Advanced Composition Article

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
found on my web site at:

http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm

I apologize in advance, but the navigation system on my web site does
not yet link to this article. I am not going to alter the navigation
system until I am sure that such articles are of value to my web site
visitors. If you leave this article to visit the rest of my site and
wish to return to the article, you will need to add the page to the
favorites section in your browser or use the back button to return to
the article.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com

Add a reply

Register or log in to remove.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hello Ron

Funny enough, I went in the opposite direction for my site! Isn't
diversity wonderful.

)

When I really got to thinking about it I was forced to conclude that
offering constructive advice about composition is a bit like trying to
teach soccer to those who lack the natural talent and skill - it's just
not in them in the first place, although they may even be experts on
the rules of the game. Not a perfect analogy, I know, but it's getting
there.

'Seeing', IMO, is a natural gift that you shouldn't have to think about
beyond commonsense irregularities withing the frame, like a tree coming
out of someone's head or a key element partially obscured. And if you
do have to think about preset rules and guidelines, it all becomes too
contrived and artificially forced into place. Ironically, in
photography, there are times when there isn't even time to think about
it at all! Generally, we just feel there's a proper look and
multi-element cohesion throughout the frame, and click! It's not at all
like painting, unless you're a total purist being rigidly faithful to
everything, everywhere in the scene. (We won't get into image-editing
manipulation!)

But none of this is to say that others won't feel they may benefit from
all your commendable hard work. Just my considered opinion...

I finally opted out on my site like this: "I'm convinced that in
practice Composition can't really be taught - you either have it in
you or you don't and some of the suggested rules I've come across are
clearly better suited to artists with brushes and pencils (and
rubbers!). Others boldly take the subject on and have plenty to say
about it."

But, good luck! Your article is well thought out and properly written.
Great photography too. (I've visited before.) "Long Lake", "Spring
Foliage", "Limekiln Falls" are very good shots.

For SLR/DSLR Amateurs & Novices:
www.theimageplane.net

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

ron@ronbigelow.com writes:

> I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
> like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
> of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
> complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
> other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
> found on my web site at:
>
> http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm

The images get out of synch with the paragraph in the vertical lines
section, making it rather hard to follow the argument.

And I don't think I agree with much of your analysis. The
boardwalk-and-leaf image seems to me to have a great sense of motion
to it (which is a bit startling superimposed on the subject matter),
and I'm not sure a ruined building shell is really what I'd pick as an
icon of stability.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailtod-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Just spent a quick few minutes checking it out and will spend more time
later. I like that you start with lines and shapes. This is what composition
is about, and that puts your article ahead of a few hundred articles I've
see on the subject that start out with cliches and go down hill from there
("start by dividing your viwefinder into thirds" - and all that dreck).
I have a page of books on composition books, most of which are out of
print so your articles will be filling a real need.
For those who care to look for more, here is the link:
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/mani [...] kcomp.html

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

<ron@ronbigelow.com> wrote in message
news:1120535507.196554.254060@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
> like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
> of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
> complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
> other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
> found on my web site at:
>
> http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm
>
> I apologize in advance, but the navigation system on my web site does
> not yet link to this article. I am not going to alter the navigation
> system until I am sure that such articles are of value to my web site
> visitors. If you leave this article to visit the rest of my site and
> wish to return to the article, you will need to add the page to the
> favorites section in your browser or use the back button to return to
> the article.
>
> Ron Bigelow
> http://ronbigelow.com
>

Reply to Tony

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I agree that some people never seem to learn. On the other hand, I
remember reading Galen Rowell talk about how disappointing his first
attempts at photography were. Now, his photos are stunning. Galen is
proof that there are some people that do learn.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com/

Reply to Ron

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 4 Jul 2005 20:51:47 -0700, ron@ronbigelow.com wrote:

>I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
>like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
>of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
>complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
>other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
>found on my web site at:
>
>http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm
>
>I apologize in advance, but the navigation system on my web site does

Hello, Ron.

I quite appreciate your efforts thus far at explaining composition.
Your offerings are well written and rather easily understood. I might
go so far as to suggest that some benefit could be gained by giving
examples of "well composed" vs. "poorly composed" shots of the same
subject, with explanation as to why one is quite interesting while the
other is not so. I very much look forward to future installments on
the topic.

