Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Minimalist landscapes  (Read 7975 times)

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2896
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
Minimalist landscapes
« on: July 26, 2010, 02:12:07 PM »

I recently started a new project shooting simple landscapes - although I think I should call them minimalist so they won't get offended.

Please note they are also part of my ongoing War Against Rule Of Thirds.

Here first three. Any constructive positive and especially negative critique welcomed. I'll get my head filled with the positive and ignore the negative.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 02:17:54 PM by feppe »
Logged

Phil Indeblanc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1842
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2010, 02:20:03 PM »

Quote from: feppe


they are tranquil. I can see it covering a wall for a mood set.  As much as the 1/3 rule works, a rule is just a boundry. If you don't step out the boundry, you will never make your own rules.
Logged
If you buy a camera, you're a photographer...

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4700
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #2 on: July 27, 2010, 04:12:18 AM »

You should just go ahead and shoot without waging war! A pacifist approach. If it pleases you then that is what counts. If you are confident in your own ability and tastes then if someone criticizes your image then you can safely ignore them? You don't need to battle against them. Number 1 and 3 are nicely balanced compositions - imo - and prove your point.

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2010, 04:29:32 AM »

Feppe

I like your pictures. I do quite similar things in B/W, very often. But I don't understand your "war".

If we take frame #1, the pathway through the crop (which is our leading-line) falls on 1/3 in from the left. And the horizon line may be below the third, but actually the real tonal transition is the light sky immediately above the horizon, which is also 1/3 from the bottom of the frame. So this picture is in fact a very good example of the so-called "rule" of thirds.

John
Logged
Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits

ognita

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2010, 05:43:50 AM »

I use to be bothered by those rules before, then I just grew tired of it.
Soon enough, you'll be tired of this war of yours as well.

Nacnud

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 54
    • www.wild-landscapes.co.uk
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2010, 11:53:07 AM »

LOL at this war!
Years ago my Mum did a HND in photography and was set an assignment about the using the photographic rules; including the rule of thirds.
She hates that sort of thing - so set herself a personal challenge.

To take a single image that BROKE as many rules as possible but still be a good photograph.

She managed a wonky horizon, sheep's bum sticking in one edge of the frame, telegraph pole right in the middle of the image, blown highlights, clutter and rubbish which she might have been able to remove by moving a step or two and many other sins which I can't remember.
That image became her best selling post card.

Personally I think the rules make a good starting point when trying to explain why some images work better than others.
There are some people whose images (annoyingly) seem to work regardless of the technical problems in the image; the rest of us have to work at it.
Logged

John R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1352
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2010, 12:26:48 PM »

Quote from: John R Smith
Feppe

I like your pictures. I do quite similar things in B/W, very often. But I don't understand your "war".

If we take frame #1, the pathway through the crop (which is our leading-line) falls on 1/3 in from the left. And the horizon line may be below the third, but actually the real tonal transition is the light sky immediately above the horizon, which is also 1/3 from the bottom of the frame. So this picture is in fact a very good example of the so-called "rule" of thirds.

John
I agree with JRS. Rules, like the Golden mean, rule of thirds and others, are really guidelines, which are very helpful to both photographers and painters, especially beginners. But ultimately, we must strike a balance between all the elements in order to convey what we want as effectively as possible.

JMR
« Last Edit: July 27, 2010, 12:27:23 PM by John R »
Logged

Ed Blagden

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 491
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/ed-blagden
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2010, 03:08:56 PM »

I like the photos.  In Number 3 you have the little islet intersecting the vertical third on the left and the transition from blue to orange water makes a nice horizontal third.
Logged
Visit my Flickr page

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2896
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2010, 03:24:53 PM »

Thanks for all the comments. I agree fully that rules are optional, and to be broken. Judging how you all find thirds everywhere it seems like the war has already been lost. If I didn't know better I'd think you're all in on it and looking for them on purpose

EduPerez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
    • Edu Pérez
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2010, 02:10:34 AM »

Please, keep breaking rules!
Logged

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3219
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2010, 03:34:44 AM »

I like the photos, but they are not very good attempts at breaking the rule of thirds, I'm afraid...

