How to decide on the image in the frame?

Janners

Janners

Active Member
Registered
Here I was trying for thirds in the frame. The bottom of the fence is approx a 1/3rd of the way up, but then the sea catches my eye. It wasn't possible to get the sea at the bottom third as I lost the bottom of the gate. My question is am I overthinking this, or is my thought process in the right direction so keep going?

20230904 Gate at Wembury V1 Web.jpg
 
It seems to me you must first decide on the subject of the photograph. In this case it is the gate so look at that first and decide where you want it in frame and how much of the frame you want to fill with it. Then place the other elements, such as the horizon, by moving the camera slightly. Often it is a matter of a few inches. Do this in-camera and take your time about it. There is no right or wrong, it is your photograph, the person you need to please is you.

For me, I would have stood further back so the gate filled less of the frame and could see the ground beneath the gateposts, possibly quite a lot of ground beneath the gate posts. I would have adjusted the position and angle of camera so the horizon was a little higher in the frame, closer to the centre but just above or below it. I would have the horizon so it best fit in between the rungs of the gate and not worry too much about where it fit the fence.

But that's me. Others will have a different opinion.
 
Last edited:
Thanks @Glenn. I see your point about moving back. Looking at it with hindsight, it's crowded, the gate needs room to breathe. This, as you point out, would have allowed me to place the horizon so as to create a better balance.
 
When you look at a scene in real life you are able to turn and see in any direction. In a photograph you are denied this because you are working within a frame. The battle that you are trying to win in any composition is therefore, preventing the viewers eye from wanting to stray outside of the frame. Most of the so called rules of composition are designed to push you in that direction. Hence avoiding people on the edge of the frame looking out etc. One of the ways of achieving this is to include some foreground interest, a horizon and something in the middle ground to form a triangle. The object being to encourage the viewer's eye to move around the triangle and consequently, within the frame. Had you opened the gate for instance and waited until the yacht on the left had reached the centre of the comp, your eye would have been taken from the FG frame of the gate and fence to the boat and then on to the horizon. For me, as it is the gate forms a bit of an obstacle to what lies beyond..............................IMHO (of course).
 
Framing rules are handy but despite this I often found when looking later at my images that I wanted to recrop or wish I’d moved here or there until… I stopped thinking about it and instead squinted at the composition to reduce it to far simpler shapes of light and shade

By doing this thdd we composition is freed of too much thinking and is far more intuitive
 
I am a little late in putting my two pennorth in if you could do this again apart from stepping back a little how about opening the gate a touch, say about a couple of feet and step to the right a little which then changes the perspective where you would see the sea and the open gate is an invitation to look further into the distance. As it is the closed gate is a visual barrier 'don't look any further'
 
As someone who often struggles with composition, I appreciate all of the suggestions that have been offered. Thanks for posting, @Janners
 
Janners, maybe you should forget about compositional rules such as Thirds, and all the other mumbo jumbo so beloved of camera club judges Composition is a complex creative thing, and shouldn't be constrained by rules. My own approach, when confronted by an interesting subject is to let the subconscious, intuitive part of the brain take over. I try not to think consciously. I find a clear, bright viewfinder is a big help. I simply look at the subject in the viewfinder, and find myself responding to it by moving in a bit, or out a bit, or to one side, or tilting the camera up, or down, a bit. I also keep lowering the camera so I can look directly at the subject, to assess areas of the subject outside what the viewfinder is showing. And when everything "feels" right, I press the shutter.
 
I disagree with your assessment of the 'Rule of thirds'.They have been in existence for a lot longer than photography and are still used. An unbalanced picture will look exactly that. The 'rule of thirds' is probably wrongly named and the word 'rule' should be renamed to mean 'guide. Yes by all means use them, don't stick rigidly to them but adapt them for your purposes but the essential elements should be there in one for or another.
Renown artists like Constable or Turner did very well out the the 'Rule of Thirds', thank you very much, so they cannot all be rubbish rules.
 
Last edited:
John, renowned artists like Constable and Turner didn't rely on basic compositional rules or guidelines. They worked in a creative area beyond rules. This is partly why they are renowned. They created things that can't be explained in words.
 
Actually, this is an interesting point. I agree with Alan there is a lot more to fine art painting than a reliance on RoT but it seems to me that John's point too is valid. Curious, I tried just a couple in my photo editor with the RoT guidelines. Not exactly a statistically significant sample but ...

Turner.jpgUntitled.jpg
 
That's why thirds are so prevalent compositionally, they just work. But so does putting the main elements compositionally in loose circles, ovals or spirals. If you revisit my photo "Old Trawlers...." you can see there is a flattened spiral taking in the main elements of the image starting with the trawler in the right background and travelling anticlockwise to the trawler in the left background and then to the hulk in the foreground and ending with the rowing boat in the centre. Also as it happens, the ships are more or less the on thirds.

I didn't consciously say to myself this composition has to be a spiral and the main elements on the thirds when I made it. It just looked right in the viewfinder. I can see a similar use of a loose spiral in both the above paintings which helps to lead my eyes around them.

I can't really offer any concrete advice as to how to compose a photo. The best advice I can offer is look at loads of photos and ask yourself why the ones you really like work as well as they do. I would also recommend using a viewing card rather than composing through the camera. It just seems easier to see the composition that way.

Just a thought, I wonder if the "rule of thirds" is important in the art of cultures that don't read from left to right.
 
Forget all about rule of thirds for moment. The importance of lead in to the picture is just as or possibly more important which I outlined with my comment on opening the gate a bit just to see what is beyond. Although you can already see what is beyond, through and over the fence, it is a psychological barrier, but when opened it invites you to look beyond the fence and the see what else is there.

Helen, I don't think it matters because the 'thirds' are equal in all places they are probably just accepted as such.

The big NO-NO for me is having an unbroken horizon in the dead centre of a picture. Even a simple thing like a tree on that line will make a terrific difference and bind the two halves together to make one picture, not two. Don't get me wrong it sometimes works by having a plain line, but mostly it contributes nothing
 
Helen Summers said:
Just a thought, I wonder if the "rule of thirds" is important in the art of cultures that don't read from left to right.
Click to expand...
This got me thinking about Chinese culture where painting and calligraphy are often scroll based and viewed a section at a time. I went on the Hong Kong Museum of Art site where they have a selection of images to choose from. I chose Pan He's Sunshine after stormy days (https://hk.art.museum/en/web/ma/collections/chinese-painting-and-calligraphy.html) but there are others there you can try for yourselves:

Pan_He_Sunshine_after_Stromy_Days.jpg

It seems to me this does follow the RoT but whether that is because it is something physiological or absorbed culturally by contact with the west by trade I can't tell.

I guess, if it is physiological, then it might have something to do with binocular vision. If you display Turners The Fighting Temeraire (https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/joseph-mallord-william-turner-the-fighting-temeraire) full screen and get close enough for it to fill your field of view, close one eye. I think you lose sight of about a third of the painting. Close the other and the opposite outer third disappears. In other words, detail on the two vertical thirds lines appears centrally to both eyes. That doesn't explain the vertical component but there seems to me to be something to it.
 
On the Chinese example you uploaded I can see some of the elements of classical composition apart from the 4/3rds. In the foreground you have a bush or tree, and to the right side is a small boat with someone in it, and behind the boat is a route on the lake that takes you past the outer edges of the bush the background with mountain bringing up the backdrop.

The picture that started this discussion off and where I suggested opening the gate is inviting you to look into the picture and not just 'at it'. This is exactly the same principal shown on the Chinese picture
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top