Monday, March 17, 2008

A Picture in a Box

Explaining ones personal approach to composition, even to fellow artists, is always a difficult proposition. I believe most everyone learns the so-called compositional rules--the "rule of thirds," how to recognize and direct "leading lines," image balance, and any number of other esoteric descriptions that can be used to sum up what is essentially a picture in a box, if only so we can break them later.

But it's in the way we incorporate these elements into our work once we have an understanding of the "rules" that things begin to get interesting. This is where style comes in, because I believe no two people will see and compose things in exactly the same way, for all the same reasons. They may end up with results so similar as to make it pointless to dissect the differences, but the approach, the journey, and the motivations, will always be somewhat unique.

In fact, one of the most beautiful things about composition is that you need not know a thing about formal compositional techniques in order to be able to do it well. Some people, it seems, just get it right.

I am not one of those people. I have to work at it to make something happen. (I try to get what I want while framing with the camera, but it almost always takes some fine tuning in Photoshop to get it just right.) The only ideas I try to keep in mind as I'm cropping are how I can bring a sense of balance and order to the composition, and how will the cropping affect the amount of depth (or perceived depth) in the finished product.

That's it.

By keeping the formula simple I like to think I'm keeping the possibilities open. And, as corny as it sounds, I try to listen to the image, to visualize the finished product before I even start working with it. The idea being that if I can understand where an image wants to be, then maybe I can help it get there.

Over the years I have developed a few tricks and techniques to make my visualizations as complete as they can be. Next week I'll share one of my favorites--Selections and selective tonal manipulations.

4 comments:

Ted said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ted said...

.The last time I was in florence (do you know how long I've waited to write those words..... WHEEEEE!) I passed a young artist at a gallery essentially copying a Rubens. He was learning about the master's technique by attempting to reproduce it. And to my eye he had reproduced it almost photographically.

I'm sure I could not do that with my camera - I mean reproduce someone else's wok. Heck, I cannot even reproduce my own stuff anywhere near perfectly.

Your points are so dead on. And you are right, some people have an inbred sense of composition. What's surprising is how many have no sense. They are whatever the visual equivalent of tone-deaf is. Like you, I have had to learn the elements over a LOT of years. Can you recall the teachers who told you to "Fill the frame"?I've learned that advice was wrong for me. Some of the problem is parallax but I've found that I need some air for later compositional diddling in PP.

But to your image. Yea, the composition is brilliant. the slash of daylight to the right explodes every rule.But if balance is the essence of comp... then the weight of the lamp is balanced interstingly by that vertical strip that doesn't scratch the upper right corner. I'd have made it do that... and I'd have been wrong.

Um, but I'd not have used the light stripe at all. Why the hell does this thing work? What's the secret here? It should be a stew of busyness... but the composition resolves it.

Don't know how though Michael.... wanna explain the magic? What's the secret here? What went through your mind when you pulled this together?

Stacey Olson said...

I think you've figured it out, great shot, and I am impressed with the others you have here also. I also, struggle to get composition correct. When I give up trying so hard, it just seems to work. trying to photograph scenery as I see it is hard, and Im still trying though. thanks for sharing and I look forward to your favorites.

Andreas said...

Michael, it's intresting, but I work largely different. I do not try to pre-visualize (well, I do, but I am not very successful at that), I try to talk to the image while working instead. At the beginning there are certain things that are glaringly wrong, and I try to fix them first. This opens the view on other, minor problems, and I tackle them next, and that ... you see, post-processing is incremental for me. It's like I believe a sculptor works: always only chipping away what certainly has to go. Then re-examining, re-evaluating. This is a careful and loving process, but essentially it always works like that. For me, that is :)

Wonderful composition, btw. There is a white point, just like a hot pixel, near the lower right power point. I'd take it away. Then the image will be perfect.