Composition

[Big Mark]

Didn't want to further hijack Larry's thread, so I figured I'd start a new one.

Mark, pic out a couple pictures that you think are really good. I'll try to help you decide why they are good and what rules of composition they're using.

I can see the concepts in most of them (foreground framing, using lines to draw attention, bokeh (sp?) etc) that make them work, I just have trouble applying those to my pictures. Perhaps I've just got unrealistic expectations on what I should be able to do this early on.

Here are some of mine that I think are at least headed in the right direction (i know I still have a Looong way to go). Are they at least on the right track, at least as far as composition?

[Big Mark]

a few more

[hasbeen99]

Excellent work, man! :clapclap:

I especially love the shots underneat the pier and of the starling in the water. WELL DONE!

[builder]

These are the best in terms of composition. Maybe Larry or someone else can give you some technical advice for getting the clean, crisp shots he gets. Or maybe it's just the scaling down to post here that makes them a little fuzzy.

The pier - good foreground and background. The offcenter perspective creates tension and draws your eye down the picture to somewhere other than the center.

The bird - Rule of thirds. You've got the bird off-center, with enough room to "move" thru the image and doesn't feel rushed out of the picture.

Girl again pole - even though it's a static image, the pole balances the picture. Rule of thirds again.

One tree hill - :) You've got the thirds going on both vertically with the tree and horizontally with the water. The other image of this tree fills too much of the frame. There's no tension, no energy. When you frame a picture, keeping the main subject off center like this is really good. This is one of my favorites of the ones you posted.

skateboarder - action shot. Movement felt either from the slight blur or just the fact that you have enough room on the right side of the image for the guy to 'move' into it.

[builder]

The portraits - try to pull back a little. When you get too close, you cut off parts of the person. That's fine if it's your intention, but take more picture than you need and crop it when you get home. Practice with distance shots to figure out what looks best by playing with cropped images.

the girl in the brown shirt - Where's her hand?

the mother and kids - what's the stuff in the background. I want to see a little more of that. Just so I don't sit there trying to figure out what it is.

little girl - don't chop off the top of her head. Try to get entire features in the image.

The dog - not bad, again, back up just a little.

Again, none of these are bad photos. Just a few tweaks here and there can make them really good photos.

[Big Mark]

Thanks, I really appreciate the feedback, and this was exactly what I was looking for. I had to scale them down twice to get them to upload, and they are sharper at full res (still not as sharp or colorful as larry's, but that's something to figure out in another thread).

Thanks again.

[builder]

well don't get discouraged. Hell, I'm sure Larry has a few pictures that don't come out just the way he wanted them. Even Annie Liebowitz said she's thrown away more film than she's published. It takes time and practice to build composition skills. We spent 2 semesters, 3 hours a day, 3 days a week in class on this stuff.

You've got some good stuff up there. It only gets better with time. Get the basics down, then just point and shoot and don't overthink it. :rockon:

[Big Mark]

Oh, I'm not discouraged. It would be an insult to the people who have been working at this for years for me to think I could just pick up a dSLR and be a pro the next day. I just wanted to make sure I was starting down the right track. I probably get 1 picture I'm proud of out of every 100 I take. I figure in a couple years I'll look back on that 1% and think 95% of it was crap. As of right now I'm just enjoying the process.

[Superfluous_Nut]

and of course, there's a ton of subjectivity involved, too. in fact, i think i completely disagree with builder.

i think the dog pic is perfect. the interesting part of the portrait is the "expression" on the dog's face and that's well frames. the close cropping and shallow depth of field keep your interest there. i like the texture of the rug slowly vanishing into the blur of the defocus.

i prefer the single tree to the longer shot of the same scene. sometimes a perfectly framed shot works, and i think the lighting is more of the story than the framing in this one. you've got near solid colors which makes the photo more graphic feeling which lends itself to a more rigid "perfect" composition.

in the girl and post shot i don't like the framing. the problem to me is that the right side of the pole opens back up to the background so you've got a sliver of information that is more confusing than it is useful to your shot. perhaps if it was more out of focus in the background, it wouldn't compete as much with the foreground.

i love the bird shot.

i like the shot of the kid looking up. in fact, the other two shots of the single kids are good as well.

the guy at the piano i like, even tho he's cropped a bit. i think close cropping works well for the photojournalistic style (as does the off kilter framing). it helps the viewer feel like they're a part of the event as opposed to an observer watching from a distance.

i like the stream/canal shot too, tho it'd be nice to not be cropping the trees at the top. you need the hint of sky up there more than you need the fg rocks, so tilting up a bit would be the only change i'd make. maybe shooting from a slightly lower vantage point would be nice, too.

