An essay addressing this subject, written by Edward Weston almost eighty years ago, is pertinent today.
"Seeing Photographically" by Edward Weston 1943
http://photohelios-team.blogspot.com...rd-weston.html
An essay addressing this subject, written by Edward Weston almost eighty years ago, is pertinent today.
"Seeing Photographically" by Edward Weston 1943
http://photohelios-team.blogspot.com...rd-weston.html
On composition:Originally Posted by Merg Ross
Such rules and laws are deduced from the accomplished fact; they are the products of reflection and after-examination, and are in no way a part of the creative impetus. When subject matter is forced to fit into preconceived patterns, there can be no freshness of vision. Following rules of composition can only lead to a tedious repetition of pictorial cliches.
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee used to teach workshops titled "Vision and Technique". It might be taught again. Before the workshop I saw what was there and accepted upside down and backward as a limitation that you deal with. I left the workshop realizing that the object isn't as important as the vision on the ground glass. It was liberating to realize that.
True, but for someone just starting out or struggling to develop creativity it’s a reasonable way to achieved some sort of success and possibly avoid frustration that will impede that path to creativity.
Thank you I enjoyed reading that essay.
I learned early the value of a viewing card which Ansel used up to and probably including the last image he made. I carry one anytime I have a camera nearby, and often when I don't.
Look for what pleases you and don't worry about rules.
I always have my viewing card with me.
Here's AA practicing his art of seeing w/ his viewing card from "The Camera."
I think he called it his cut-out card.
Study art work, paintings, drawings, different compositions and various perspectives to work on your 'Seeing' as well as photographs, and shoot a lot of b&w film in a small format camera, taking time to look at the rolls of negatives against a well lit window, so you can develop a sense of b&w pre-visualization.
A Wratten #90 filter in a small card frame, square, will help to learn what the 'Values' of shades and highlights are and, together with the rest, allow you to start visualizing in b&w and in Colour.
If needed, you can hold other format cards over the Square #90 Card, so you can cut down on the clutter, but I prefer to use the larger square as it allows more 'movement' in the scene so you are no missing other possibilities.
It is possible to see in b&w or monotone values, it just takes time together with experience and practice to do so.
IMO
And true, the words were written by someone well experienced with composition. But teaching the rules to beginners may still not be the best way to go about it. I'd rather let the beginners photograph, make prints, and have them tell me if they are happy with the prints, and start there with any discussion on composition. Why hamstring them early?
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Principles and guidelines for organizing elements of an image have been around for centuries (millennia?). In contrast to Vaughn, I think they are useful for beginning students; why re-invent the wheel? They were taught to painters and architects through history to guide them on their way. I don't see them as a constraint and I don't think they should be presented that way.
We have to be aware, though, that these rules are just basic, primary-school-level building-block tools for helping organize an image expressively; like basic grammar is to fine writing.
Just as you need to learn the alphabet and the grammar and build your vocabulary if you wish to write well, you need to learn about populating and organizing and image to have a claim to being a literate image maker. But gaining literacy is not the same as becoming masterful at one's craft.
There is always a transcendental, creative aspect to the use of the fundamental principles and "rules" when employed by artists who have truly mastered their media, which springs from an awareness that grasps unifying concepts at a meta-level and a synthesis of technique with intent and innovation that elevates the end results out of mediocrity.
How to get there though? Learn the basics, master them, move to the next level. Do as much as your time, diligence and intelligence will allow, being aware that we can't control the latter very much. Then, go out and make images with intent and with an open mind. Use your toolbox of techniques to organize your images in the way that best communicates that intent. If you're a genius, and have paid your dues, your images will show it. Otherwise, don't worry about it.
I learned what I know of visual organization by studying art history, looking at paintings, architecture, sculpture and, yes, photographs with a view to understanding how great artists were using form and organization to lend their work expressiveness, legibility and power. Knowing the principles they learned and used, as well as the innovations they made (their vocabulary and syntax if you will) allows one to be moved by the significance, fluency and depth of content of great works and to understand, to a degree anyway, how organizational choices contribute to the emotional and intellectual impact of the work.
When I photograph, I take my tools and try to do something with them that lends my work intensity, using them in old and new ways, experimenting but sometimes also using them traditionally. How I succeed depends on factors beyond my control, so I don't worry about them. People are hard-wired to do things in particular ways; we can't fight that, but should rather embrace it.
I really believe, however, that having a good working knowledge of the time-tested principles of visual organization is an indispensable foundation for consistently making really meaningful photographs. Which set of principles we employ is a personal choice, but you can't choose to use something you know nothing about.
M. C. Escher's works transcend perspective; however, he couldn't have made them without a thorough knowledge of perspective.
Nuts and bolts: I use a viewing frame a lot, mostly because I can save wasting time setting up the camera that way. I have a lot of things I want to communicate with my photography. I think about them a lot when I'm not photographing. When I am photographing, I try to work with an empty mind, trusting in my subconscious to provide me with the expressive tools I need and allowing the things I see and the way I feel that day choose subjects for me that have the potential to express one or the other aspect of those things I wish to share. If I'm lucky, I find new things to say, new melodies to compose.
I do spend time with the organization, though, sometimes working through a scene trying out the rule of thirds, to bullseye or not to bullseye, placement of the elements in relation to each other, etc. but mostly listening to what the scene in front of my camera has to say about how it wants to be organized. Elements in the scene dictate to me where they want to be placed, what they want to point to, which aspect ratio to use, what gets importance, what not. I try to listen carefully and do justice to the impetus that moved me to stop and set up my camera in the first place. That is what I believe is practicing the art of seeing.
Having a mind full of possibilities always helps.
Doremus
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks