Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Door  (Read 1747 times)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Door
« on: December 18, 2016, 04:08:53 pm »

. . .small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Door
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2016, 08:04:13 pm »

Uh oh! I can see they don't want me in there. Unless the door is twenty feet high.

Nice one, Russ.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Door
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2016, 09:34:28 am »

I really like this image Russ, it is simple, graphic and enjoyable to look at and I know you will hate me for suggesting this and think this idea is complete sacrilege, but may I suggest a healthy cropping of the wall to the left of the door, so it balances up more equally with the wall on the right of the door?

I know you will not want to do this, as "Croppers will always come a cropper" etc, but why not try it just so your audience can see what it looks like  ;)

I might also like to see a more contrasted B&W version of the crop as well.

Look forward to seeing them Russ.

Dave
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Door
« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2016, 04:48:43 pm »

OK, I'm not Russ,but I'll try to explain why the image needs all the empty space to the left of the door.
For one thing, it suggests that the door is cringing, shrinking to avoid some unknown terror to the left.   ;)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Door
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2016, 05:26:21 pm »

Hi Dave,

Sorry to take so long to get back to you. As Eric pointed out there's a reason for the blank, very different space to the left. This is not tourist photography. I crop on the camera unless there isn't time to get to the position I want to reach. This wasn't one of those times. The door wasn't turning its back to me or walking away, so I was able to crop exactly as I wanted to crop on the camera itself. No need for more cropping.

I checked out B&W before I posted the picture, and wasn't satisfied with it. The contrast between the nice yellow wall on the left and the B&W, unpainted, skinny wood was part of the point of the picture.

But thanks. I appreciate the critique.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Door
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2016, 05:53:08 pm »

This is not tourist photography.

Not sure what you mean by that, really, not being pedantic, just don't get the reference with regards to the static scene under discussion here :-\

I just thought (and still think) that the picture is a little unbalanced, yes the wall is absolutely needed, but the weight of showing that much wall on the left, seems to unbalance the image to the left IMHO - which might be my problem being as I am right handed or something. But as this is your shot and you shot just as you wanted it to be, that is absolutely fine, of course it is, it is your choice after all, but for me as an honest critique of an image I quite like and within the critique section of this forum, I personally would have rotated the camera slightly to the right to balance the shot in a way that feels more balanced, to my eyes, or cropped it in post.

But hey that's me and you are you and that is what makes the world go around isn't it :)

Here's a link that discusses compositional balance for anyone who is unaware of the concept - here

Dave

eg -
« Last Edit: December 22, 2016, 06:11:50 pm by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
Logged

BobDavid

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3307
Re: Door
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2016, 06:05:08 pm »

I like the original crop. Nice contrast between the textures and the colors. The door is so incongruous with the wall. That adds to the interest.
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Door
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2016, 06:09:48 pm »

. . .I personally would have rotated the camera slightly to the right to balance the shot in a way that feels more balanced. . .

Exactly, Dave. You just defined what I mean by a tourist picture. All that balance can put your dinner guests to sleep when you project your pictures for them. If you jar 'em a bit they might stay awake. Depends on how much they've had to drink, though. Balance can be sleep-inducing.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Door
« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2016, 06:24:27 pm »

Exactly, Dave. You just defined what I mean by a tourist picture. All that balance can put your dinner guests to sleep when you project your pictures for them.

I know you don't usually try and put your fellow photographers down Russ and I assume you are happy to respect their work and effort, but you do seem to be saying my work falls under the category of "tourist shot" that I then foist upon unwilling dinner guests or something, which does sound a teensy weensy bit pejorative don't you think?

Tell me I am wrong Russ, because I respect you and whatever you try to do successful or otherwise and I am sure this is not the type of thing you would normally say to a fellow photographer if it is indeed meant pejoratively - is there something wrong?

Dave
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Door
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2016, 07:59:13 pm »

I was pulling your leg my friend. Sorry. Maybe too subtle a jab.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Door
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2016, 08:37:32 pm »

I was pulling your leg my friend. Sorry. Maybe too subtle a jab.