back to the hill with two trees, i think i'd frame the shot to avoid seeing the ground in front of the water. the reflection is an interesting element, so it'd be nice to maximize it. maybe step up a few paces so it fills more of the shot. frame it so it bleeds off the bottom and it'll suddenly be an infinite pool instead of a small pond. plus you'd get to see some sky reflected which would be a nice touch of color. a final nitpick would be the dark shape on the hill that's cropped on the right. that feels a bit distracting to me. i'd suggest you capture it completely or don't capture it at all. it's not the star of the shot, but it's such a contrasty element that you can't help but notice it.

i like the way you captured the bridge. too bad it's out of focus (i'm guessing you don't have a tripod). but the framing is great.

the castle i'm not fond of. i don't think you've got enough room to see the fireworks (which, in my mind, aren't the most interesting fireworks anyway) and so the castle ends up just feeling small for no good reason.

i think the skateboarder would be better as a horizontal shot to help the feeling of lateral motion. i'd like to see where he's been and where he's going.

looking down on the couple, i'd crop to center up their bodies a bit. maybe enough to get rid of his shoes at the bottom and enough on the right so that maybe his nose is centered left/right. maybe if they were on grass or the sand you'd want a lot of the ground to be seen, but not asphalt.

the pier i like, but i think i'd have used a shallower depth of field at this angle. maybe tried to find something a little more fg too, tho i understand a foreground vertical beam would obliterate too much of the structure in the background and you'd miss out on some of the interest. with everything in focus, i'd have shot straight down the center and let the repeating lines of the structure be the whole story. again, it'd be a graphic looking shot and lend itself to that perfect angle thing.

anyway, don't take this as harsh criticism or anything. i'm just trying to apply some thought to what my gut tells me, so i'm probably overthinking things and looking for problems to point out. and also take it all with a grain of salt cuz i'm not pro photographer by any means.

[Big Mark]

anyway, don't take this as harsh criticism or anything. i'm just trying to apply some thought to what my gut tells me, so i'm probably overthinking things and looking for problems to point out. and also take it all with a grain of salt cuz i'm not pro photographer by any means.

Wow, thanks. That certainly was thruough and I appreciate it. This is the kind of feedback I need - and no, I don't take it as harsh at all - the more advice I get, certainly the better it'll do me.

Thanks again to all of you.

[builder]

Hey nut...I'm not gonna go collin on you here, but I was just curious what your background is? Me, I tend to deal more in 3-d than imaging. So a lot of my observations are based on that. You seem to be more of a flat surface guy. Again, not arguing because all art is subjective, just curious.

[Superfluous_Nut]

Hey nut...I'm not gonna go collin on you here, but I was just curious what your background is? Me, I tend to deal more in 3-d than imaging. So a lot of my observations are based on that. You seem to be more of a flat surface guy. Again, not arguing because all art is subjective, just curious.

my background is computer animation. i've taken art classes, but no real "schooling" on the subject. the computer animation i do is 3d, tho of course, not really 3d as it's only a 2d representation of 3d. in a certain way, computer animation is like cinematography, set design, lighting design, etc. pretty much everything you do to film a live action scene you also do in computer animation, only there's no crew to help you. and i don't mean to puff up my qualifications to say my opinion is somehow superior or anything.

in fact, i think this little thread could be pretty informative in general. peer critiques are a valuable way to learn about stuff. i always hated them in art classes, but having somebody talk about your work is a good way to learn about the process and even having to critique somebody's stuff forces you to think about it as well. one thing about critiques is that you'll find some people are drawn to an aspect that some people don't like. it really shows that there's really no right or wrong.

i don't do nearly as much photography as i'd like, but it'd be kinda neat to have a critique session occasionally of a single photo or perhaps series of photos of the same subject. sort of get people's opinions and generally discuss the topic of what works or doesn't work and why. maybe i'll go look for something to post...

[Big Mark]

Hey nut...I'm not gonna go collin on you here

rolf

[builder]

peer critiques are a valuable way to learn about stuff. i always hated them in art classes, but having somebody talk about your work is a good way to learn about the process and even having to critique somebody's stuff forces you to think about it as well. one thing about critiques is that you'll find some people are drawn to an aspect that some people don't like. it really shows that there's really no right or wrong.


I wish my friends would sometimes do that. They always say, oooh, it's so pretty.

[Big Mark]

I wish my friends would sometimes do that. They always say, oooh, it's so pretty.

I get the same thing from the ladies.

[builder]

I get the same thing from the ladies.