One more thing, and this might just be more important than what I've
already said. I strongly disagree that composition cannot be taught;
that a person is either innately able to "see" or innately unable to
"see" an interesting way to depict a particular subject in an image.
If that were the case, there would be no sense in teaching music.
Notes, scales, chords, rhythms, keys, and articulation are all easily
taught to almost any student. But not so easily taught are phrasing
and expression. Most beginning music students aren't born with
knowledge of those things, either. It is then by example and patient
explanation that the "seeds" which grow into these fruits are planted.
There are individuals who seem unable to grasp such things, but as
long as they are willing to work at comprehending and learning, there
is reason for them and their teachers to continue. I rather suspect it
is somewhat the same with image composition.

That it IS this way with thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, and partial
differential equations, I am certain.

"It is better to light a single candle...," someone once said. And
lit one, you have done. Please continue.

And again, thank you.

Cal

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

No, the love and appreciation of music is inherent from birth and flows
from within the person. It can never be added at any future stage. Ask
any gifted music teacher.

Countless numbers are sent to gain more knowledge about musical
expression,(relatives of mine are a great example of this!) but if the
gift of music and the articulate talent essential to express it is
lacking, then the accumulation of mere knowledge will serve no lasting,
worthwhile purpose. Must be very frustrating for the teachers too!

I rather think some miss the essence of compositional talent, not that
it really bothers me too much, but those studying photography must
struggle when what has been taught fails to come naturally.

Photographic 'seeing' (rather than artistic expression of a scene on
canvas) just happens and can be used to produce images with connected
elements. It can't be contrived or integrated into an individual's
perception through education, no matter how well it's thought through.

)

For SLR/DSLR Amateurs & Novices:
www.theimageplane.net

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 4 Jul 2005 20:51:47 -0700, ron@ronbigelow.com wrote:

>I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
>like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
>of value, and would you like to see future articles?

Sorry, others have actually read the article and commented on it. I
couldn't stand to look at the page for that long. Layout is appalling.

You need some space between your paragraphs and the edge of the web
page (currently your article appears to bleed out of the browser),
and you need some space between the images and the paragraphs. Think
of the overall look of your text, white space and images and apply
COMPOSITION rules to it. Right now it's horrible.

I'd also suggest you re-create the example images with a decent frame
around them rather than that cheap-looking 3d trick. A simple 5 pixel
black frame would be infinitely better - and you can do an even nicer
job with a few minutes in photoshop.

Your bullet points are floating around all over the place, the
connection between the paragraph and the example images is weak and
there are huge bits of space with nothing there.

Your examples of good composition would be enhanced if we can compare
them to bad composition alternatives (hopefully, purpose-shot ones of
the *same scene*).

Finally, the font is too large, too bold and very 'fugly'.

Look at a photography or computer magazine for hints on a better
layout. Break it up, the background doesn't need to be gray for the
*entire* article. Adobe are the masters of visual presentation, you
might be better off producing this as a PDF.

Take a look at one of their product brochures to see decent layout,
easy to read and inviting page layout.

http://www.adobe.com/products/phot [...] cs2_wn.pdf

And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
black background because it generates problems if you want to print
the article) is here..

http://www.geofflawrence.com/flash.htm

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
black background because it generates problems if you want to print
the article) is here.. "

Actually it won't - this is a common fallacy. Backgrounds won't print.
Try printing the page you linked to (or one of mine). I recently had to
correct an 'expert' on this.

Bear in mind that a monitor projects light whereas pages in a book
reflect it, so to avoid glaring contrast extremes on each page, try
giving your backgrounds a subtle tone effect. Better for your monitor
too.

White text should print out as black.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Ron Bigelow writes ...
>
>I have written part one of an article on advanced composition.

For those interested in abstracting images into underlying shapes and
deconstructing them like this I *highly* recommend a couple of books by
the great Canadian photographer Freeman Patterson. He teaches a week
long course in New Brunswick (and elsewhere) and spends about 3 days
covering topics like Ron describes, with examples from his own work.

www.freemanpatterson.com

Bill

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 19:22:56 GMT, Owamanga
<owamanga-not-this-bit@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 4 Jul 2005 20:51:47 -0700, ron@ronbigelow.com wrote:
>
>>I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
>>like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
>>of value, and would you like to see future articles?
>
>Sorry, others have actually read the article and commented on it. I
>couldn't stand to look at the page for that long. Layout is appalling.
>
>You need some space between your paragraphs and the edge of the web
>page (currently your article appears to bleed out of the browser),
>and you need some space between the images and the paragraphs. Think
>of the overall look of your text, white space and images and apply
>COMPOSITION rules to it. Right now it's horrible.
>
>I'd also suggest you re-create the example images with a decent frame
>around them rather than that cheap-looking 3d trick. A simple 5 pixel
>black frame would be infinitely better - and you can do an even nicer
>job with a few minutes in photoshop.
>
>Your bullet points are floating around all over the place, the
>connection between the paragraph and the example images is weak and
>there are huge bits of space with nothing there.
>
>Your examples of good composition would be enhanced if we can compare
>them to bad composition alternatives (hopefully, purpose-shot ones of
>the *same scene*).
>
>Finally, the font is too large, too bold and very 'fugly'.
>
>Look at a photography or computer magazine for hints on a better
>layout. Break it up, the background doesn't need to be gray for the
>*entire* article. Adobe are the masters of visual presentation, you
>might be better off producing this as a PDF.
>
>Take a look at one of their product brochures to see decent layout,
>easy to read and inviting page layout.
>
>http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/pdfs/pscs2_wn.pdf
>
>And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
>black background because it generates problems if you want to print
>the article) is here..
>
>http://www.geofflawrence.com/flash.htm

On a 1280 X 1024 screen, the layout is nearly perfect, as is the font
and font-size.

Cal

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>I *highly* recommend a couple of books by
>the great Canadian photographer Freeman Patterson.

The specific books recommended would be
http://www.freemanpatterson.com/books/artofseeing.htm for classic
design basics
and
http://www.freemanpatterson.com/bo [...] eimage.htm for
discarding many of the classic design basics

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

For those interested in abstracting images into underlying shapes and
deconstructing them like this

Interesting stuff. Not for everybody but another take on imagery.

(And I mention on my way to bed, if anybody is interested, that Mr
Patterson has no backgrounds on his web pages. His Windows window
colour is default white [some users have another setting] and that's
what he's seeing.)

)

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On a 1280 X 1024 screen, the layout is nearly perfect, as is the font
and font-size.

I hope Ron's thick-skinned! We all have to be.

The layout is far from perfect as mentioned above, and especially the
text. Few pro sites will use Times Roman - it tends to clash with
screen pixels, especially at normal or smaller sizes.

Text strung the whole way across a sceen is particularly poor design,
and more difficult to live with at 1280, although the font size in this
instance is large. I don't know what Ron's site is compliant with, but
as more basic HTML it doesn't really matter, like mine. But even so, a
lot more could be done with design here.

But reasonable design doesn't always come easy, and Ron's site
communicates very well. take a look at (or perhaps not, if you're into
design, like me) The Luminous Landscape - a real eyesore, but very,
very popular.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 6 Jul 2005 12:07:28 -0700, "Sharp Shooter" <theimageplane@uk2.net>
wrote:

>No, the love and appreciation of music is inherent from birth and flows
>from within the person. It can never be added at any future stage. Ask
>any gifted music teacher.
>
>Countless numbers are sent to gain more knowledge about musical
>expression,(relatives of mine are a great example of this!) but if the
>gift of music and the articulate talent essential to express it is
>lacking, then the accumulation of mere knowledge will serve no lasting,
>worthwhile purpose. Must be very frustrating for the teachers too!
>
>I rather think some miss the essence of compositional talent, not that
>it really bothers me too much, but those studying photography must
>struggle when what has been taught fails to come naturally.
>
>Photographic 'seeing' (rather than artistic expression of a scene on
>canvas) just happens and can be used to produce images with connected
>elements. It can't be contrived or integrated into an individual's
>perception through education, no matter how well it's thought through.
>
>)
>
>For SLR/DSLR Amateurs & Novices:
>www.theimageplane.net

You restate your opinion most articulately and lucidly, but I still
disagree. If you have literature to support your opinion, I would be
interested in reading it, and would appreciate your citing of a few
sources. You did say, "IMO...", (in my opinion) in your original post.
My opinion, formed from my own experiences, is very different.

My reference is not to the teaching of gifted students, but to the
teaching of the not-so-gifted, though still intelligent, and nearly as
importantly, the ones who possess a strong desire to learn and
willingness to work at learning. Further, it is my opinion that there
occurs an "opening of one's mind" to notions quite foreign or strange.
This "dawning", if you will, requires a persistent application of
effort by some of us, less by the more nearly gifted, and scarcely any
at all by the truly gifted. Also, I do not offer that any amount of
effort will bring one to the level of genius in any field.

