I have no formal training and simply rely on my own built in sense of balance. Sometimes I think I get it right. Many times, not. Per Volquartz in his workshops stresses looking for natural 'S' shapes.
I have no formal training and simply rely on my own built in sense of balance. Sometimes I think I get it right. Many times, not. Per Volquartz in his workshops stresses looking for natural 'S' shapes.
How about clouds? I love taking photos of clouds, but for me, the composition IS the cloud. It's relationship to the frame, and the tones, lines and shapes within the cloud. Every cloud photo I have ever taken has gotten the "you should have something at the bottom to anchor it..." BS. Maybe I don't want that house roof in the photo... or the top of that mountain or hill... maybe I just want a photo of a cloud.
Photographs by Richard M. Coda
my blog
Primordial: 2010 - Photographs of the Arizona Monsoon
"Speak softly and carry an 8x10"
"I shoot a HYBRID - Arca/Canham 11x14"
I do like symmetric composition (like my self portrait avatar), but
I prefer the balance of empty space with the object at the corner.
Some kind of yin-yang, may be.
Sorry it's not LF but it's an example to explain what I mean.
Sinar P 180mm Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar
5x7 TMY, PyroCat MC
After we've explored the formal approaches, it's often best to "forget" what we've learned, and let the subject dictate the composition, with a life of it's own.
Our effort is in learning to be open enough to sense it.
Speaking of "S" curves here are a few with a little chaos thrown in for good measure.
I like abstracts and I like ice, good thing because we get a good bit of ice in season. I got this shot and while changing perspective a bit the wind picked up. Not a big deal, it wasn't going to move the ice any........but it did dislodge the frost from the limbs above.....hmmmm, a frost blizzard ensued and the day was done.
Here is to captures made and chances missed.
OK, here goes. This is a recent one and its a Polaroid Type 52 print so no cropping or enlarging.Originally Posted by Donald Miller
First constraint was physical, as it usually is for me. I set up across the road from the elevator. The road was banked up very high in this area so if I moved back any further, I would lose my lens elevation and be standing on a very steep bank. But, I thought the frame was filled nicely from this distance.
Second: I moved to the left of the main structure centerline. This put the roof peak of the scale house on the right edge. My thought was that another angled line drooping away from the main structure, would add unwanted complexity. I like the geometric arrangement better in this view than if I had been on center with the Gano logo. Also, the logo is full face, prominent, and undisturbed. That's important because the Gano name and logo is the sole reason this building still exists.
Third: Moving left of center placed the left edge of the main structure roof right on the edge of the frame. Now the whole frame width is bounded by the two roof lines, one left, and one right.
Fourth: This view also allowed some slight depth on the left faces of the building, so it doesn't come off as being entirely "flat". I thought it added depth and body.
That's it. Nothing very intellectual. How'd I do?
I am sure that others will chime in and my observation on your image is a subjective thing. Having said that, I like the composition just as you presented it. There is one thing that I notice and think that is vitally important. That is the small portion of window in the lower right corner of the image. It really serves to anchor that corner. I like the slight left of center orientation of the camera because it adds a vanishing point on the lower right building roof edge. This vanishing point serves to give a reference providing depth in the image. The other vanishing point is on the small cupulo directly above the Gano sign.
What I would suggest, Alex, as a further exploration of the subject matter is isolating aspects of the grain elevator...making the photograph about geometric shapes without a reference to what the object is. There are a wealth of geometric shapes. Beyond that there is the exploration of shaded surfaces to lit surfaces. This will probably require a longer lens to really work on this but if you wish this might give you a lot more images from this one subject...just my thoughts.
Great image as it is. Thanks for posting it.
Well I think that you are in pretty good company when you want to only take a photograph of a cloud. Steiglitz made an image named "Equivalent" (among several of the same subject matter as I recall).
This is what has been written about that image.
"
Equivalent, 1926
Alfred Stieglitz (American, 1864–1946)
Gelatin silver print; 4 5/8 x 3 5/8 in. (11.8 x 9.2 cm)
Alfred Stieglitz Collection, 1949 (49.55.29)
By photographing clouds, Stieglitz meant to demonstrate how "to hold a moment, how to record something so completely, that all who see [the picture of it] will relive an equivalent of what has been expressed." Stieglitz's choice of intangible vapors as his ostensible subject was telling, for the vagueness of transcendental meaning is not easily sustained by material objects. Whether his equivalents achieved their goal is a question each viewer must answer for himself or herself; that they demonstrated the ineffable dimension of inspiration is without doubt."
So the next time someone critiques one of your cloud images with what you have heard to this point, you might direct them to this image.
Thanks for posing the question.
Ken, I agree...this is particularly true in photographs of nature or natural objects.
Sinar P 180mm Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar
5x7 TMY, PyroCat MC
After we've explored the formal approaches, it's often best to "forget" what we've learned, and let the subject dictate the composition, with a life of it's own.
Our effort is in learning to be open enough to sense it.
Yes S shapes are particularly engaging. Thanks for posting Jim.
I have no formal training and simply rely on my own built in sense of balance. Sometimes I think I get it right. Many times, not. Per Volquartz in his workshops stresses looking for natural 'S' shapes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks