Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Composition is part of making images that reflect the way you see the world. I think this is partly why some photographers' pictures are often instantly recognizable as "theirs".
Of course, choice of subject matter, decisions about tonality, etc, also enter into it.
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Joe gets a Gold Star, Thank you.
Bernice
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joe O'Hara
Composition is part of making images that reflect the way you see the world. I think this is partly why some photographers' pictures are often instantly recognizable as "theirs".
Of course, choice of subject matter, decisions about tonality, etc, also enter into it.
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joe O'Hara
Composition is part of making images that reflect the way you see the world.
Exactly!
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
and the way we remember
do we internalize events or pictures?
perhaps we have changed memory
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Emotions are one strong aspect of what created memories. Emotional triggers can also bring up memories created by previous emotional experiences.
Bernice
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tin Can
and the way we remember
do we internalize events or pictures?
perhaps we have changed memory
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
This is where I diverge.
Composition is structure, like architecture, it’s your decision in design/framing. It is restricted first by your choice of focal length. There is a vastly different way of visualizing with say a 210mm vs 90mm. The longer the focal length, generally the more restrictive in compositional options (this is where visual creativity comes in).
It is an evaluative thought process brought on by one’s sense of perhaps aesthetics, a concept, precept, set of rules etc as to how one should function in the taking process. It need not be emotional - in fact there is nothing emotional about it. It is simply advantaging visual opportunity based upon some notion of what works, and that is purely personal.
It is akin to decisions one might make to optimize profit in a business given a “new” set of options, criteria and associated restrictions.
I was out two days ago trying to capture the effect of strong sidelighting on an intimate landscape scene. There was little room to maneuver. I worked with 2 lenses of different focal length and what worked best was the first image I took. I experimented for an hour and pursued that special light throughout the open forest. It seemed to me there were an almost infinite number of compositional structures, but generally my initial reaction was my most favored.
It is unclear to me how one translates emotion into the making of a photograph. In fact I eschew emotion in any creative process because it seems to limit possibilities. Keeping open visually, maintaining a calm awareness, once one has skill/craft honed, is the way I work.
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pdmoylan
This is where I diverge.
Composition is structure, like architecture, it’s your decision in design/framing. It is restricted first by your choice of focal length. There is a vastly different way of visualizing with say a 210mm vs 90mm. The longer the focal length, generally the more restrictive in compositional options (this is where visual creativity comes in).
It is an evaluative thought process brought on by one’s sense of perhaps aesthetics, a concept, precept, set of rules etc as to how one should function in the taking process. It need not be emotional - in fact there is nothing emotional about it. It is simply advantaging visual opportunity based upon some notion of what works, and that is purely personal.
It is akin to decisions one might make to optimize profit in a business given a “new” set of options, criteria and associated restrictions.
I was out two days ago trying to capture the effect of strong sidelighting on an intimate landscape scene. There was little room to maneuver. I worked with 2 lenses of different focal length and what worked best was the first image I took. I experimented for an hour and pursued that special light throughout the open forest. It seemed to me there were an almost infinite number of compositional structures, but generally my initial reaction was my most favored.
It is unclear to me how one translates emotion into the making of a photograph. In fact I eschew emotion in any creative process because it seems to limit possibilities. Keeping open visually, maintaining a calm awareness, once one has skill/craft honed, is the way I work.
The subject has to be saying something. It starts with that. You can make a silk purse from a sow's ear.
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Alan,
Your choice to think in terms of a “subject” for me limits the possibilities. One can think animals, insects, humans, vehicles, buildings as subjects and record an image accordingly. I am saying break free of a specific notion of a subject and you have expanded the possibilities exponentially.
Perhaps it is the difference conceptually between a portrait and a “scene”, the latter with no specific focus but rather a rambling viewpoint well manicured. It could be relationship of forms, color, lines, etc and which may not provide something familiar to the viewer.
Take Stephen Shore’s work in the last 3 years. Even in his Uncommon Places, the concept of subject goes out the door. It is more about “objects” that comprise a visual structure that makes an image interesting.
Re: “Good composition is merely the strongest way of seeing.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by
h2oman
"Not On View"
:)