Photographic composition

[Roger Hicks]

It ain't what you say, it's the way that you say it. Read to the end of this post before you draw a conclusion.

This morning, I was taking drugs with my teenage girlfriend. We're living together while my wife is in hospital.

Translation: Aditi (18) came to stay before Frances was admitted to hospital (see other threads in my sub-forum). She's the daughter of an old friend and mercifully is still here (and a tower of strength) while Frances is in hospital. Frances and I regard her as the daughter we never had; we could not wish for a more wonderful girl. Aditi and I are both on antibiotics (drugs) for the same thing as Frances has, and we took them together at breakfast.

Now re-read the second paragraph: drugs, teenage, girl/friend (she's both a girl and a friend), drugs, living together, wife, hospital.

Isn't photographic composition the same? Not the facts, but how you present them?

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

It's good that you can keep a sense of humo(u)r. It helps get through these things.

Photographic composition. When Nikki was in Children's Hospital, I took a Polaroid. Went through a lot of packs of film, trying to get the best composition possible of the kids there. Something to show the lighter side. And then gave away all of the pictures, except those of Nikki. Pictures of kids with the "clown Staff", musicians, story tellers, game room, etc. Something that they could remember with a happy thought. Not just being sick in a hospital.

 

[Mackinaw]

Roger, Im just glad that you're on this list. You come up with the most interesting stuff.

As to composition, I believe in the Duke Ellington philosophy, "If it sounds (looks) good then it is good.

Jim B.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Something that they could remember with a happy thought. . .

Dear Brian,

That's what it's about, really, isn't it? Not just hospital. Life.

And to Jim: yes, absolutely. What other criterion is there, in jazz or photography, than sounding/looking good? Academia? Nah...

To John (following post): YES! Eight-by-bloody-ten off 24x36mm is a travesty. I'll cheerfully crop when I choose to -- but only when I choose to, and to the crop I choose!

Love,

R.

 

[John Bragg]

Hi Roger.

I feel that the most important thing that I have realised about composition is that I am usually more satisfied when I print full frame and compose in the viewfinder with no recomposition at the time of printing. I used to print on 8x10 and hated it. I much prefer to see the whole image as I visualised at the moment of taking it..

 

[Bob Ross]

Composition: the combining of parts into a harmonius (sometimes an unharmonious) whole.
Parts is parts: a favorite saying of my brother, a Prof. of Human Anatomy.
Bob

 

[charjohncarter]

Roger, my wife and I have someone like that (Aditi) in our lives. I know it's hard to be 'up' but there just some people like Aditi, well you know. I always try to get an 'S' from the upper left to the lower right, but there is always a tree in the way, (I guess) photos aren't as important as loved ones. Best of luck to you, Frances, and Aditi.

 

[Krosya]

This morning, I was taking drugs with my teenage girlfriend. We're living together while my wife is in hospital.


R.

Cool, got any pics of those dirty deeds? 😉

(just having some fun with your post) hehe.

 

[Krosya]

Speaking of translations - love that movie - "Lost in Translation".

 

[estudleon]

Composition: I always forget to apply the rules. When I feel that what the finder show "is" what I look for, take the pic. Feel that is NOW. No more.Seems to be more emotional than intellectual (in me, of course).

 

[Spider67]

.....Oh Roger that was quite a blow! I also had sometimes what you refer to: people reacting very embarassed....before even having read something to the end!
Who says that live has to be what others expect it to be!
I always wondered what kinda photo would inspire "Pretty girl, young man, old man man with a gun :to people in love the rules do not apply"

 

[estudleon]

I think that we always want to be surprised. Attraction is newness in activities still related to the aesthetic thing? If it is thus, how much are worth the rules of the composition?

 

[estudleon]

Excuse me. I read my last post and see that I was confussed. I wanted to say that, as Roger said we must show the elements of the image in the form that the message was clearly that we want to transmitt. Inside this, I think that the best way is the liberty of forms not the rules of composition.I hope to be more clear.

 

[Roger Hicks]

In photography, there really are no rules - just "guidelines" (e.g. rule of thirds). Indeed, if it looks good - shoot it. After all, the image is your statement. If everyone said the same thing, it'd be a little boring.

The way I use the 'rules' is this:

If I can't see how to shoot it, just by looking through the viewfinder, I'll try the 'rules'.

Once I've tried them, whether I've pressed the shutter release or not, I can often see how to break them...

