OP...don't know what to tell you. Don't really understand what the question is. I'm kind a simpleton, either a pix is a keeper or not, that is all I go by.
Bresson sums it up for me...
Yes...Yes...Yes...photography is like that and there's no maybes. All the maybes go to the trash. There is a tremendous enjoyment in saying yes, even if it is for something you hate. It is an affirmation...Yes!
Bresson sums it up for me...
Yes...Yes...Yes...photography is like that and there's no maybes. All the maybes go to the trash. There is a tremendous enjoyment in saying yes, even if it is for something you hate. It is an affirmation...Yes!
Sparrow
Veteran
-------------------------
... Classical design principals, not to be confused with the Classical Order, which is a well defined order of architectural types. Sometimes classical design seems to be a whatever people decide to pull out of the bran-tub ... so I'm not suggesting this list is comprehensive.
Shape and Proportion; including Pi, the golden ratio and the so called rule of thirds and the like
Geometry; regular forms and I suppose Pi, the golden ratio again
Balance; positioning orientation and harmony in the elements
Field of View; the area within the image that holds your attention
Negative Space; the area that isn't Field of View
Eye-Line; how the viewer's eye finds it's way round the image
Contrast; or value, the difference between the light and dark bits
Repetition and Rhythm; repeats, patterns and rhythms
Illumination; lighting
Form; modelling, shading and like
Colour; the colours and their combination
Perspective; I've never been sure if perspective belongs here, but it has to go somewhere
... you could probably think of many more, almost anythings that anyone finds attractive is fair game I think, and why I use the other lot ... it is too easy to pick something to support the case for anything one fancies.
Anyone who has gone to a critique night at camera club or watched many of the videos modern 'masters' post on the interweb pick anything to criticise an image as long as it doesn't apply to their work (more of this later).
next ... finding Proximity
-----------------------
... Classical design principals, not to be confused with the Classical Order, which is a well defined order of architectural types. Sometimes classical design seems to be a whatever people decide to pull out of the bran-tub ... so I'm not suggesting this list is comprehensive.
Shape and Proportion; including Pi, the golden ratio and the so called rule of thirds and the like
Geometry; regular forms and I suppose Pi, the golden ratio again
Balance; positioning orientation and harmony in the elements
Field of View; the area within the image that holds your attention
Negative Space; the area that isn't Field of View
Eye-Line; how the viewer's eye finds it's way round the image
Contrast; or value, the difference between the light and dark bits
Repetition and Rhythm; repeats, patterns and rhythms
Illumination; lighting
Form; modelling, shading and like
Colour; the colours and their combination
Perspective; I've never been sure if perspective belongs here, but it has to go somewhere
... you could probably think of many more, almost anythings that anyone finds attractive is fair game I think, and why I use the other lot ... it is too easy to pick something to support the case for anything one fancies.
Anyone who has gone to a critique night at camera club or watched many of the videos modern 'masters' post on the interweb pick anything to criticise an image as long as it doesn't apply to their work (more of this later).
next ... finding Proximity
-----------------------
Sparrow
Veteran
oh ... I'm quit dyslexic so please point out any missing words, spelling or grammatical errors ...
Hsg
who dares wins
Do you follow these rules in your own photography?
And can you give some examples of how to correctly follow these rules using photographs taken by yourself.
And can you give some examples of how to correctly follow these rules using photographs taken by yourself.
airfrogusmc
Veteran
I certainly don't think of using language as rules. Because say you have a color like green it can give you very different feeling and meaning by the type of lines, shape, subject matter, etc and the way the image is put together (composed). So what works in A fails miserably in B. Thats why it can take so long to get fluent. Becoming fluent frees you from all rules. A great photographer once told me either everything in the frame is helping your photograph and if those things aren't helping it then they are hurting it. That's as close to a rule as I have. And I determine what's working or not by my fluency and it is growing all the time. The more I look and try to understand more complex images the more it becomes part of my work and the more fluent I become.
harpofreely
Well-known
Not to be a suck-up, but when I look at my photography with a cold eye, I rarely feel fluent.
