Photographic Composition - what works, what doesn't and what is often ignored

[Deleted Member 5003]

After just under 2 years of membership, it seems to me that a frank exchange of views around the subject of
photo composition could be interesting and educational for many on the forum......

This is clearly a very contentious subject, and whilst there are clear guidelines within the photographic community
on this subject, equally as photography has developed and new trends have emerged, it would be good to discuss
what it is felt works in a traditional or personal sense versus the current trends toward opposing compositional views.

At the outset , if members/guests wish to engage, it should be understood I envisage that opinions will be lodged,
photographic examples proffered and a degree of potential confrontational debate may occur... i urge those who
are predisposed to such confrontational debate(myself included) temper urges to the benefit of the overall discussion.

This is not for the faint hearted, but i believe, from my perspective, that many of our members/guests could benefit
from such an exchange of views..

If the thread is supported I will stimulate the discussion, as necessary, and as much as others "hostilities" will allow....

Suggest opening salvo's consider specific general subject photography moving on to landscapes and possibly city scapes
and architecture.

 

[Clix Pix]

For me, the first thing is always seeing something interesting and then deciding on whether or not I want to spend some time capturing whatever the subject is which has caught my attention. If it's not interesting in the first place, I walk right on by. When it's an appealing subject, sometimes I can frame it pretty nicely but in other situations I may need to resort to judicious cropping while editing, and also maybe erasing/cloning-out extraneous bits that were in the scene which could do nothing about at the time. (I run into this a fair amount while shooting wildlife, as the darned critters just won't pose nicely or get out of the way when I'm aiming at one particular subject!)

Sometimes I'll deliberately shoot something knowing that when I get to the editing phase I'll be experimenting with it in ways which will change the original shot anyway so the framing/composition of the image in the beginning isn't really as important as it would normally be. Occasionally the end result image winds up with unconventional composition because I wanted to see what would happen....

I don't really pay a lot of attention to the so-called "rules" of composition. I frame what looks right to me and if in the editing phase I decide it needs a bit of adjustment, I attend to that so that it looks right to me as I'm finalizing the image.

Not sure if this is what you're looking for in this discussion, Deleted Member 5003?

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

It's a good start. Clix.

I guess at the outset it would be interesting hear how people approach the taking of their shots and what has led to their best images versus random
Shooting without a particular subject or image in mind.

I guess for me when I am out shooting, many of my best images have followed a process whereby I go out with a target subject in mind, a minds eye view of the composition of the image i am looking for aand initially fix my camera settings to best reflect the image and subject i want to create.

in seeing the subject I want to shoot, i would think at least 50% of my shot preparatory thinking is. concerned with the background and
Frame position of the subject...irrespective of what may be possible in post production......but if I can't quite achieve the image
Composition I am looking for my thinking is to then consider post production actions to more closely reflect my image.

I will often move to achieve the most pleasing background whilst trying to avoid subject distracting elements along with fixing the general
subject position or orientation.....ie top, button, left or right in the viewfinder and will also try to follow rule of thirds or other traditional
techniques if they fit my compositional expectations.

Suffice to say for me the bulk of my pre shot thinking is as much concerned about the composition ,if not more than the subject i am shooting.

Be interesting to hear the approaches by others for their most special/best images rather than just random shooting walkabouts with no particular
Subject in mind.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

It might also be interesting to hear peoples view of the top 3 compositional attributes
they consider are the most important for a stand out image......?

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Ray, I see you've put this in the "Bird" subforum. Did you mean for a conversation about composition when doing bird photography, or in general?

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

In general Chris, so no-one feels excluded, and lets see where the discussion goes......

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

@Deleted Member 5003 Ray I hope you don't mind, I asked to move your thread so it can get more visibility because its a really great topic!

My 2cents: as a novice I cling to the rule of thirds when possible, but I find that hard to do when taking pictures of specific subjects like moving people. In that case, and also with floral photography, I just center my subject. I hope to mature more in this aspect of photography.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

That's fine Chris...Thanks, I will know next time

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

I cling to the rule of thirds when possible

As Joni Mitchel sang*:

I'm just a prisoner
Of the rule of thirds
On the highway

And why is it popular? I guess, because it seems to work. I keep that grid displayed on the camera. I am often it's prisoner. More or less. And sometimes not. But it somehow helps me not to do stupid stuff too often.