John R Smith

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1357
  • Still crazy, after all these years
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2010, 04:23:48 AM »

Quote from: feppe
Judging how you all find thirds everywhere it seems like the war has already been lost. If I didn't know better I'd think you're all in on it and looking for them on purpose

I'm afraid that we were all having a little bit of fun at your expense . . .

But it was meant in the nicest possible way  

John
Logged
Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14416
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2010, 09:16:34 AM »

I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules because there is an instinctive need to balance things out, make the weights work in the overall favour of the frame. To do otherwise would be to offend your own eye - why would you do that?

Taking your claim about avoiding any 'thirds' seriously, you can see that you obviously couldn't do it even if you believed that you were.

You do nice work, feppe, don't mess with your mind or invite others to try!

Rob C

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4700
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2010, 09:58:53 AM »

Quote from: Rob C
I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules because there is an instinctive need to balance things out, make the weights work in the overall favour of the frame. To do otherwise would be to offend your own eye - why would you do that?

Taking your claim about avoiding any 'thirds' seriously, you can see that you obviously couldn't do it even if you believed that you were.

You do nice work, feppe, don't mess with your mind or invite others to try!

Rob C

I was about to post something in a similar vein, but the wise old man summed it up nicely

NikoJorj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1057
    • http://nikojorj.free.fr/
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2010, 04:21:36 AM »

Quote from: Rob C
I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules [...]
Especially if you work with the exact phrasing of the rule or thirds :
"In any image, the subject is closer than 1/6th of frame of the 1/3rd or 2/3rds lines (or maybe it's the borders)".
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 04:22:00 AM by NikoJorj »
Logged
Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1236
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #16 on: July 29, 2010, 07:38:32 PM »

The rule of thirds is valuable for two things:

It gets the photographer to avoid putting objects in the middle of the frame which is the number one problem with beginning photographers.

It is difficult to have symmetrical images if you place objects on the thirds. Symmetry is a natural response to the environment but it can be boring.

At the moment I am at a loss to think of one photographer who is considered to be a master of photography who makes highly simplified images. The problem is that every time you look at that image you see the same thing. It quickly becomes boring.

Rules are meant to be broken. Thinking about the person looking at your images and creating images that are interesting and long lasting is much more important.

Cheers,

feppe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2896
  • Oh this shows up in here!
    • Harri Jahkola Photography
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2010, 02:21:57 PM »

Quote from: tom  b
At the moment I am at a loss to think of one photographer who is considered to be a master of photography who makes highly simplified images. The problem is that every time you look at that image you see the same thing. It quickly becomes boring.

John Paul Caponigro comes immediately to my mind - he has some of the most insightful views and opinions on color, and it shows in his photography. I would categorize many of them as simplified images. But definitely not boring.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10968
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2010, 07:36:27 PM »

Quote from: feppe
John Paul Caponigro comes immediately to my mind - he has some of the most insightful views and opinions on color, and it shows in his photography. I would categorize many of them as simplified images. But definitely not boring.

I agree! And as for the "Rule of Thirds", I've noticed that a great many of John Paul's images have a horizon line that is (a) not in the middle of the picture, and ( b ) very deliberately not one third of the way from either the top or the bottom.


He's a good role model I'd say.

Eric
« Last Edit: July 30, 2010, 07:37:15 PM by Eric Myrvaagnes »
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my photo website. New images each season. Also visit my new website: http://ericneedsakidney.org

popnfresh

  • Guest
Minimalist landscapes
« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2010, 06:36:54 PM »

Quote from: Eric Myrvaagnes
I agree! And as for the "Rule of Thirds", I've noticed that a great many of John Paul's images have a horizon line that is (a) not in the middle of the picture, and ( b ) very deliberately not one third of the way from either the top or the bottom.


He's a good role model I'd say.

John Paul can get away with bending the rules because he's mastered them. People like to say that rules are meant to be broken, but I say that rules are meant to keep the clueless from looking like idiots. Only break a rule when you're good enough to know what you're doing.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up