it just does. Maybe it's because I've been photographing stuff for over 45 years and I can arrange the elements in my head before arranging them in the viewfinder. Or not. But it does generate some thought on my part.
I'm curious about others. Do you consciously think about your framing and compositions? Or does some instinct come into play that takes over the process?
The psychologist took one of the photos and pointed out the various elements and inquired about how I went through the process of composing them for the photo. The artist then asked, "Do you even realize you're doing this at the time?"
Interesting. Fact is, most of the time, I don't really think about it--I just do it. I'm responding to what I see instinctively. And I can't even articulate why a subject interests me, it just does. Maybe it's because I've been photographing stuff for over 45 years and I can arrange the elements in my head before arranging them in the viewfinder. Or not. But it does generate some thought on my part.
I'm curious about others. Do you consciously think about your framing and compositions? Or does some instinct come into play that takes over the process?
Robert Lai
Well-known
Usually something will catch my eye as being of interest. Then I will try to arrange things for the composition. Perhaps not analytically, but by moving around and seeing how things change in relation to each other. One thing that I am obsessive about is the background. I'm always moving or asking my subjects to move so that the tree or telephone pole is not growing out of their head. Similarly, if there is a large pane of glass in the background, I'll angle the plane of the subjects so that the glass is not parallel to the film plane, and give me a reflection back from my flash.
Composition is perhaps the hardest thing to learn and teach. There are so many rules if you look in a book. However, I tend to just keep moving around until I find something that seems satisfying. Too hard to keep all these rules in my head.
Composition is perhaps the hardest thing to learn and teach. There are so many rules if you look in a book. However, I tend to just keep moving around until I find something that seems satisfying. Too hard to keep all these rules in my head.
David Hughes
David Hughes
See it,snap it. It seems to work a lot of the time.
Regards, David
Regards, David
cysewski
Member
Feeling and Responding!
Feeling and Responding!
To me, photography is more about feeling than seeing and responding instead of imposing.
Feeling and Responding!
To me, photography is more about feeling than seeing and responding instead of imposing.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Same here. Most of the photos I'm OK with I don't know what I'm doing.
But I understand why I'm doing it. I have no clue about geometry and arts.
Why HCB photos are special? Half of it because he learned and practiced in geometry.
Then he was asked what makes good photo his answer was - geometry and else.
He described "else" as energy later on.
But I understand why I'm doing it. I have no clue about geometry and arts.
Why HCB photos are special? Half of it because he learned and practiced in geometry.
Then he was asked what makes good photo his answer was - geometry and else.
He described "else" as energy later on.
ellisson
Well-known
When you have been shooting for many years, you do many things instinctively and automatically. From experience you have a feel for what works and does not work as well. For the psychologist's and artist's questions, I might try to convey to them that like many things, your experience and knowledge come into play in composing and framing a shot. In a sense, you've done much of the work before the shot.
LCSmith
Well-known
Excellent topic.
Seeing and snapping from the beginning was the point of the Leica. Seeing and snapping is not the willy-nilly enterprise it seems to be. Seeing and snapping is informed by years of studying good photographs and knowing your camera. So there is thinking; but maybe not deliberation. Oddly, this is true for me also in shooting architecture. I see the picture in my mind and take it. My more "studied" compositions are hardly ever as effective as the "intuitive" compositions.
Seeing and snapping from the beginning was the point of the Leica. Seeing and snapping is not the willy-nilly enterprise it seems to be. Seeing and snapping is informed by years of studying good photographs and knowing your camera. So there is thinking; but maybe not deliberation. Oddly, this is true for me also in shooting architecture. I see the picture in my mind and take it. My more "studied" compositions are hardly ever as effective as the "intuitive" compositions.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Spice things up a bit and show some of the pics you shared with your friends.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I see something and respond. Of course with the view camera I then have to think about it an awful lot, but with handhelds I tend to just walk up and make a picture. Often several frames to account for the framing inaccuracies of a rangefinder or a TLR.
daveleo
what?
I'll respond to something that catches my eye, by grabbing a camera (or lifting it to my eye).
But looking through the viewfinder, I slow down quite a bit and move the camera a bit and check metering mode, etc because I know when I get home to the computer I'm going to wish that I had ......
Most times I take a few slightly different frames (composition) because I am hopelessly insecure.
But looking through the viewfinder, I slow down quite a bit and move the camera a bit and check metering mode, etc because I know when I get home to the computer I'm going to wish that I had ......