I wish there was a bigger selection of grids.




*Or maybe not.

 

[Clix Pix]

Background!!! YESSSSS!!! When composing a shot the first thing after the subject itself to which I pay attention is indeed the background and what's around the subject. If the background is especially interesting, too, it might even wind up as another shot on its own from a different perspective so that it won't detract from the intended subject. Usually, though I find that quite often backgrounds are complementary to the subject, especially in nature.

In shooting wildlife it is desirable to have a nice, clean, unobtrusive background/foreground but that isn't always possible, of course. One of my recent shots of a GBH frustrated me because the darned bird simply would not move from the busy, cluttered wooded area in which he was standing, but I made do, anyway, and cropped out as much of the distracting background as possible.

 

[Landshark99]

For me I do not think there is any absolute rules to composition, there are guidelines that might help someone starting out, like the rule of thirds. Over the years what I like and the way I see has always has been in flex, long horizontal, large empty spaces, tilted horizon line, camera tilts, vignettes, over weighted to one side or another, occasionally just centered. I compose the way I see at that moment whether in capture or years latter in edit, I just make sure that what ever is in the frame is something i want there.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

As Joni Mitchel sang*:

I'm just a prisoner
Of the rule of thirds
On the highway

And why is it popular? I guess, because it seems to work. I keep that grid displayed on the camera. I am often it's prisoner. More or less. And sometimes not. But it somehow helps me not to do stupid stuff too often.

I wish there was a bigger selection of grids.




*Or maybe not.

Many editing softwares have different grids available to overlay when working with the crop tool (golden ratio/spiral, diagonals, grid, rule of thirds) so I also wish our cameras had such "training wheels" available... and No Sony, I'm not going to pay for them in a software update lol

Sorry, I digress.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

"training wheels"

nice.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Most of the traditional grids have a psychological foundation in that they reflect the brains view of what
Is a pleasing image pattern...bright colours also work in the same way wherein bright colours will tend to
draw the viewers eye.....

Personally like Chris and Thad above I follow the rule of thirds most of the time but more often in post, while cropping,
As long as my shot image leaves the flexibility to do so, based on my view at shooting where the subject is best positioned to
be enhanced by the background rather than the background become the main feature.

Landscapes of course are in many instances enhanced by the background and often the background becomes the main feature.

In my bird shooting, I will often also look for leading lines in the image as well framing opportunities.


Maybe to stimulate the conversation it might help for everyone to list the top 5 compositional elements , in order of importance,
that they consider to provide or have provided their best images in the past.....

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

the top 5 compositional elements

I have trouble naming any, apart from the grids as mentioned (thirds, fifths, golden ratio, etc), the assertion that an odd number of things is more interesting than an even number...

A composition should have balance. Unless unbalance is actually the subject.

It should be pleasing and the eye should fall on the subject, by dint of any or all of geometry, focus, light, etc. But sometimes a pic in which the subject is not immediately obvious can be interesting. Assuming that people put in the effort.

But please, stimulate the conversation! others are better educated/skilled/experienced than I am, so It's interesting to see what they say.

I try to get composition/proportions right in camera. I regularly don't, and cropping has to be done. Especially with those just-get-the-shot moments which will be gone if one stops to think. I suspect that getting those right, without thinking about it, is one of the real skills of a real photographer: I'm on a lowish rung of the ladder.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I think that with the advent of digital a lot less time is spent, and less time is needed, in sticking to the traditional guidance on composition when actually taking the shot, certainly for wildlife at least, as more often that not images get cropped so it's easy to adjust accordingly at that point. Working that way also gives freedom to concentrate on other aspects like background and foreground distractions, getting settings right, etc.
When cropping I will then see what looks right, but it's not always according to the rules as such, because often something like a butterfly or dragonfly will look better in a square frame. Back in the days of film this wasn't an option, you had 6x4 as a base ratio for all images, that no longer matters as much, if at all.
Where I will stick to the general rules of composition (rule of thirds) is for Landscape and Architecture, where cropping is unlikely, so you need to get it right. That is, of course, far easier, as building and mountains don't tend to move much (dammit Everest, stay still!!!)
Most of us know what looks right to us, and if it does, it should be fine for everyone. Balanced and clean are what I look for in the end result.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Thanks Thad,
we all have our moments when shooting, be it good , bad or indiffrent. The main thing is to learn and improve and as long as your skill base is growing then you will also grow as a photographer.