Stewart, if you would, please carry on.
If I try the rules for a while and they don't work for me, so be it. I've also spent mucho $ on "stuff" that didn't help, either - can't see how learning & applying some of these ideas could ever be a worse risk to my photographic integrity than mindless gear chasing.
Stewart, if you would, please carry on.
If I try the rules for a while and they don't work for me, so be it. I've also spent mucho $ on "stuff" that didn't help, either - can't see how learning & applying some of these ideas could ever be a worse risk to my photographic integrity than mindless gear chasing.
Sparrow
Veteran
em, sorry hairyfrogman ... as much as I enjoy quotations of what you think other people think ... this thread is about sharing what I know, please don't bombard it with quotations or a deluge of your own images, as much as I like them 
Sparrow
Veteran
... in my work they inform everything we do ... in photography I use them to inform as I'm taking them, and always in editing and post
There is more to come but I've been buggering about with a new macbook ... that won't talk to other bits'n bobs ... more to come, but I hope to use other peoples photos and images so it doesn't look like personal fad
airfrogusmc
Veteran
em, sorry hairyfrogman ... as much as I enjoy quotations of what you think other people think ... this thread is about sharing what I know, please don't bombard it with quotations or a deluge of your own images, as much as I like them
It's what I've come to know and I agree and they just say it a whole lot better and have a lot more cred than hairyfrog.
And they were all extremely fluent in the language.
Ranchu
Veteran
You're missing the point, what he's investigating is not whether it's a good photo or not, but how what's in it guides how people look at it. It's an example to illustrate what he's talking about.
airfrogusmc
Veteran
And it's some of the same things Bresson explored when evaluating his own work and the work others. .
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Maybe you should spend more time and an entirely new world might open up.
Ranchu
Veteran
Can we not bicker over whether or not it's our cup of tea, and let the man share what he wants to share with us?
****!
****!
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Who is judging crappy. You? I certainly wouldn't use that as my measure.
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
That sounds like a good idea. I don't believe for a moment that this is showboating by either of you so this discussion could easily be continued via PM. Some of these erroneous posts could also be deleted, including this one, so that we don't have to trawl through them to get to Stewart's intended points.
I was a rash young lad when this came up at college and dipped out to spend more time out with a camera than listening to more experienced people than me, skipped the life drawing classes too believing I knew better...now I'd like to hear from someone who not only studied it but has also spent forty years practicing it professionally (I've been working for twenty years and have learned a massive amount so double that has to be worth at least listening to.)
Sparrow
Veteran
... sorry, bit of a delay. I just got a new macbook and it's not playing nicely with the other stuff
I really don't want to come over as a know-all here, or force anyone to read it.
I did worry how it would be received before I started ... I don't mind reasoned argument but lets not bicker
Simon; ... I thought that was what art colleges were for?
I really don't want to come over as a know-all here, or force anyone to read it.
I did worry how it would be received before I started ... I don't mind reasoned argument but lets not bicker
Simon; ... I thought that was what art colleges were for?
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Me, personally, I love what you're doing. And I'd ask that you'd please continue. Even where I might disagree, that could easily be because I'm wrong, or not, but nonetheless might spark argument.
The only reason I haven't engaged more, earlier, is that I'm run off my feet in my day job. Until the end of the month that's likely to continue. But please don't think for a moment that lack of interactivity is lack of engagement. I'm as engaged as I can be under my current employment circumstances.
...Mike
Michael Markey
Veteran
Yep carry on Stewart ....
Sparrow
Veteran
... yes I will, and thanks, I'm posting as I write so there well be interruptions if things need illustrations and the like I'm hoping to do real world examples rather than just scribble lines and arrows on things
airfrogusmc
Veteran
I agree. The only thing I disagreed with was the rules part but the language is what can take work to the next level and help build bodies of work and help with personal vision. So Stewart by all means keep it up.