Most times I take a few slightly different frames (composition) because I am hopelessly insecure.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I think this is totally a function of your style, what you photograph, and how much effort you put in advance. Experience and effort does seem to improve "your luck". There is the continuing effort to subconsciously previsualize and be ready.
I was using this old photo this morning but remember shooting it. There was probably 1/4 - 1/2 second when I saw the 3 subjects lift their hands, raised my camera, instinctively framed and pressed the shutter.
BUT:
* It was no coincidence I was seated where I was. I had previsualized a potential photo, framed it in my mind as I was familiar with the FOV of my 40mm lens. I had moved to the front pew, then moved over a seat just to be ready in case a photo unfolded.
* It was no coincidence my lens was set at f1.4 and the shutter at 1/125. I already knew the light intensity in front of me.
* It was no coincidence my lens was already focused using the distance scale on the lens.
So how much of all of that was conscious vs. instinctive? How much was effort to be in the right place at the right time, ready to fire the shutter if a photo emerged in front of you?
Steve M.
Veteran
Well, it's a visual thing, not a thinking thing. Still, one needs to know the fundamentals. Like most skills, you have to learn how it works, then forget about it. By that I mean you no longer have to ck to see that you have a crooked horizon, the wrong exposure for that film or shot, an unbalanced composition, the wrong lens/film/light, etc for the portrait....all that stuff. After you learn all that, then you just see the shot and go for it. This is probably what the artist meant when she asked if you knew what you were doing when you were doing it. She has to do the same thing in whatever medium she works in, and the less you have to think, the better.
Leave it to the psychologist to over-think things :[
Everyone is different though. Ansel Adams liked to pre visualize the shot beforehand, then make it happen. This technique is more suited for large format landscape work, where you approach the shot at a leisurely pace and have to make a lot of preliminary adjustments before tripping the shutter. Whatever works.
Leave it to the psychologist to over-think things :[
Everyone is different though. Ansel Adams liked to pre visualize the shot beforehand, then make it happen. This technique is more suited for large format landscape work, where you approach the shot at a leisurely pace and have to make a lot of preliminary adjustments before tripping the shutter. Whatever works.
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
At 67 I would trade a lot of my experience for passion and "the eye".
x-ray
Veteran
I think this is totally a function of your style, what you photograph, and how much effort you put in advance. Experience and effort does seem to improve "your luck". There is the continuing effort to subconsciously previsualize and be ready.
I was using this old photo this morning but remember shooting it. There was probably 1/4 - 1/2 second when I saw the 3 subjects lift their hands, raised my camera, instinctively framed and pressed the shutter.
BUT:
* It was no coincidence I was seated where I was. I had previsualized a potential photo, framed it in my mind as I was familiar with the FOV of my 40mm lens. I had moved to the front pew, then moved over a seat just to be ready in case a photo unfolded.
* It was no coincidence my lens was set at f1.4 and the shutter at 1/125. I already knew the light intensity in front of me.
* It was no coincidence my lens was already focused using the distance scale on the lens.
So how much of all of that was conscious vs. instinctive? How much was effort to be in the right place at the right time, ready to fire the shutter if a photo emerged in front of you?
Bob you do some knockout work! That's an excellent image.
I
For me decades of experience leads to a strong instinct and a huge base of experience. Instinct plays a part as does being concious of the elements in and around the frame. A constant awareness and evaluating the environment around you weigh equally with instinct.
michaelwj
----------------
I think Bob pretty much nailed it for candid photography, where candid includes all spontaneous types of photography.
With experience you end up consciously doing some things (setting the camera to the correct light and focus distance) and unconsciously doing other things (moving a good angle to create opportunities for good compositions (like Bobs excellent photo) and avoiding bad ones (distracting backgrounds, poles coming out of heads etc). All of those things lead to an increase in the chance of getting photos with pleasing compositions.
The second half of the equation is after the fact. Can you select the best photos from the bunch you took? I often can't. As an example, my neighbour is a painter, and likes to paint from photographs. As such, he constantly goes through my photos looking for compositions he likes and so many times he finds real gems in the pile of rejects. I hadn't selected them based mostly on some preexisting condition when I took the photo, such as I was in a bad mood, or didn't see the composition I subconsciously captured at the time. I think this is the area where I, and I assume many others are lacking. It's almost like I can't objectively evaluate my own work.
With experience you end up consciously doing some things (setting the camera to the correct light and focus distance) and unconsciously doing other things (moving a good angle to create opportunities for good compositions (like Bobs excellent photo) and avoiding bad ones (distracting backgrounds, poles coming out of heads etc). All of those things lead to an increase in the chance of getting photos with pleasing compositions.
