As autumn progresses

[Manfred M]

You have Photoshop, look at the cropping options at the top bar and you will see the Rule of Third, Diagonal, Golden Ratio, etc. amongst those.

As for image, to invoke such an inviting feeling to walk further and savour the atmosphere of the place here may not be what you feel when you saw this, but showing and sharing it with us invokes this kind of feeling in me, at least...and that is creativeness and an art (of seeing).

You missed my point, Izzie. Anyone who has looked at composition runs across these terms, so my response bordered on the silly, but then cynicism does not always come across particularly well in the written word. I know what they are and of course as Ted has pointed out, they have been around for a long time.

I've read all kinds of books and articles on composition. Earlier on this year I took both a photographic composition course and a photographic portfolio development course at the local community college in order to hone my compositional skills. The most important thing I learned about the rules of composition can be summed up as:

"The rules of composition work, except when they don't".

In my experience photographers go through three stages when it comes to composition:

Stage 1 - Novice - generally create mediocre to average images, with the occasional standout. They eventually figure out they don't know why they get the occasional standout, but hear about "good composition", so then...

Stage 2 - Intermediate - Study up on composition (as well as improving their technical skills). They find that both of these things result in "better" images, but things are still hit and miss. Even though they slavishly follow the rules of composition, their images really are not as good as they would like them, but the number of "keepers" goes up from what they had when they were novices. They even start noticing that some of their best shots have come about by "breaking the rules of composition". This is their breakout moment.

Stage 3 - Competent photographer (Advanced?) - these photographers have outgrown slavishly following the rules of composition and recognize "a good shot". More often than not, they are quite familiar with their camera and how get the best out of it. They recognize that they need to look at the whole image; how the viewer will see it and how they will lead the viewer into the image. Some of the rules of composition might still be in use, but rather than looking at the Golden Rule, the Rule of Thirds, Diagonals, etc, they will start seeing the image in its entirety and "designing" their shot using a holistic approach.


I can honestly say, my photography improved immensely when I realized I reeded to ignore the rules of composition and just work on images that looked good. Start looking at good images by the great photographers and I think you will find that many of their works break the compositional rules that we have learned about.

[xpatUSA]

Anyone who has looked at composition runs across these terms, so my response bordered on the silly, but then cynicism does not always come across particularly well in the written word. I know what they are . .

Aha! I did wonder about that, Manfred, but I punished you with a long and detailed response anyway . .

. . I too have found that being deliberately obtuse rarely works as intended

By obstinately using the Golden Ratio and never the 'rule of thirds', I guess I'm still at stage 2, so I've just learned a lot from your post

[kdoc856]

Hey, Manfred

This shot reminded of the work of a young Russian photographer whose work I admire, and thought you might want to play with some of her technique: softening the periphery while adding a vignette, to really focus the eye and add a surreal feeling to the shot.

I'll try to link her stuff in case you'd like to have a look.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7557186...n/photostream/

PS: I totally got your Golden ratio quip

[Manfred M]

Aha! I did wonder about that, Manfred, but I punished you with a long and detailed response anyway . .

. . I too have found that being deliberately obtuse rarely works as intended

By obstinately using the Golden Ratio and never the 'rule of thirds', I guess I'm still at stage 2, so I've just learned a lot from your post

One of the discussions we got into during the composition course was about which rules of compositions to use. The prof, who had been teaching this course for 20+ years, said that he found that at least 80% of the work he sees follows the "rule of thirds". Very few compositions incorporate more than one of the "rules of composition"; sometimes one sees a couple in play but never more than three.


One of the discussions on the rule of thirds ran something like this....

Of course the "rule of thirds" suggests placing objects of interest at the thirds or at the intersection of the horizontal and vertical lines that make up the thirds. Pointing the key parts of the image on these intersection points can result in a very strong composition, even stronger than just placing the object on one of the thirds.

This rule quickly turns to suggesting that placing these things "near" these lines and points is good enough to qualify to using said "rule". Besides putting the objects exactly on the lines or intersecting points might not result in the strongest composition.

Pretty soon this rule starts looking like "placing the main objects asymmetrically", because the "thirds" can get to be quite broad when measured this way.

And finally, some images look great when they are presented in the middle of the frame and one presents them symmetrically.

[Manfred M]

Hey, Manfred

This shot reminded of the work of a young Russian photographer whose work I admire, and thought you might want to play with some of her technique: softening the periphery while adding a vignette, to really focus the eye and add a surreal feeling to the shot.

I'll try to link her stuff in case you'd like to have a look.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7557186...n/photostream/

PS: I totally got your Golden ratio quip

Thanks for the link, Kevin. I will have a good hard look at her work.

Just as a bit of a note; virtually all of my images have a vignette, but I try to be quite subtle about applying them, i.e. I apply a vignette and turn it back so only someone who is really looking for it will notice it.

[IzzieK]

Sorry for my ignorance as you say...not being able to understand that you were cynical in your response, I responded like an idiot translating your question as it was. From your question, being an expert in Photoshop, I thought for a while there that you had forgotten where the crop options are located, hence my reply. Thank you for making me feel stupid with your response. It could have been much better if you had just said that you do not follow those kind of cropping rules. As simple as that. It is this kind of cynicism attitude that does not translate well with me (and maybe others too) because I do not think in just one language. I tried though..it is really hard.

You missed my point, Izzie. Anyone who has looked at composition runs across these terms, so my response bordered on the silly, but then cynicism does not always come across particularly well in the written word. I know what they are and of course as Ted has pointed out, they have been around for a long time.

I've read all kinds of books and articles on composition. Earlier on this year I took both a photographic composition course and a photographic portfolio development course at the local community college in order to hone my compositional skills. The most important thing I learned about the rules of composition can be summed up as:

"The rules of composition work, except when they don't".

In my experience photographers go through three stages when it comes to composition:

Stage 1 - Novice - generally create mediocre to average images, with the occasional standout. They eventually figure out they don't know why they get the occasional standout, but hear about "good composition", so then...

Stage 2 - Intermediate - Study up on composition (as well as improving their technical skills). They find that both of these things result in "better" images, but things are still hit and miss. Even though they slavishly follow the rules of composition, their images really are not as good as they would like them, but the number of "keepers" goes up from what they had when they were novices. They even start noticing that some of their best shots have come about by "breaking the rules of composition". This is their breakout moment.

Stage 3 - Competent photographer (Advanced?) - these photographers have outgrown slavishly following the rules of composition and recognize "a good shot". More often than not, they are quite familiar with their camera and how get the best out of it. They recognize that they need to look at the whole image; how the viewer will see it and how they will lead the viewer into the image. Some of the rules of composition might still be in use, but rather than looking at the Golden Rule, the Rule of Thirds, Diagonals, etc, they will start seeing the image in its entirety and "designing" their shot using a holistic approach.


I can honestly say, my photography improved immensely when I realized I reeded to ignore the rules of composition and just work on images that looked good. Start looking at good images by the great photographers and I think you will find that many of their works break the compositional rules that we have learned about.