'Novelty' is of course an omitted middle. "Good work is often novel" is not the same as "novel work is often good."

And to return to Estudleon's point, you can surprise yourself. We have friends staying at the moment. Their younger daughter (9, or as she puts it, 'nearly 10') is very outgoing. Their older daughter (12, or in her words, 'nearly 13') is very shy. But I took a few pics of the older daughter last night (as you do when you're sitting around after dinner) and she's an amazing model: takes direction perfectly, beautiful smile, a natural at posing. I spent another half hour taking pics of her this morning. I still haven't got a good shot of the 'outgoing' one, except for the one with the gun (no rules?) -- just an air pistol, but she loves shooting and has rapidly acquired an awareness of shooting safety. She also has a weakness for splitting logs with a big axe, and with a wedge and hammer. When she's older, she'll make some young man very happy. Or very frightened. Or possibly both.

Cheers,

R.

 

[estudleon]

Thanks Roger. You are very easy to understand. It's a place to read yor posts.Cheers, Rino.

 

[bsdunek]

I still haven't got a good shot of the 'outgoing' one, except for the one with the gun (no rules?) -- just an air pistol, but she loves shooting and has rapidly acquired an awareness of shooting safety. She also has a weakness for splitting logs with a big axe, and with a wedge and hammer. When she's older, she'll make some young man very happy. Or very frightened. Or possibly both.

Cheers,

R.

She'll have to find the right one - probably frighten most men! Sounds good to me though.

When I was a teenager I was in love with 'Penny King' (Gloria Winters), Sky King's niece. She could hunt, fish, shoot, ride a horse, fly a plane and cook. That's the kind of wife I wanted.
Fortunately both my late wife and current wife did/do many of the same things, plus others. Can't stand weak women.

 

[Lilserenity]

It's an interesting way of putting it. When I write, you can play all sorts of trickery, it just depends how you express things, almost like when you see some police drama or read a thriller, slowly but surely the details eke out through each individual's confessions or gradual attrition.

Sometimes taking a picture can be the same. I'm completely self taught, I've never read a book on the zone system but I do look at a large amount of books on painting, painters, photographers, photos etc and numerous exhibitions. Painting allows you to easily omit details that aren't in keeping with your message, which construe a different viewpoint to your composition (e.g. removing the power line, giving the lane a bit more kink and curve, adding people into the scene etc.), photography apart from hacking a photo to bits in Photoshop doesn't allow this as readily.

My tricks tend to be using the natural elements in a landscape to hide various elements which don't carry the right message, and using the laws of parallax to your advantage (i.e. a different elevation, bit more to the left, right, back of forth -- all with your feet, not with a zoom lens and standing still, that does not work) allow you to edit bits of the landscape out that don't fit, e.g. hiding the large transmission mast behind the tree in the distance, swinging down a little to get the poppies to pop out from the top of the tall blade of wheat rather than sitting in a flat patch on the top as it were, swivelling a little to the left to get that tree in the distance to budge over a bit to look nicely framed and roughly in that rule of third thing. Click.

And then the next one.

Sure someone would go to where I shot the photo and go but there's pylons and wires, a big transmission mast over on the hill top and the trees are bunched almost in the middle, and the wheat/barley whatver is a bit stumpy, not very tall.

I've said something different about the scene by moving around and almost painting and editing out bits with where I am placing my eye.

It all becomes a merry shuffling dance, and that does give a very different way of expressing a scene, and it's all composition, that magical mix of things in the right place.

Thanks for the thoughts Roger, I've mused of a similar parallel myself in my head on one of my epic 25 mile saunters now and then and concluded, 'keep that thought in there, the curly wurly cuckoo is calling' 😀

Vicky

 

[Ben Z]

This morning, I was taking drugs with my teenage girlfriend.



Now re-read the second paragraph: drugs, teenage, girl/friend (she's both a girl and a friend), drugs, living together, wife, hospital.

Isn't photographic composition the same? Not the facts, but how you present them?

Tashi delek,

R.

Initially you wrote "girlfriend", not girl/friend, girl-friend, or girl friend. At least in American English, "girlfriend" has always connoted a romantic relationship, and in modern times is apt to cause some ambiguity even when referring to two females, therefore the slash, hyphenated or two separate words are typically used for clarification.

Yes, either by design or by mistake, prose or photography can mislead, intentionally or unintentionally. That's pretty much a fundamental of communication isn't it?