The second half of the equation is after the fact. Can you select the best photos from the bunch you took? I often can't. As an example, my neighbour is a painter, and likes to paint from photographs. As such, he constantly goes through my photos looking for compositions he likes and so many times he finds real gems in the pile of rejects. I hadn't selected them based mostly on some preexisting condition when I took the photo, such as I was in a bad mood, or didn't see the composition I subconsciously captured at the time. I think this is the area where I, and I assume many others are lacking. It's almost like I can't objectively evaluate my own work.
pvdhaar
Peter
So true.. especially shortly after creating the images.
What factors in my evaluation is the amount of effort I put into a shot. If I had to work hard to make it, or made a very conscious decision about composition, it should be good, shouldn't it?
But when I look back at older photos, I tend to favour quite different ones, often even the snapshots.. perhaps because those captured the feeling of the moment best.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I sense this is commonly a result of not acknowledging what the purpose of the photograph is. There is no such thing as a universally good or bad photograph. It is a matter of the photograph accomplishing the photographer's goal, something that is commonly undetermined by many.
Are you seeking an impactful way of grabbing the viewers attention and communicating information?
Are you seeking a neutral comfortable way to provide a pleasing visual background?
Do you want a record of a personally important event or location?
Do you just want to show what can be done with the very old / very latest zipdeedoodah camera or the boken of the omygoshigon lens?
You cannot score the answer without knowing the question.
willie_901
Veteran
This is a great thread. I have wondered about this myself.
When I was doing interiors photography I though a lot about the composition. This was commercial work so, it was important to focus the viewers' attention.
For candid scenes I have to rely on instinct. Spontaneity is crucial so there is limited time to contemplate composition. I use an optical finder (X100T, X-Pro 2) with virtual RF frame lines. I suspect it takes me less than a second to consider what's outside the frame line before I compose the photograph.
For other documentary work (buildings, neighborhoods, retail spaces, etc.) limits on where one can stand limit composition options. There's a compromise between perspective and field of view. Spontaneity is not a priority.
During post-production I only crop to minimize tilt and converging verticals. I never crop as a means to compose.
When I was doing interiors photography I though a lot about the composition. This was commercial work so, it was important to focus the viewers' attention.
For candid scenes I have to rely on instinct. Spontaneity is crucial so there is limited time to contemplate composition. I use an optical finder (X100T, X-Pro 2) with virtual RF frame lines. I suspect it takes me less than a second to consider what's outside the frame line before I compose the photograph.
For other documentary work (buildings, neighborhoods, retail spaces, etc.) limits on where one can stand limit composition options. There's a compromise between perspective and field of view. Spontaneity is not a priority.
During post-production I only crop to minimize tilt and converging verticals. I never crop as a means to compose.
BillBingham2
Registered User
When I'm walking I am always looking around, for many reasons. If something catches my eye that looks interesting, fun, unusual, etc., I make the decision to get a picture or keep walking. I look at it and work through the composition and whip out my little friend. These days (being 100% digital) I'll often take the initial picture and then look around and think about what drew me to it, different angles, exposures, etc. When I was shooting film I would jump to this step before exposing a frame.
Some times I go out with specific types of pictures in mind (e.g. an Ice Storm, Flood, Obama's First Election Night in Chicago) but keep my eyes open for other stuff.
I can't say what triggers my interest, but it's worked out ok.
B2 (;->
Some times I go out with specific types of pictures in mind (e.g. an Ice Storm, Flood, Obama's First Election Night in Chicago) but keep my eyes open for other stuff.
I can't say what triggers my interest, but it's worked out ok.
B2 (;->
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I'm guilty of being a "snapper". Now, if we went through my images I doubt anyone would recognize a pattern, or even make it through the stack -- they would proclaim, "maybe you should consider pottery".
In truth, I get a few keepers; and I definitely try to grab a few snaps to account for my RF framing slop -- as mentioned by a few others above.
I also do a bit of very contemplative photography too. That tends to be stuff like my "tools as art" project where I have a small still-life studio set up and a camera on tripod, and some lighting. The process is very intentional and deliberate.
So, can we be both snappers and thinkers? I hope so.
In truth, I get a few keepers; and I definitely try to grab a few snaps to account for my RF framing slop -- as mentioned by a few others above.
I also do a bit of very contemplative photography too. That tends to be stuff like my "tools as art" project where I have a small still-life studio set up and a camera on tripod, and some lighting. The process is very intentional and deliberate.
So, can we be both snappers and thinkers? I hope so.