Cal

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I think Sharp Shooter's comment about web design reflects my opinion
well. While I am always open to ideas on how to improve the layout of
my site (and I have gotten a number of good recommendations here), my
may concerns are the images and photographic information.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com

Reply to Ron

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 6 Jul 2005 13:15:41 -0700, "Sharp Shooter" <theimageplane@uk2.net>
wrote:

>"And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
>black background because it generates problems if you want to print
>the article) is here.. "
>
>Actually it won't - this is a common fallacy. Backgrounds won't print.
>Try printing the page you linked to (or one of mine). I recently had to
>correct an 'expert' on this.

Actually it will. And I am a semi-expert on this. Backgrounds *do*
print if the browser has been configured to do so. I prefer to print
as I see on screen, which depending on the printer I send it to can
have disastrous results (color laser is okay, ink-jet on standard
paper is nasty).

>White text should print out as black.

Only if the browser is configured not to print background graphics.
And as I've demonstrated, you can't count on that...

A better design system for web-authors is to get the page to use a
different stylesheet depending on if it's being displayed or printed.
This is easy, simply use two stylesheet directives instead of one:

<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen"
href="style/screen.css"/>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print"
href="style/print.css" />

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hello Owamanga!

Yes, the browser may be set to print gallons of ink on rare occasions,
but to advise someone against using white text on black for this reason
is stretching the point way too far.

You argument for avoiding a perfectly legitimate page colour scheme and
design is based on a very unlikely "if". How silly is that.

Have a good think about your logic here...

)

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 7 Jul 2005 08:09:51 -0700, "Sharp Shooter" <theimageplane@uk2.net>
wrote:

>Hello Owamanga!
>
>Yes, the browser may be set to print gallons of ink on rare occasions,
>but to advise someone against using white text on black for this reason
>is stretching the point way too far.
>
>You argument for avoiding a perfectly legitimate page colour scheme and
>design is based on a very unlikely "if". How silly is that.

You have no idea what percentage of the population have their browsers
configured like mine, so it is a legitimate danger. Ink-jet users
certainly don't want to do this, otherwise they risk many damp-pages
and empty cartridges, but laser users (either B/W or color) will still
end up with high-quality output that mimics the original page. 95% of
the stuff I print goes to a color laser.

If I was creating a page which had a high chance of being printed
(such as an interesting article on composition) I'd certainly stop and
think about how that might look on paper, not just on-screen.

>Have a good think about your logic here...

In context, I also mentioned PDF creation as an alternative technology
and was trying to keep my comments consistent between the two
possibilities. PDFs *by default* print with background colors *on*.

The solution I offered for the website is the correct one. Use
specific stylesheets for each output method and then have you full
control of how stuff is going to look.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hmmm...

You have no idea what percentage of the population have their browsers
configured like mine

Yes, that's true, nor have I any idea why under *normal* circumstances
anyone would bother. I suppose that's why it's not the defaukt setting!

But anyway, to help me with my learning curve here, please tell me why
you change the default setting to print what you *see* on the screen
rather than choosing to have white text as black (or whatever) and no
background colours. Seems a largely fruitless exercise in the vast
majority of cases.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bull.
Composition (musical, graphic, literary, mathematical - etc) can be
taught and appreciation for music (like any art) is a LEARNED process in us
all - some may learn very young (Mozart for example) but it is always
learned.
Playing is another matter. Some are not capable of becoming competent on
an instrument - although those people are actually relatively few. I have
taught more than one person who has been told to "forget music" how to play,
because that inane "music is inate" attitude causes bad teachers to give up.
The teacher's laziness and incompetence destroys more potential musicians
than so called tone deafness.
--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Sharp Shooter" <theimageplane@uk2.net> wrote in message
news:1120676848.068033.267780@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> No, the love and appreciation of music is inherent from birth and flows
> from within the person. It can never be added at any future stage. Ask
> any gifted music teacher.
>
> Countless numbers are sent to gain more knowledge about musical
> expression,(relatives of mine are a great example of this!) but if the
> gift of music and the articulate talent essential to express it is
> lacking, then the accumulation of mere knowledge will serve no lasting,
> worthwhile purpose. Must be very frustrating for the teachers too!
>
> I rather think some miss the essence of compositional talent, not that
> it really bothers me too much, but those studying photography must
> struggle when what has been taught fails to come naturally.
>
> Photographic 'seeing' (rather than artistic expression of a scene on
> canvas) just happens and can be used to produce images with connected
> elements. It can't be contrived or integrated into an individual's
> perception through education, no matter how well it's thought through.
>
> )
>
> For SLR/DSLR Amateurs & Novices:
> www.theimageplane.net
>

Reply to Tony

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

First off the concept of "good" and "bad" composition is at least
relative, and at most archaic. What most photographerrs usually mean by good
composition is the following of a batch of inane rules that create static
and boring pictures.
I won't comment on the layout of the website as by now everyone should
realise that will change with different browsers and screen sizes, etc.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Owamanga" <owamanga-not-this-bit@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:asaoc1tmronsto3p45sbjb9s2cc0914lko@4ax.com...
> On 4 Jul 2005 20:51:47 -0700, ron@ronbigelow.com wrote:
>
> >I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
> >like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
> >of value, and would you like to see future articles?
>
> Sorry, others have actually read the article and commented on it. I
> couldn't stand to look at the page for that long. Layout is appalling.
>
> You need some space between your paragraphs and the edge of the web
> page (currently your article appears to bleed out of the browser),
> and you need some space between the images and the paragraphs. Think
> of the overall look of your text, white space and images and apply
> COMPOSITION rules to it. Right now it's horrible.
>
> I'd also suggest you re-create the example images with a decent frame
> around them rather than that cheap-looking 3d trick. A simple 5 pixel
> black frame would be infinitely better - and you can do an even nicer
> job with a few minutes in photoshop.
>
> Your bullet points are floating around all over the place, the
> connection between the paragraph and the example images is weak and
> there are huge bits of space with nothing there.
>
> Your examples of good composition would be enhanced if we can compare
> them to bad composition alternatives (hopefully, purpose-shot ones of
> the *same scene*).
>
> Finally, the font is too large, too bold and very 'fugly'.
>
> Look at a photography or computer magazine for hints on a better
> layout. Break it up, the background doesn't need to be gray for the
> *entire* article. Adobe are the masters of visual presentation, you
> might be better off producing this as a PDF.
>
> Take a look at one of their product brochures to see decent layout,
> easy to read and inviting page layout.
>
> http://www.adobe.com/products/phot [...] cs2_wn.pdf
>
> And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
> black background because it generates problems if you want to print
> the article) is here..
>
> http://www.geofflawrence.com/flash.htm
>
> --
> Owamanga!
> http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

Reply to Tony

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Sharp Shooter wrote:

>
> When I really got to thinking about it I was forced to conclude that
> offering constructive advice about composition is a bit like trying to
> teach soccer to those who lack the natural talent and skill - it's just
> not in them in the first place, although they may even be experts on
> the rules of the game. Not a perfect analogy, I know, but it's getting
> there.
>
> 'Seeing', IMO, is a natural gift that you shouldn't have to think about
>

It's the same with race car drivers. If someone doesn't pick it up
quickly/naturally, they are never going to be very good. If they have to go
to driving schools and read books on how to drive, when they get in a -bad
situation- they aren't going to be able to think, only react and they will
fall back on their bad skills. Been there and watched people who can't
naturally drive do this.
--

Stacey

Reply to Stacey

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Sharp Shooter wrote:

>
> "...a 1996 camera in the hands of a meticulous PhD who studies the
> instruction manual won't produce as many publishable images as a 1936
> camera in the hands of a person with a refined 'photographic eye'."
>

So true.

--

Stacey

Reply to Stacey

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Sharp Shooter wrote:

> No, the love and appreciation of music is inherent from birth and flows
> from within the person. It can never be added at any future stage. Ask
> any gifted music teacher.
>
> Countless numbers are sent to gain more knowledge about musical
> expression,(relatives of mine are a great example of this!) but if the
> gift of music and the articulate talent essential to express it is
> lacking, then the accumulation of mere knowledge will serve no lasting,
> worthwhile purpose. Must be very frustrating for the teachers too!
>

Again I agree. It's not like I can learn to play the guitar like Eric
Clapton. I have a good ear for music and learned to play the piano without
ever learning to read music but people like him are like on another planet
when it comes to that sort of thing!

--

Stacey

Reply to Stacey

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

cal wrote:

> Further, it is my opinion that there
> occurs an "opening of one's mind" to notions quite foreign or strange.
> This "dawning", if you will, requires a persistent application of
> effort by some of us, less by the more nearly gifted, and scarcely any
> at all by the truly gifted. Also, I do not offer that any amount of
> effort will bring one to the level of genius in any field.
>

The difference is; if someone has to "work at it", when they have to make a
quick decision, they can't just react and the moment is gone. I've seen
this in race car drivers who had to -learn to drive- vs ones who it just
came naturally, the natural drivers can avoid wrecks that the "learned"
drivers can't react to quickly enough. Same with photography, there are
many shots that are only there for a split second and if you have to think
about composition, it's gone. I've never read any book etc on composition
and while I know I'm not a great photographer, if I had to think about
composing these two shots, they would have been gone before I could snap
the shutter.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/937049/fly.jpg

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/200 [...] uckweb.jpg

--

Stacey

Reply to Stacey

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 6 Jul 2005 13:15:41 -0700, Sharp Shooter wrote:

> "And a better web page design (although, I'd avoid white text on a
> black background because it generates problems if you want to print
> the article) is here..

I don't know why you are all discussing this, it's obvious you are either
born with web design ability or not, it just can't be taught.

Sorry, that's just as silly as saying you can't teach/be taught composition
isn't it :^P

-SL

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

That sounds quite clever on the face of it, I'll give you that, but in
fact I'm not saying composition can't be taught. I'm saying *in
relation to photography* you either have it or you don't. The accepted
rules of composition that can apply to art in general are not well
suited to the art of photography.

In fact, I've done quite a bit of design work as part of a former
profession, and there are excellent rules that work well for general
guidance, but having an eye for pleasing design is a significant
advantage and there are those who are quite hopeless at it. I can tell
you that for a fact. I saw an example of this just yesterday, and was
reminded of it again. No... not so silly really...

But finally (for me) back to photography and composition:

Photographic 'seeing' (rather than artistic expression of a scene on
canvas) just happens and can be used to produce images with connected
elements. It can't be contrived or integrated into an individual's
perception through education, no matter how well it's thought through.

"I don't think you should be very conscious in photography of classic
rules of graphic composition."

Walker Evans

"Compostion is important but I believe it is largely a matter of
instinct..."

Bill Brandt

)

For SLR/DSLR Amateurs & Novices:
www.theimageplane.net

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<ron@ronbigelow.com> wrote in message
news:1120628302.449352.62800@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I agree that some people never seem to learn. On the other hand, I
> remember reading Galen Rowell talk about how disappointing his first
> attempts at photography were. Now, his photos are stunning. Galen is
> proof that there are some people that do learn.
>
> Ron Bigelow
> http://ronbigelow.com/
>

He was the main reason I subscribed to Outdoor Photographer. I still get
the mag, but I sure miss his articles.

Mark

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 6 Jul 2005 12:07:28 -0700, "Sharp Shooter" <theimageplane@uk2.net>
wrote:

>No, the love and appreciation of music is inherent from birth and flows
>from within the person. It can never be added at any future stage. Ask
>any gifted music teacher.

Sure -- I always ask the person with a vested interest in
touting the way things are for him.

I agree some innate talent (and certainly interest) may be
needed to reach the heights of perfection in any discipline, but to
say someone cannot be taught something that brings it all together for
him in a way he had not anticipated is pure foolishness.

However, if you then want to say it was innate in him anyway
and just needed liberation, you're into the realm of circular
argument.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 19:22:56 GMT, Owamanga
<owamanga-not-this-bit@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>http://www.geofflawrence.com/flash.htm

From the article:

The dreaded 'red eye' caused by light bouncing directly back from the
centre of the eye. Although we have three types of receptors in our
eyes, to collect the red, green and blue light, the red ones are
concentrated in the centre.

Is he _really_ trying to say the RGB receptors are colored RGB
on the retina? I've seen plenty of pictures of my own full retina and
it just ain't so. This guy should spend some time talking to an
ophthalmologist.

Reply to Anonymous

Forum Digital Camera : Digital Camera General - Advanced Composition Article

Please mind

Focus On

Advanced Composition Article

Forum Digital Camera : Digital Camera General - Advanced Composition Article

Please mind