Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Compositionally Challanged  (Read 36398 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2013, 09:36:37 AM »

My method of "over-shooting" an image by taking numerous images with the intent of merging to crop/compose on my computer
because I can't seem to compose in my viewfinder...I've been told that it denotes a lack of composition skill and is wrong.  Is it so wrong?

There are no rules, just techniques: in my head, the more simple the latter the stronger the image. On the face of it, it seems a contradiction in terms to deny ability of in-camera composition but claim it via computer: they are just different ends of the same sausage.

Rob C

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3128
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2013, 12:48:39 PM »

"Photography is not a sport... I believe there are no rules in photography. A photographer is allowed to do anything, anything, in order to improve his picture." Bill Brandt.
Logged

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 744
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #22 on: August 20, 2013, 01:07:55 PM »

Quote
Photography is not a sport
I do like that response Isaac...       ;)
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/chauncey43

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2013, 03:45:35 AM »

"Photography is not a sport... I believe there are no rules in photography. A photographer is allowed to do anything, anything, in order to improve his picture." Bill Brandt.


And in the age before Photoshop, he was probably right.

I very much wonder if he'd claim the same today. The line is no longer fine but almost non-existent.

Rob C

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3128
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2013, 10:53:34 AM »

I don't know much about Bill Brandt's photography, but apparently he was willing to collage two negatives to make a picture of Top Withens -- don't like the sky, use a sky you like.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2013, 11:48:01 AM »


I don't know much about Bill Brandt's photography, but apparently he was willing to collage two negatives to make a picture of Top Withens -- don't like the sky, use a sky you like.


Then a questionable source to quote?

;-)

Rob C

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3128
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #26 on: August 22, 2013, 12:01:34 PM »

Then a questionable source to quote?

If you have any actual knowledge that would suggest that quote was out of character, do share.
Logged

fike

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1387
  • Hiker Photographer
    • trailpixie.net
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #27 on: August 22, 2013, 02:53:41 PM »

Photography is not a sport, eh???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfTR3QtbDbU

Kelby can make anything a sport.  As a photographer, I have much more respect for McNally than Kelby (Joe is actually a working photographer).  Kelby is a photoshop performer.  You can learn some great basics of PhotoShop from Kelby, but then you need to advance photographically from there.

There is nothing wrong with your approach.  Take it to the extreme to see where you can go with it.  As other have said, if YOU aren't happy with your results, then try some different things.  Make some games and rules for yourself (make it a sport, if you will).  Go out with your camera and a single fixed focal length lens.  Experiment.  Play. Get goofy.

The composited  image you showed is fine.  Sorry if you were going for great.  Combining 20 images didn't make the result amazing.  It still looks like a harshly-lit midday snapshot along a trail.  In a perverse way, this is a testament to your amazing Photoshop skills that the image holds together at all.  I think you have mastered photoshop, but not the basics of creating a fully dynamic exposure.  Don't invest more time in that shot.  go back and shoot some more until you are thrilled with the image components for your composite.
Logged
Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #28 on: August 22, 2013, 05:15:26 PM »

If you have any actual knowledge that would suggest that quote was out of character, do share.


You're attempting to dodge the bullet. Admirable sentiment, but in the context of the statement you made and my response, nothing changes. If you admittedly don't know much about the source, where the value in quoting it?

Rob C

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 9328
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #29 on: August 22, 2013, 05:23:42 PM »

... where the value in quoting it?

You got to keep your quote generator busy, otherwise it becomes rusty pretty quickly ;)

Isaac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3128
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #30 on: August 22, 2013, 05:54:47 PM »

You're attempting to dodge the bullet.

You're really really bored.

If you admittedly don't know much about the source, where the value in quoting it?

Even if I knew nothing about the source, the value would be that the quotation was apposite.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #31 on: August 22, 2013, 05:57:22 PM »

But Isaac, how could you possibly know?

Rob C

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 744
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #32 on: August 22, 2013, 06:12:17 PM »

Quote
It still looks like a harshly-lit midday snapshot along a trail
Partially correct...6-22-08 @ 4:30 PM, back when I shot mostly in Auto Mode without a clue what was going on.      ???
I keep working on it because of the natural "God Rays" and Muley twins in the same frame of the series.
Was taken from some property that went away with a divorce.    :'(
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/chauncey43

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4738
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2013, 07:59:36 AM »

Kelby can make anything a sport.  As a photographer, I have much more respect for McNally than Kelby (Joe is actually a working photographer).  Kelby is a photoshop performer.  You can learn some great basics of PhotoShop from Kelby, but then you need to advance photographically from there.
Scott Kelby sometimes comes across like the world's luckiest amateur photographer. Why? Just see any post where he gets to stand next to the pro photographers at say an American Football match and he then gushes like a complete fanboi.
His business is teaching and writing, not taking photos for a living and he has an extremely successful business doing so.  But it would be foolish to carp at him as he's probably more successful than most professional photographers who make money by merely selling images.
McNally is obviously a press photographer first [and a very good one at that], but he's also a talented writer too. Although his book about how to use speed lights 'The Hot Shoe Diaries: Big Light from Small Flashes' should have been retitled 'The Hot Shoe Diaries: Big Light from Nikon Flashes and Nikon Cameras' as some of the 'advice' was quite specific to Nikon kit. Which is not a problem in itself, but not so good when stated as if it applied to all photography gear. Plus if I'm buying a book that is promoting a product i.e. in effect an advert, I expect to pay far less or get it for free. As that's the usual positive offset of putting up with annoying advertising.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4701
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2013, 09:42:14 AM »