OK Russ, no problem and I did think it was a bit unusual of you to get so heavy, so perhaps it was my mistake and I missed the subtlety in your comments, but if you re-read all the words you wrote above, then on reflection I am sure you must agree that to describe them as "subtle", is being rather generous, but fair enough I accept what you say and I bear no ill will against you for the future and I wish you well  :)

Dave
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Door
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2016, 08:55:36 pm »

I'm with Russ.

Balance is sometimes overrated. It is just another aspect or design element to be played with.
I like what he has done with it here.

 :)
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Door
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2016, 07:38:36 am »

Yeah, maybe I pushed it a bit hard, David, but Eric caught the point I was making. You can get carried away with an obsession for balance. The most effective visual art -- photography or painting -- usually isn't balanced.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5882
Re: Door
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2016, 07:50:33 am »

The original post was imo fine and I can see where Dave is coming from. Both opinions are of course subjective. However an experienced photographer consulting the "rules" is odd imo because after a few years composition should be instinctive and all the "rules" should be forgotten about?

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Door
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2016, 08:10:04 am »

Personally speaking, and it's a neat trick if you can do otherwise, I'd perhaps have backed off a bit more and kept the left even stronger, but I do feel that the top and bottom wouldn't suffer from a bit of breathing space, if only so I could drop in a fake film edge and sign it Henri... we are supposed to be dream weavers, you know.

Regarding 'tourist' photography: I sometimes did it professionally and called it stock, but not often. Today, I can confess to finding some of the tourists to be somewhat exotic creatures, but again, not often.

;-)

Rob

Dave (Isle of Skye)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2514
  • I've even written a book about it
    • SkyePhotoGuide.com
Re: Door
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2016, 10:34:33 am »

Sorry if I am moving this thread away from Russ's original shot by adding one of my own, but yes I do think balance is one of those rules, that we really are better trying to adhere to whenever we can.

To my mind, composition leans heavily towards the subjective, but weight and balance leans more towards the objective imho.

However an experienced photographer consulting the "rules" is odd imo because after a few years composition should be instinctive and all the "rules" should be forgotten about?

Which I totally agree with but with one small caveat, as I believe that as we become more experienced, we apply compositional balance (or imbalance) to our work subconsciously, in other words we use compositional balance or the tension of imbalance without really thinking about it, which Russ has chosen to do here.

I also agree that personally satisfying photography which is what all should be aiming to do, has to become second nature based on what feels correct from deep within us, but isn't that 'knowing or feeling of correctness', based on all the previous experience we have inwardly digested and then learned to apply instinctively? In other words, learn all the rules and then forget about them, because you will apply them and be able to push their boundaries instinctively.

Here is an image of mine that I gave up working on (hence the many still visible dust spots) because the perceived imbalance across the shot, makes me think the image is a failure. When I took the shot which is a short stitched vertical pano, I was instinctively trying to balance the large weight of the central mountain and reflection, which I believe I have done quite well, but the clouds how ever ephemeral they may be, add so much compositional weight and imbalance to the right of the shot, I gave up on it.

I think my mistake here was to concentrate on the balance of the darker and heavier elements within the shot, to the detriment of the balance between the lighter elements, because subconsciously I must have thought that solid granite is so much heavier than water vapour, which it is in reality, but not so compositionally.

So yes, I agree, don't think about any of the rules when taking your shots, but only after you have learned all the rules first over many years and using your own experience to find out what works for you.

Dave
« Last Edit: December 23, 2016, 10:50:41 am by Dave (Isle of Skye) »
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16046
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Door
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2016, 10:42:09 am »

I agree with what you're saying, Stamper, but I wouldn't say, "forgotten about." I'd say that the rules should become "ingrained." Sometimes you get the strongest results by ignoring the rules, but you at least should be aware you're ignoring them. I think you learn composition by looking at successful composition -- not from formal rules. Dave's post popped up while I was writing this and I think I'm saying the same thing he said.

And Rob, I do plenty of tourist photography but you don't normally see it on LuLa.
Logged
Russ Lewis  www.russ-lewis.com.
Pages: [1]   Go Up