Composition

[tegan]

To beginners or even intermediates in photography who know very little about photographic composition I would recommend

www.photoinf.com

At least if you view that site, you will have some idea what I am talking about if I critique a photo. I will not be making it up or expressing a personal opinion.

Cheers!
Tegan

[Marko]

Some good articles there tegan.

Sometimes though, photographs are still great and break all the rules of classical composition. I guess as an old prof once told me...you gotta know the rules before you can break the rules.

[Joshua Hakin]

I agree totally Marko.
Those rules are fine for learning and getting you started, but every artist runs into the wall at some time. If everyone held to the rules creativity would cease to exist! It becomes "paint by numbers".
I'm reading a book on the Group of 7 and it's great to see how they all held up to the terrible reviews they got from the canadian art scene during the early 20's but ended up laying a foundation for the Canadian art motif. And they all had an intimate knowledge of the "rules" of painting... I guess the rules just bored them.

[tegan]

Some good articles there tegan.

Sometimes though, photographs are still great and break all the rules of classical composition. I guess as an old prof once told me...you gotta know the rules before you can break the rules.

Actually, no, based on considerable experience. I have seen even in Popular Photography photos that supposedly break all the rules of composition, but if you look and read carefully that is not really true. The photos may break a rule or two but others are applied very strongly and effectively. No photo breaks all the rules of classical composition and is great.

A great photo is excellent in both technique and composition. Whatever does not contribute to the quality of a photo, detracts from it and makes it weaker.

Tegan

[tegan]

I agree totally Marko.
Those rules are fine for learning and getting you started, but every artist runs into the wall at some time. If everyone held to the rules creativity would cease to exist! It becomes "paint by numbers".
I'm reading a book on the Group of 7 and it's great to see how they all held up to the terrible reviews they got from the canadian art scene during the early 20's but ended up laying a foundation for the Canadian art motif. And they all had an intimate knowledge of the "rules" of painting... I guess the rules just bored them.

Not at all. Composition is based on how the eye looks at an image and the effect of colour, texture, line, shape, and lighting. It does not at all limit one's creativity but don't forget part of photography is contributing your feel and the impact of the centre of interest to the viewer. If you get too personal and subjective so-to-speak then you are not communicating ANYTHING at all to the viewer and your photo has failed.

A major element in art photography is that more than one person has to agree that it is art. A pro. will not sell his work, if he or she is the only who thinks it is great, or for that matter if only those unfamiliar with quality work think that it is good either.

Composition and technique are used as more objective guidelines by both the Canadian Association of Photographic Art and by editors and corporations that buy the work of professional photographers.

Of course, whether this is important or not, depends on the role of photography for you. If you are not interested in pro work, competitions or gaining recognition for your work by knowledgeable photographers, then of course you have the ultimate freedom to be yourself and not care about the process of evaluating quality photos or the role of composition. Nothing wrong with that. If you really want to learn, then perhaps listening to a different view will help.

Generating some thought for me, is part of what forums should be all about.

Tegan

[Joshua Hakin]

Well done!
You just perfectly explained the BEST way to kill personal expression in your own work: cater to other people.
What do you choose? YOUR personal vision, or create the other persons vision? Are you trying to cater? or are you trying to speak?
It matters little whether other people comprehend what you express, you shouldn't dumb down your work to be accepted by people who have no clue what art is for.
Selling it??? You need to listen to Marko's Podcast interview with Dita Kubin and find out what the real world of art is outside the prism of CAPA (who I even wrote an article for about this very subject) and juried contests.
I think you are confused between fine art photography and sellable photography.

As I used the Group of 7 analogy earlier, they sold nothing for years!!! Were they artists? Yep.
Your last paragraph ACTUALLY explains what true art is... but that seems silly to you... again you need to listen to the Dita Kubin interview. You will only end up sacrificing your own voice to be "accepted". This is conformity, the very antithesis of art.

[tegan]

Self-expression is not being killed and other people are not being catered to.
Any artist has to work within the framework and the parameters of the particular art form. A writer has to use sentences, grammar, spelling, and structure to create a great work of literature. Scribbling on paper may be creative and expressing something but it does not communicate anything to the reader and therefore is certainly not literature.

Self-expression is also not art. Kicking a garbage can is expressing yourself but that does not make you an artist. Art forms have a communication component. In photography, if your(in the general sense) work does not even attract the attention of the viewer then you may call it whatever you want but everyone will ignore it and certainly not take you seriously at all, as either an artist or photographer.

At the far end is the person who considers himself or herself and artist and wants to express themselves and not cater to other people by shooting overexposed, out-of-focus photos that mean nothing to any viewer and so bad that everyone else would throw them in the garbage. The reality is that such a person would be considered to be engaging in self-delusion and regarded as a nut case.

tegan