Camera aside, what helps you learn to compose?

[sun of sand]

Oh, I'm not telling you to go take those exact photos. I just think closer and to the right puts you on track to what's interesting -at least to me. The water there does nothing for me. I see large boulders of varying shapes with fast water flowing through and think a tight crop -in that area- would find many subjects all at least half worthy of a photograph. Some extreme close-ups and semi-macro's
Maybe that's where the real magic is.


I have a favorite boulder creek just downstream of a largish waterfall that has many of these scenes. I know there are great phtographs there
at least a couple not of the waterfall itself
half the fun is walking through butt deep barefoot trying to not step on broken radios and keep balance on the slick rocks with camera over the shoulder

[andrew gardiner]

I'm not sure if watching films counts here -maybe it's too closely related -but I would say the films of Antonioni are masterclasses in composition. 'La Notte' and it's perfectly balanced, black and white 'chequerboard' compositions. 'Il Desserto Rosso' for exquisite lessons in handling colour ( this from the man who famously painted the grass green because it wasn't green enough).

[rdenney]

So, what have we learned?

1. Sun of Sand actually DOES know where the shift key is. He used it for shouting, but that's okay. (He still hasn't found the punctuation, but then neither did e e cummings.)

2. But in reading the whole thread (which I guess I missed earlier, and now I'm glad I did), I'm agreeing with him. Completely. And. Without. Reservation. (Those are some extra periods you can use, SoS.)

I was asked to explain the Rule of Thirds once in a discussion on another forum, and it went like this: Things are static when piled in the middle. They are dynamic (another word I found only in SoS's posts) when they are off-center. But if they are off-center without any counterweight, the composition looks as though it's falling over, which is another way of saying it leads the viewer out of the image. When it's dynamically balanced, it leads the viewer back into the image. It may be a zig-zag path, as with Friedlander (as I learned to appreciate from Paul and Struan), or it may be direct and simple. But the motions of the gymnast trying to find balance on the beam is an exact metaphor for what I'm thinking. The Rule of Thirds or the Golden Mean or the Square Rebate are just models of compositions that are asymmetrical but balanced.

The distinction between balance and symmetry was absolutely spot on. If a composition is symmetrical, it will be balanced. But if it is weighted at the bottom, that balance will be static, which is not always inappropriate. If it's weighted at the top, then it can toppled even if it's in balance--that's what makes it dynamic. But it can certainly be asymmetrical, and in unusual ways that create a dynamic response that still pulls us to the the center.

What do I do to make myself better at it? Apparently, from looking at my own work, nothing.

But I know it when it happens. Just look at Jiri's, Nana's or Austin's photos, as those who achieve dynamic balance in different ways. "Balanced" is the word that comes to my mind every time I see one of their photos.

Now, here's how artists learn to develop this sense: They do gesture drawings. The idea is to get the essential dynamism--motion--onto paper in a minute or less, as an exercise in focusing on the movement and how it balances, rather than on the details of the subject and the drawing skills. I sucked at it.

(Musicians do this, but in dimensions that are neither visual nor verbal. When I have to play a melody, I give it words in my mind, as a tool for triggering the right emotion, and for phrasing. But I do not expect those words to form in the listener's ear, and in many cases would be aghast if they did.)

Rick "who still sucks at it" Denney

[Heroique]

I’m not sure if watching films counts here – maybe it's too closely related – but I would say the films of Antonioni are masterclasses in composition...

I think it’s a great observation. I remember certain movie scenes that suggested how I might compose landscapes, both color and b/w. The movie director’s use of cropping is what I usually notice first, if I’m thinking of LF at all w/ popcorn in hand.

Your remarks also remind me of the classic cowboy movies that must have taken inspiration from compositions by Frederic Remington (1861-1909). A quick example below – a painting called Fight for the Waterhole.

“Right out of the movies,” one might think, but really, the famous cowboy movies are “Right out of Remington.”

LF landscapers, too, not just movie makers, might take inspiration from Remington (not just Renaissance masters, etc.). In this case, love the circular arrangement of space. Plus, the circular actions – the circular aim of rifles, the circling “Injuns” – reinforce the circular space. Check out the circular reflection in the water, returning attention to the horizon. The painting also goes a considerable way in “satisfying” not just rule-of-third axes, but central axes. Many lessons of composition here, I think, for multiple film formats. (And I didn’t even touch use of color, light, shadow, texture...)