I think the way to go in this discussion is maybe not look at what we feel is good composition but look at what we feel makes for bad composition and accordingly less than stellar images.

The reason i raised this composition question is i see images on this Forum and others wherein people are producing good work but composition, from my perspective, is not what it could be and accordingly lessens the impact of the image. I understand we do not all see the same thing in an image and all shoot for different reasons, some for solely personal pleasure as memories, family snaps and even as a means of getting up off the couch and getting exercise walking around shooting and therefore peolple have differing views of the images they create.

Ultimately it is a fair assumption that many on this forum joined to improve their photography to a greater or lesser degree and so to expand on my earlier mails and so we can come up with a discussion product/guide that others currentlly and in the future can benefit from i suggest we take the key genres on this forum....Landscapes, Birds/wildlife, Architecture/city scapes, portraits and cars/transport/mechanical and list the composition defects we see in our shooting and photos of others we review which we feel detract from the overall impact of the image.


To start I have added my first in each genre as follows :=

1.Landscapes 2.Birds/Wildlife 3. Architecture /city 4. Portraits 5. Transport/Mechanical

Missing foreground eye exposure not distracting background photo bombed intense sun reflections
element sharp people/groups images


Fill in the above listing as you experience or feel comfortable commenting upon and hopefullly we can come up with an overall listing which i will compile and return as a future reference source particularily for enthusiasts and/or new phtographers looking for guidance. Also feel free to add further genres if you feel i have missed one of the more important elements.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Have reorganised the listing, as my above typed mail, left justified the text to give a garbled text.


1.Landscapes
* Missing foreground

2.Birds/Wildlife
* eye exposure not sharp

3. Architecture /city
* distracting background people/groups

4. Portraits
* photobombed images

5. Transport/Mechanical
* Distracting sun reflections

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Hi Kev ,
agree with your points and the fact the more experienced shooters know what we look for and what doesn't work for us, but
the idea of this theme is to draw on that experience along with other less experienced shooters so there is a guide or record of ideas that those
who are less experienced and future forum members can benefit also.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Hi all,
As you may be aware I have recently launched a theme, my first in this context, as per this theme title,
geared to drawing Forum members/guests thoughts and opinions as to image compositional elements which
detract from Positive overall shot/subject impact.

I have posted a listing of key genres to register your thoughts and ideas against so we can ultimately
develop an overall forum guidance/check listing of what photography enthusiasts/ newbies may consider
in seeking to improve their photography skills/ image quality.

It seems to date the response is limited but I acknowledge my normal refrain to the birds theme may have
Limited the reach of my original posting....this has now been transferred to the open talk forum.

Bottom line, and in the interests of collective effort, given the many years of inherent photographic
experience within what seems to be the high age demographic Of the forum member group, together
with promoting enhanced group harmony I would request all(members and guests alike) to engage
to a greater or lesser extent as your time availability/interest allows, so we can bring the end
guidance/check list to fruition in the minimum of time.

 

[Clix Pix]

Thank you for reorganizing the list as it was a bit confusing in the original post!

Birds/Wildlife:

The first element for me while composing an image of a bird is that indeed I look for the eye(s) and focus on it/them (Sony makes this so easy to ensure accuracy here), as if the eyes are not in focus or showing at all, the image immediately loses impact.

Secondly I look at the background and area behind and around the bird, where he or she is standing, swimming or flying, and adjust my own and the camera's position as needed to get a pleasing composition. This may make or break the image, as because if the background and surrounding area is too cluttered the bird may not really stand out sufficiently in order to make a good image. I usually do try to compose and shoot leaving enough space around the bird to allow for cropping as it is frequently needed.

Without these two elements working together to present the possibility of a successful, interesting image I don't go any further.

I don't shoot landscapes (well, I have but it is very rarely), and the same applies to the other genres.

With portraits or candid shots of people, I do tend to again pay attention to the eyes of the subject, plus the environment around them, what they're doing and who else is around him or her. If it is a formal portrait/headshot, lighting plays a key role in the composition, but I also try to ensure that they look relaxed and comfortable.

In terms of architecture/buildings/city, I'm mindful of the lens I've got on the camera and how well it'll work for the shot that I want to capture. One important thing to watch for when composing a shot of a building is of course, "keystoning," where the building appears to be leaning backwards.

Yes, when shooting vehicles, airplanes, etc., reflections and glare can be very problematic and ruin an image very quickly.

I'd like to suggest an addition to the list -- a sixth genre: Macros and Closeups. That's where I spend a lot of camera time, too. In shooting a macro of, say, a flower, I look over the entire subject first, deciding upon the best approach and the most interesting or intriguing element of the flower. Then I spend time with shooting from different angles and perspectives, frequently experimenting as I go. A lot of macro shooters these days are into stacking focus, but I have not tried that and the process really doesn't appeal to me, although for some subjects it really is the better way to go.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Thank you Clix for a very comprehesive response...I will take your comments and consolidate them into a rolling listing
along with any other future comments you may wish to add, together with other contributor inputs over the coming days for
final consoidation and forum logging.

Much appreciated...

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Hi gents, appreciate any feedback on matters of composition.

I will hold it open until next Saturday and if there is no response I will publish a listing including the opinions of those that took
the time to respond along with my personal views. and assume other than the small number of interested parties who have shown
willing, as a group, image composition is not a subject of interest

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

Hi, Ray,


I'm still new to photography. It's too soon to have developed thoughts on composition. I've given myself time to wander through the process, somewhat aimlessly.

This is what I do in my daily walks. It's rare for me to stand in one spot for more than a minute or two. Behind the lens, I want to capture something to work with in post. There's not much planning (or composition) involved.

In post, I crop to suit the subject and then work with the light, curves, and contrast. I rarely touch the colours.

I'm sorry not to have anything to add to the conversation, although I appreciate the thoughts that led you to start it.

Thats fine ST, each to his own as regards shooting style......any response is better than no response and i thank you for that,.

If and when we get to a final listing maybe its worthwhile casting your eye over it to see if anything fits with your work process.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Hi, Ray,


I'm still new to photography. It's too soon to have developed thoughts on composition. I've given myself time to wander through the process, somewhat aimlessly.

I don't think that's true, and is something that you should think about more if you aren't already.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

I agree kev,
it seems we all start off very focussed on the subject of our images (metaphorically speaking)and less on the overall composition.

In my experience, as people strive to improve their image quality, everyone sooner or later gets to a point of realisation composition has an equal if not higher weighting in respect of overall image quality than all those other quality factors we juggle with continually.

 

[AlphaWorld]

Many editing softwares have different grids available to overlay when working with the crop tool (golden ratio/spiral, diagonals, grid, rule of thirds) so I also wish our cameras had such "training wheels" available... and No Sony, I'm not going to pay for them in a software update lol

Sorry, I digress.

Rule of thirds, for example, is available. I am not sure how many others are. Pretty sure diagonals are, too. Not sure if it's all Sony bodies, though.

I can check the bodies I own - should we?

 

[Snaps]

I'm new to Sony, Santa brought me an A7R5. I'm transitioning from Canon crop sensor mirrorless (M6mk2) and I appreciate so many things about the A7R5. With respect to composition, my biggest challenge as a novice is unanticipated busy backgrounds and poor subject placement (poles poking out of heads sort of thing) that I often don't notice until reviewing in post. I typically shoot grandchild and travel photos. The A7R5 viewfinder allows me to see these mistakes during composition, so there's hope.

I'd appreciate hearing from the members here how you think about composition in the field, primarily for travel and family photography, 20-70mm focal range for example. Mental checklist before pressing the shutter? Lots of shots and post process culling? Visualizing the shot before raising the camera? What about approaches to capturing the decisive moment?

 

[Landshark99]

I would look at learning differently, Hold the camera to your eye to see what it sees without taking the image, look for stuff that you want or would not want in frame, somethings are easy to remove in post others are not. Capturing the decisive moment comes with experience and more often luck. For the main factor with any image is light, no point in shooting if the light sucks unless it is just to record the image. Light can make that poor background amazing or thrilling

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Did anybody mention frames? Elements in the pic that act as frames to the main subject, one one, two, or more sides.