Composition and all that Arty stuff - discussion thread.

[airfrogusmc]

Originally Posted by breal101

It could be argued that the wall is cyan, or teal which is the opposite of red in light color theory. Although the bench isn't red either.

Magenta is the opposite of green for light theory.

Which color wheel are we talking about in art theory?

The filter color theory is for filtered light. Color printing and filters. With that theory red green and blue are the primaries. That is a theory for filtered light not reflected light.



The color theory we should be talking about is the one for reflected light.
http://www.tigercolor.com/color-lab/...eory-intro.htm

http://www.colormatters.com/color-an...c-color-theory

http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010...ning-of-color/

[breal101]

I knew all those years printing color would bite me in the ass one day.

Tom's crop did wonders for the water drip shot, good suggestion.

What I find in tonylong's bench shot is the DOF or lack of it interferes with the vanishing lines and the trash can at the end ruins it IMO.

[tonylong]

Thanks for the C&C folks!

Originally Posted by breal101

What I find in tonylong's bench shot is the DOF or lack of it interferes with the vanishing lines and the trash can at the end ruins it IMO.

So, interesting comments,

First, I actually shot this with the "vanishing Depth Of Field" in mind, wide open with an f/2.8 lens to get just the end of the bench "in focus", and I wanted the line of the bench to go soft -- are you suggesting that this was not a good approach?

As to the trash can at the end, heh! I could have moved that, I just didn't think of it, this was the scene I encountered and I'm not in the habit of changing things around, but I'll have to bear this in mind the next time I encounter a "scene"! I'm also not in the habit of cloning out "stuff"...

[nicksan]

Interest topic.

I don't necessarily "actively" think about composition. I usually shoot what I see in my mind. Sometimes my mind churns out crap, sometimes it churns out decent stuff.

A couple from a recent trip to the Botanic Garden.

I wanted the DOF to be exactly the way you see it and wanted to frame it close and tight.


I thought this plant looked kind of cool juxtaposed against the light that was coming in. I wanted to silhouette the "branches".


I liked the way the sun rays were hitting the tree trunk and wanted that part in focus. I wanted a more dramatic perspective so I shot from very low and closer to the trunk.


I thought this was a really nice looking plant. I wanted to capture the tiny "balls" at the end of the "pins" so I broke out my Macro lens and captures it exactly the way I envisioned it.

[mtimber]

Nick, some nice shots there.

[breal101]

Originally Posted by tonylong

Thanks for the C&C folks!



So, interesting comments,

First, I actually shot this with the "vanishing Depth Of Field" in mind, wide open with an f/2.8 lens to get just the end of the bench "in focus", and I wanted the line of the bench to go soft -- are you suggesting that this was not a good approach?

As to the trash can at the end, heh! I could have moved that, I just didn't think of it, this was the scene I encountered and I'm not in the habit of changing things around, but I'll have to bear this in mind the next time I encounter a "scene"! I'm also not in the habit of cloning out "stuff"...

I should apologize for using ruined, that's too strong a word. I guess it's the architectural photographer in me that wants vanishing lines to be distinct and not fuzz out. I'm not trying to make a rule though, I'm sure there are exceptions. I shoot commercial so trash cans have to go somehow, either by moving them or hiding them with a plant or anything else that's handy. I probably wouldn't clone the can, I would probably cut and paste sections from the background in layers until it was rebuilt. Or add something I already had.

Just different ways of thinking, I'm not claiming mine is any more valid than yours.

[airfrogusmc]

Nick I think #2 is the most interesting and would look great in B&W.

Heres an image that in kinda reminded me of by Imogen Cunningham that really plays with positive and negative space.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v4zyliczF3...ningham_14.jpg

[nicksan]

Originally Posted by airfrogusmc

Nick I think #2 is the most interesting and would look great in B&W.

Heres an image that in kinda reminded me of by Imogen Cunningham that really plays with positive and negative space.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_v4zyliczF3...ningham_14.jpg

Thanks Allen.

I just wish the DOF on that one was just a tad bit wider. Didn't realize the lower right side was OOF.

[nicksan]

This one's obvious. I saw, I liked, I shot.

[nicksan]

This was shot a few winters ago. It was after a snow storm and I saw a bunch of ducks just hanging out by one of the many small "bridges" in Central Park. I wanted to get one duck in focus and also get down low for a more dramatic perspective and to also keep the bridge in the frame in the background.


I looked up and saw these branches forming "veins" against an overcast backdrop. I kept the branches silhouetted to keep some of the grey in the clouds.


Saw this man sitting like this on the steps of St. Patrick's Cathedral. I thought his pose looked rather dapper but liked the contrast between the business man and the other stuff going on.


This one's obvious.


I liked how neatly these books were stacked, the vivid blue color and the lighter backdrop.

[tonylong]

Nick, you've got some good stuff there! I can't personally think of something I'd want to put out as C&C!

[tonylong]

Originally Posted by breal101

I should apologize for using ruined, that's too strong a word. I guess it's the architectural photographer in me that wants vanishing lines to be distinct and not fuzz out. I'm not trying to make a rule though, I'm sure there are exceptions. I shoot commercial so trash cans have to go somehow, either by moving them or hiding them with a plant or anything else that's handy. I probably wouldn't clone the can, I would probably cut and paste sections from the background in layers until it was rebuilt. Or add something I already had.

Just different ways of thinking, I'm not claiming mine is any more valid than yours.

Cool that you are coming from that perspective -- this would be a great thread to post some of your work and fill us in on your "vision"!

[mtimber]

This shot was at a friends wedding.

The bouquet belonged to the maid of honour.

I was trying to capture that moment at the end of the wedding when it all draws to an end.

I was also trying to create a traditional composition and look of an oil painting (without adding any strokes).


The fading bouquet... by mtimber1971, on Flickr

[chauncey]

Am subscribing...finally a thread that goes beyond "how do I take this picture?"

[airfrogusmc]

When I do personal work, I tend to work in bodies of relating images. Its not so much about the individual piece but the more important whole. Its hard to show something like that on the internet because things like flow, scale and the surface the images are printed on are not relevant but those things are SO important when exhibiting.

Having said that heres part of personal project that I think the images are working together well even though the flow and impact are nt the same as they would be in a very large scale, flush mounted, properly lit and in the proper sequence in a gallery.