Quote jjj

But it would be foolish to carp at him as he's probably more successful than most professional photographers who make money by merely selling images.

unquote

Making money isn't the best criteria to judge how good someone is? Judging someone by what they produce is surely a better and more objective ideal. I have a couple of his books and swore not to buy any more, mainly because of his humour and there are better writers - imo - than him.The amount of money he has in the bank doesn't come in to it. :(

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4738
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #35 on: August 23, 2013, 10:18:18 AM »

Quote
But it would be foolish to carp at him as he's probably more successful than most professional photographers who make money by merely selling images. jjj
Making money isn't the best criteria to judge how good someone is? Judging someone by what they produce is surely a better and more objective ideal. I have a couple of his books and swore not to buy any more, mainly because of his humour and there are better writers - imo - than him.The amount of money he has in the bank doesn't come in to it. :(
But I wasn't comparing 'quality', just commenting on his success. He is more successful in his aspect of photography than many pro photographers who rely on just selling images to make money. And just because you are a professional photographer doesn't necessarily mean your photos are better 'quality' than an amateur photographer's. There are other important aspects to being a pro over simply being able to take good photos.

Besides 'quality' is probably too subjective a criteria to judge fairly in this case - you even use IMO to qualify your statement about Kelby's writing. Others like Kelby's writing for his humour, whereas you do not.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography

amolitor

  • Guest
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2013, 11:10:34 AM »

People who merge multiple photographs will generally nail down the white balance across all the images, as well as the exposure. This can be done in-camera if you're shooting JPEG or in post with the right tools. This might not produce *pleasing* colors, but should allow the stitching to succeed with cleanly merged colors. Then paint in local white balance adjustments as necessary to get pleasing color.

As for composition, well, having been digging around in this pretty seriously for a couple years now I find that photographers are insanely poorly served by their resources. Everywhere you look it's idiotic stuff like "Rule of Thirds" and "Horizontal Lines Convey Peace" and nothing about, you know, actual composition.

Henry Peach Robinson's "Pictorial Effect in Photography" (available free on books.google.com) is a nice relatively compact book on photographic composition. I was sufficiently frustrated with the state of the art to write one as well, which you can find by going to my blog and looking. I refuse to plug my own schwag in any but the most indirect fashion, and anyways Robinson said it all better.
Logged

wmchauncey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 744
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2013, 02:01:04 PM »

Quote
Making money isn't the best criteria to judge how good someone is
I might submit that...if you sell your stuff, making money is the only way to keep score, do the masses buy your product.
A hobbyist, on the other hand, merely seeks adulations from his peers to stoke his ego.         ;)
Logged
The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/chauncey43

tnabbott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 189
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #38 on: August 26, 2013, 07:37:19 PM »

Sure...I use about 20 images to end up with this one


.

And with all due respect, this image holds no interest.   Why not take one low res shot of something compelling?
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14424
Re: Compositionally Challanged
« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2013, 04:58:52 AM »


Let me preface the below by saying that I don't intend this post as a direct reference to, or attack upon the original photograph posted here, more as an observation on the nature of much photography, its worth and what it seems to mean to different people.


And with all due respect, this image holds no interest.   Why not take one low res shot of something compelling?



That ¡s the problem with so much in the world of photographic images: too many elephants crowding the rooms.

Folks get blinded by the cost of their gear; by the manipulation facilities available and their competence in using them; others can no longer see the wood for the trees and despair of finding nirvana. Well forget it: there is no photographic nirvana. The best you can hope for is to find the occasional cracking great image, perhaps render it successfully and find somebody else somewhere who actually likes it so much that they let you know.

Someone mentioned the success measurement inherent in the bucks photography puts on the table. Yes, to an extent that’s true, especially in a really professional situation, where you win a commission in the face of the always stiff competition for it, where the buying is mostly done by people with a lot of experience in the medium and with a lot of practice in making calls and decisions on matters such as style etc.

I’m not so sure that you can extrapolate that to include the example of what the ‘public’ is buying or ignoring. Going by the evidence of my own eyes and ears, that usually comes down to the lowest common denominator in all things. If you make your purchasing decisions on whether you or your uncle can produce the same thing as the ‘artist’ is selling, whether an image matches or clashes with your curtains, then that is something very else to a professional judgement.

During my years as a Tony Stone contributor, as a sideline to girl pix, I tried to interest them in graphic travel stuff from the trips: you know – bold colours against pale backgrounds, one mule working an otherwise empty field; a bent road sign on a curve at the edge of a huge drop to the sea below; that single tree on the brow of a field of corn - stuff that had some visual drama or dynamic. They told me that they understood perfectly well what I was on about, but that there was simply no market for that kind of thing other than in postcards, and that brought in negligible return. Travel meant the standard ‘classic’ shot of the same church, palace or ruin. And Stone was very successful – became Getty’s take-off platform. They understood the world’s buying preferences and the precise horses for which courses.

In the end, if the thing is hobby, then why on Earth not forget about the latest and greatest equipment, about spending your kids’ inheritance (or your next car!) on some exotica that won’t make you any better a photographer but certainly much the poorer?

Does it make sense to pay through the nose to have the sharpest picture of something dull? The best thing you can do for yourself is to relax and realise that it’s just a game, some fun, an alternative to watching tv. I wouldn’t be at all surprised that you might discover something better in your work simply by cutting yourself free of gadgetry syndrome, learning how best to use what you have. With the realisation might come some ultimate pleasure rather than angst about what you’d really, really need to buy to make you a better snapper.

Rob C

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up