:clap:

[JuliaGulia]

Mark, some good stuff here but I notice a lot of blur/lack of sharpness in your pics. Have you been toying at all with ISO? If you need more shutter speed, you can always bump the ISO, just have to deal with extra noise. Also, as I'm sure you've heard from Larry, focus is crucial when you're dealing with shallow DOF... make sure your AF point is dead on or be a real man and manual focus ;)

Your composition gots some skillz yo... but I can certainly see you improving over time. I get in a funk sometimes where I just frame someone or something up and shoot. It gets old and the pics are stale so sometimes I step back and think a little. Instead of the standard old portrait... shoot just eyes, or hands, or an ear hole. You'd be suprised at how sometimes the little things make great pics. Also, get on the ground... stay there. Put your kids out in the yard and tell them to play. Like a cat ready to pounce on its prey, wait for the perfect shots. Sometimes that patience really pays off. PS- I also just stalk low angle shots.

One last thing and I swear I'm done... I have to disagree with builder about not thinking so much and just snapping away. I recently had to slap myself after using 10G to shoot ONE wedding. Digital makes us feel as if we can just rapid fire at random, and hope something happens to tickle our fancy. I found it makes me a piss poor composer. I have recently gotten back into really taking time to think about what I am shooting, from what angle, the light, the DOF, the focal point, the focus, and framing etc. etc. etc.

I think you're on the right track man... In no time you'll be looking at your first photos and seeing just how far you've come!

[Big Mark]

Thanks for all the advice folks!

I went out this afternoon to take pictures here around the house to try and really focus on composition and the suggestions you guys made. Here's 3 pictures of the same silos taken from different angles and distances. Which to you guys like best? Further suggestions?

[Big Mark]

It should be mentioned I was using the kit lens, so please forgive the terrible barrel distortion

[Superfluous_Nut]

i like the last one (the one closest to the silos) from a purely artistic standpoint. that's an interesting site -- i'm sure you could get some great macro shots there. distressed industrial materials make some interesting pics, imo.

[Big Mark]

thanks for the input, any particular reason why? Anything you'd like seen done differently?

that's an interesting site -- i'm sure you could get some great macro shots there. distressed industrial materials make some interesting pics, imo.

That's the curse of living in Yadkin County - the silo on the right is about 35 feet from my front door.

[Superfluous_Nut]

thanks for the input, any particular reason why? Anything you'd like seen done differently?


i like the forshortening. you get a good sense of scale by being close and looking up. the sky makes a nice clean background for the silos, too.

the first two shots don't have anything in them that's worth seeing, in my mind. i mean, aside from the silos. the light isn't optimal (looks like it's late in the day) so that's not helping to add much interest to the surrounds -- they whole place feels gray and flat.

i'd say #2 is a bit better for capturing more than just the silos, but if that's what you're going for, i'd frame the silos a little more off center so you get a bit more of the building in the background. maybe step up a bit closer to the silos, too cuz i don't feel like the ground really adds much at the bottom of the shot and you've got plenty of sky above. or maybe you could shoot landscape and get more to the left that way.

i guess what i'm saying is that #3 captures the silos really well and in #1 and #2 it looks like you're trying to add some other elements, but i'm feeling like you're not giving them enough attention so they only subtract from the silos without adding much to the whole photo.

[builder]

I have to disagree with builder about not thinking so much and just snapping away. I recently had to slap myself after using 10G to shoot ONE wedding. Digital makes us feel as if we can just rapid fire at random, and hope something happens to tickle our fancy. I found it makes me a piss poor composer. I have recently gotten back into really taking time to think about what I am shooting, from what angle, the light, the DOF, the focal point, the focus, and framing etc. etc. etc.

I didn't really mean that he should take that position everytime, just as a break once in a while. From my experience, overthinking leads to other issues and you neglect the actual subject matter at hand. Remember, I'm coming from a true 3-d perspective here. And yeah, a lot of times the pics I take like that end up being fit for the bottom of the bird cage.

[Big Mark]

I didn't really mean that he should take that position everytime, just as a break once in a while.

How many times have you said that? ;)

Seriously, what did you think of these last 3? did you have a favoite?

[builder]

I agree with nut. The third one. I like the juxtaposition of the sky against the manmade industrial elements. Doesn't hurt that I did my 5th year thesis on rehabing silos into office buildings and apartments.

The silos themselves are very busy with the weathering, the concrete, the vines. The other images are just too busy when you put ground elements into it. The third image also gives you the idea that there's some serious weight to the objects. And I like that when combined with the sky which has no weight.

[Playa]

The silos themselves are very busy with the weathering, the concrete, the vines. The other images are just too busy when you put ground elements into it. The third image also gives you the idea that there's some serious weight to the objects. And I like that when combined with the sky which has no weight.
Bullshit. You like it because it looks like a hairy cock.

[builder]

Bullshit. You like it because it looks like a hairy cock.

While I enjoy girth....I need a little more length than those are capable of. :37: