|
Post by donsausa on Oct 17, 2010 23:55:15 GMT
I'm actually referring to the part about birds in flight which I quoted from Enriques' post. A lot of people who are in photography would know about about symmetry but they don't have any idea how to properly compose bird images. "For birds in flight shots, for example, the most outstanding ones have the bird positioned not in the center, with space given in the composition for a trajectory. For landing shots, that space is below the bird, and wherever the bird is facing, space is allowed. I think it's because we already know that birds will take the expected path of flight, regardless of our subconscious conditioning. We also know that they don't fly backwards, so we "expect" the space to be in front. For those with their bodies centered in the composition, usually something else offsets this static pose - wing or leg diagonals, or curves." 1. I agree with this opinion because it's what I'm trained to enjoy in individual photographs (unless I'm looking to have 3 pics with the same dimensions posted for a flight sequence and the space available for the remaining doesn't allow much for composition to meet those dimensions, so symmetry would be the ideal choice). 2. The idea of composition and the "rules" in photography are nothing more than subjective opinions. And as my good old teacher from jr. high once said, opinions are like armpits, everyone has them. 3. Violating those rules will often have reaction not from the general viewing public, but from the trained eyes who are biased towards a certain angle, shape, off-center, "spacing" opinion. I'm part of it, I fully recognize my psychological bias. 4. But before "visual arts" training when I picked up my film-based Pentax DSLR in the early 90's my shots were a little bit more loose, a central focus, symmetrical lines and guiding lines were more natural than the rule of thirds. Another photographer summarized it better than me ( Don's edit: note he is reviewing dpreview's forums and is not related to PBPF, but take note of his points objectively, there's truth to it): Posted by NighCkahn Date/Time 5:43:20 AM, Wednesday, July 07, 2010 (GMT) Like almost all forums based on one subject, the people who populate those forums generally cater their craft to their own peers rather than the general public.
Show a picture of a model with so-called excellent use of bokeh to a photographer, and the photographer will oooo and aaaah. Show the same photo to the average person, and they'll wonder why the background is blurry.
The general public will also expose for the shadows and blow the sky highlights out completely, but show a properly exposed photograph to the public and it's too dark. The public doesn't care about the sky. They completely ignore it.
The same is true with the rule of thirds. To them, there's absolutely nothing compelling or more interesting when a photograph is off to the side of the subject or on some imaginary point off center, to them it looks like the photographer needs some practice pointing his camera.
Basically what is happening here is a bunch of mental mast****** about what's important in a picture. Photographers get so caught up in the technical aspects that they forget that the general public doesn't want a picture that's not centered, is too dark, and the background is so blurry that the only eye wandering that's going on is that of looking for the visine because they're sick of trying to resolve a broken picture.
If you are trying to impress your photographer peers, then pay attention to the "rules"; but if you are trying to impress the general public, then just concentrate on the background and make a photograph that's all-in-focus and doesn't try to over complicate the simple idea of clicking the shutter release.
|
|
|
Post by Nilo Arribas Jr. on Oct 18, 2010 3:22:18 GMT
This is interesting.
I don’t see any problems with someone deviating from implied, accepted, written or unwritten rules in wild bird photography or photos in general. In fact, this can be a healthy way of squeezing our creative juices…
Having said that, if the individual photographer can demonstrate (show photos) that he can execute consistently the output of a Philippine wild bird photo shoot using the rules/approaches subscribed by his peers/group AND introduce an alternative concept… I’m ALL EARS…
In other words, if a photographer opted to shoot partly blurred wild Philippine bird subjects in flight and clear backgrounds or a combination of these… I would like to see his “missed shots” of clear/sharp birds photos with clean backgrounds that ended up hitting the rule of thirds because his panning was too fast and the bird slow at the same time almost full frame in his critique of his “not so pleasing shots” vs his preferred shots.
This is one of the reasons why this forum is asking fellow wild bird photographers to post basic shooting information aside from the bird photos so we can learn from it. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Neon Rosell II on Oct 18, 2010 5:11:52 GMT
Here is my two cents to this thread. We are talking bird photography here and I think the best way to present a bird photo is when it looks natural, and how you saw it in the wild. Sometimes you present the bird as a full framer showing the details and sometimes you have it very small in the frame showing the environment. There should be no interpretation of what is appealing to you but a simple WYSIWYG that's it. Composition comes in when you determine how the subject will appear more natural with the captured environment. If it's facing the to the right, it is more natural to give it more space and place you bird on the left side and so on and so fort. For me, I'm not an artistic kind of guy so I want my photos as natural as can be. This is why it is harder to get it right because the camera sensor is not as dynamic as our eyes, you have to position your self for the right lighting all the time to get the most natural presentation you can get. This is what I like with this craft as you can't tell the subject to position it self for you, you have to find a way to get the lighting right, which is where the fun begins and "nija" skills comes out. Cheers, getting paroled pretty soon, withdrawal symptoms at its worst!!
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 18, 2010 5:14:25 GMT
This is interesting. I don’t see any problems with someone deviating from implied, accepted, written or unwritten rules in wild bird photography or photos in general. In fact, this can be a healthy way of squeezing our creative juices… Agreed. Nah, I don't think people need to prove anything to anyone. Photography for many here is a labor of love. But back to my original point: (1) you can break the rules if you want to (2) they are not really rules, in fact, they are opinions collectively or not from the 18th century. Agree.
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 18, 2010 5:37:59 GMT
Wildlife photography (birding included) is among the most difficult areas of photography, also the most cropped, and one of the most enjoyable. Indeed, WYSIWYG.
Totally agree. Focus on the subject in its natural environment, forget what people will be thinking about rules, forget trying to impress people, move forward and capture the moments that's precious.
Yeah I will know how you feel soon enough. I have a documentary project coming up soon and I think it's going to take my time for a couple of weeks. Cringe.
|
|
|
Post by Enrique Frio on Oct 18, 2010 9:12:15 GMT
As a take on this thread, let's post some of our thoughts with examples. Centered but not symmetrical 1This is a square-format headshot of a Green peafowl ( Pavo muticus) taken at Eden Park (Davao). A square easily removes the rectangle format's extra space, making it ideal to illustrate "centering". The photo oddly lacks symmetry! The eye is smack in the center, but it is a pleasing composition, at least for me. Why? Several reasons: 1) Diagonals - the neck, beak, and crown feathers form lines that introduce a dynamic quality to a static head shot 2) Dimension and depth - the shallow depth of field at f5.6 emphasizes the eye, beak and forehead areas; dimension is added by de-emphasizing the neck and crown feathers. ==================================================== ExposureTime - 1/200 seconds FNumber - 5.60 ISOSpeedRatings - 1250 SubjectDistance - 2.31 m Flash - Flash fired, Compulsory flash mode FocalLength - 300 mm ==================================================== Centered but not symmetrical 2This is a headshot of a male Indian Peafowl or Blue Peafowl ( Pavo cristatus) taken at Eden Park (Davao). The photo also lacks symmetry and the eye is smack in the center, but it is also a pleasing composition. Why? Several reasons: 1) Curves - they add "grace" and a smooth dynamism/ flow that implies graceful form and motion. The neck, face, and bill follow this flow. 2) Diagonals - the head feathers' splaying out of the head introduces a strong counterpoint to the center visually, so you don't really realize that the eye is in the center. ==================================================== ExposureTime - 1/100 seconds FNumber - 5.60 ExposureProgram - Aperture priority ISOSpeedRatings - 1250 SubjectDistance - 3.05 m Flash - Flash fired, Compulsory flash mode FocalLength - 300 mm
|
|
|
Post by Renoir Abrea on Oct 18, 2010 14:55:03 GMT
what is happening here'
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Oct 18, 2010 16:44:46 GMT
Nice jolting thread ... I always associate photography with arts and I had always subscribed to the notion that in Arts, nothing is really too beautiful nor too ugly. It is always in the eyes of the beholder. This business in my opinion is a matter of taste. Kanya kanyang trip baga Thus, as much as I would want sometimes, I stop myself in making comments how some photos look really odd or revolting for my taste. This leads me to think that maybe my photos look odd or probably offending to others too so I had to just be mum about what I don't like. However, there is what we call the "norms" on everything that we do. THese norms get developed overtime by the pressure your peers are putting to each other. Some call it a rule and as imposing it may seem, and some simply refer to it as a yardstick, a means to compare how your shots are like. Most, if not all do agree to these norms as it becomes popular. However, once in a while, we are free to deviate from the norms. THis is when one attempts to enter the realms of masterpieces. This is when a genius is discovered most of the time. He becomes a genius when he deviates from a norm and almost everybody agrees and appreciates the deviation. It becomes the genius' signature if he/she deviates often and consistently getting positive responses. The problem sometimes though is when no one agrees with the deviation. One could be in a wrong forum. This forum has been notorious though in praising every photo that has been posted. Though it may foster lasting goodwill and harmony, we wont know where we are in terms of our photography. How I wish though that this forum speaks out the truth.
|
|
|
Post by mantarey on Oct 19, 2010 0:06:08 GMT
I think this is the right thread for my earlier comment.
Today at 4:16am, Enrique Frio wrote: Thanks, everyone, and thanks, Don for your responses and the new thread. I have posted some examples with my other thoughts on composition.
@rey - thank you! The principles are great, but I have to put them into practice as I haven't shot in a while. My 100-400 lens is still out for repairs. As my friends say, I need to get out more! hehe You're welcome Enrique. I think you just hit the nail in the head. Knowing all the fundamentals and principles to create great bird images doesn't cut it if you can't execute them. You need to practice a lot and practice some more before your images gets better. I have observed that most of us have to go out in the field and shoot thousands upon thousands of photos with the invaluable guidance and constructive criticism from Mastah Romy before the images we create became better. Funny thing is, we thought the earlier images we created were so great that we were so proud of them showing them to our peers and to our friends. "Ignorance is truly bliss" but there's got to be a time when you have to wake up to reality and listen to people when they say you're photos are horrible hahaha. Thanks Mastah Romy for showing us the light.
By the way, did I forget to say that you have to learn to Post Process too.
|
|
|
Post by mantarey on Oct 19, 2010 0:10:00 GMT
@edu You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? ;D Kidding aside Edu, we actually learn from our peers and mostly from mentors if we're fortunate enough to have one, so we can create better photographs so our photos don't remain revolting even to our own taste. That's the main difference between the two, our peers/friends wants to be and remain our friends so they're very careful not to hurt our feelings by critiquing our work, a mentor wants us to learn and get better in what we do and not necessarily interested to be our friend.
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 19, 2010 5:09:45 GMT
The photo oddly lacks symmetry! The eye is smack in the center, but it is a pleasing composition, at least for me. These are beautiful photographs. They are pleasing subjects, I certainly like the frontal view. As for the composition, to me, it just depends on the photographer (you) and what message you want to highlight. You want to emphasize a certain part of the subject and use narrow DOF, that's great. Use the center and move away from the rule of thirds (symmetric or not), great. I mean what you wanna do with your subject, in part or in whole, up close, sharp or soft, there's just so much you can do. It's all subjective and dependent on what you want to portray. Some want finer details and lock in f/8 or f/11, some want true motion and will slow down the shutter speed. There's just so many choices. I do as many as I can and love every minute of it, I won't scratch my head and pause though of what others will think of it. I have published images that I never thought photo editors would choose. In my mind, I ask myself, really, you like that image? Because it would not have been my first choice. At any rate, there are "fundamentals" in photography that you applied here that are objective and not subjective in nature (e.g. composition opinions). Your command of these three elements in the triangle (shutter, ISO, and aperture) and your ability to switch to these settings to create a perfect exposure for your taste, in my mind, is one of the true measures of your skill level. How you compose, what you want to portray, and how others take it though -- is simply subjective. And like all opinions, like armpits, everybody has one. -Don
|
|
|
Post by alainpascua on Oct 19, 2010 5:11:08 GMT
This forum has been notorious though in praising every photo that has been posted. Though it may foster lasting goodwill and harmony, we wont know where we are in terms of our photography. How I wish though that this forum speaks out the truth. Well, well, well! We're coming to the bottom of it! Is it time we call a spade a spade? Are we all ready to face the truth? Can we handle harsh remarks and straight-forward critiques, and still post our pictures herein? Are we ladies and gentlemen enough not to strike back at others just because the photographer behind the pictures gave ours a very strong criticism? Say YES, my dear fellows, and off we go! Sometimes it's not the critique, the remarks, the criticisms, the comments that hurt and offend one person, it's often the way such is made that makes it revolting. Oh how we want to kill someone for giving statements as if he/she is the perfect and best photographer of all times! Though we essentially agree to what he/she talks about, we, however, abhor the way and the method he/she brings his/her message across... Can we separate the message from the messenger, or can we modify the way we say things so that feelings may not be hurt? For friends in this Forum, the deeper the friendship, the wider is the scope of understanding. We can tolerate whatever criticisms may be given by our friends because we know our friends would want our works to be better, to be perfect. But how about newbies, new members, new recruits whose sensitivity is as shallow as balloon which can easily burst. We tolerate them, we care for them, we nurture them... But of course if a new member comes barging in in this forum and throws comments like a lecturing mentor, all knowing and all perfect as though... that's another case, we will sure gang up on him/her! So, are we now ready?
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 19, 2010 5:19:52 GMT
Nice jolting thread ... This is when a genius is discovered most of the time. He becomes a genius when he deviates from a norm and almost everybody agrees and appreciates the deviation. It becomes the genius' signature if he/she deviates often and consistently getting positive responses. The problem sometimes though is when no one agrees with the deviation. One could be in a wrong forum. Or the wrong era. The greatest artists were rejects of their time. Vincent Van Gogh only sold one or two paintings, and someone just told him to quit. Degas, Monet, Manet, Renoir, the list goes on. Perhaps a general critique forum needs to be opened up if people want advise on what they could do better. -Don
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 19, 2010 5:33:37 GMT
Good point. I remember back in the days of bulletin board systems, there were people that I thought were rude online. But once we did meetings and group activities, they were the nicest people I've met.
It's the nature of the beast, it's online, you don't get to see facial expressions. A group having a typical cup of coffee at Starbucks may have lengthy discussions about topics and it will sound normal and fun because you get to see people's faces. But you translate that discussion into text it may sound awkward, sometimes rude, etc.
Just the limitations of this online era we live in.
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Oct 19, 2010 6:05:13 GMT
This forum has been notorious though in praising every photo that has been posted. Though it may foster lasting goodwill and harmony, we wont know where we are in terms of our photography. How I wish though that this forum speaks out the truth. Well, well, well! We're coming to the bottom of it! Is it time we call a spade a spade? Are we all ready to face the truth? Can we handle harsh remarks and straight-forward critiques, and still post our pictures herein? Are we ladies and gentlemen enough not to strike back at others just because the photographer behind the pictures gave ours a very strong criticism? Say YES, my dear fellows, and off we go! Sometimes it's not the critique, the remarks, the criticisms, the comments that hurt and offend one person, it's often the way such is made that makes it revolting. Oh how we want to kill someone for giving statements as if he/she is the perfect and best photographer of all times! Though we essentially agree to what he/she talks about, we, however, abhor the way and the method he/she brings his/her message across... Can we separate the message from the messenger, or can we modify the way we say things so that feelings may not be hurt? For friends in this Forum, the deeper the friendship, the wider is the scope of understanding. We can tolerate whatever criticisms may be given by our friends because we know our friends would want our works to be better, to be perfect. But how about newbies, new members, new recruits whose sensitivity is as shallow as balloon which can easily burst. We tolerate them, we care for them, we nurture them... But of course if a new member comes barging in in this forum and throws comments like a lecturing mentor, all knowing and all perfect as though... that's another case, we will sure gang up on him/her! So, are we now ready? I am not Seriously ... not sure how we can do this Alain. I am not sure if I can accept criticisms from anyone who I think his/her photos are revolting! ;D
|
|
|
Post by mantarey on Oct 19, 2010 6:30:36 GMT
This forum has been notorious though in praising every photo that has been posted. Though it may foster lasting goodwill and harmony, we wont know where we are in terms of our photography. How I wish though that this forum speaks out the truth. Well, well, well! We're coming to the bottom of it! Is it time we call a spade a spade? Are we all ready to face the truth? Can we handle harsh remarks and straight-forward critiques, and still post our pictures herein? Are we ladies and gentlemen enough not to strike back at others just because the photographer behind the pictures gave ours a very strong criticism? Say YES, my dear fellows, and off we go! Sometimes it's not the critique, the remarks, the criticisms, the comments that hurt and offend one person, it's often the way such is made that makes it revolting. Oh how we want to kill someone for giving statements as if he/she is the perfect and best photographer of all times! Though we essentially agree to what he/she talks about, we, however, abhor the way and the method he/she brings his/her message across... Can we separate the message from the messenger, or can we modify the way we say things so that feelings may not be hurt? For friends in this Forum, the deeper the friendship, the wider is the scope of understanding. We can tolerate whatever criticisms may be given by our friends because we know our friends would want our works to be better, to be perfect. But how about newbies, new members, new recruits whose sensitivity is as shallow as balloon which can easily burst. We tolerate them, we care for them, we nurture them... But of course if a new member comes barging in in this forum and throws comments like a lecturing mentor, all knowing and all perfect as though... that's another case, we will sure gang up on him/her! So, are we now ready? The big question my dear friend is that, are you ready to receive criticism and comments from someone who's just a beginner and doesn't have the capability yet to create good bird photographs. I have nothing against newbees all of us were at one time but I guess it's kinda hard to swallow a suggestion/comment from somebody who at this point in time in his pursuit of the hobby can't even create what we consider a decent keeper.
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 19, 2010 7:19:42 GMT
I've "post processed" my original post taking note of some sensitivities. I'm looking for a logical discussion and I fear there maybe some misunderstanding of my intent. My apologies if my message may have been misread.
My point is, composition is subjective and you should freely take photographs that fit what you want to convey. And yes, it's okay to put a subject in the center.
|
|
|
Post by donsausa on Oct 19, 2010 7:46:52 GMT
Push back, educate, share some more.
I'm sure everyone has taken some "bad" pictures, too blurry, overblown highlights, not sharp, etc -- but what makes them "great" photographs in the field of science is if it records an event that's never been recorded before.
We live in a country that's so bio-diverse that there's things changing everyday. Don't hold back even the "bad" pictures in your opinion, throw it at the experts.
|
|
|
Post by Toto Gamboa on Oct 19, 2010 8:18:28 GMT
Push back, educate, share some more. I'm sure everyone has taken some "bad" pictures, too blurry, overblown highlights, not sharp, etc -- but what makes them "great" photographs in the field of science is if it records an event that's never been recorded before. I am not sure about this. I do separate photography as an art as against photography for documentation. my personal rule is that, I only post images in the Wild Birds of the Philippines section primarily to get confirmation if my photos are pleasing to the eyes and not to please the scientist in us. So just like everyone else, when my pic isnt satisfactorily pleasing to my eyes, I also brand it as docu shots. if i get to please both photographers and scientist, much better. This is when we also get to determine what is the norm. Aside from setting the norm for great shots, there is also a norm for docu shots. The problem starts when some shots that closely resembles that of docushots (or worse botch shots) are regarded as some kind of genre (aka deviation from the norms). I do agree though that we all get bad shots. In my case though, I dont force myself in trying to post bad shots, unless perhaps it is the only pic i have of a rare bird. But I know when I have overblown my highlights, I know when I have screwed sharpness on critical parts of the bird, I know when cropping doesnt work. When my photo sucks, the photo simply goes straight to my PC's trash bin. I dont have to doubt myself and find out if others might like it.
|
|
|
Post by Lydia Robledo on Oct 19, 2010 9:09:53 GMT
What is this room? It is not a ladies' room, is it? Wow, the deliberations are loooong. Men, o men... You and I know that there are a lot of courtesy remarks in the forum. Encouraging one another is one skill that all of us should be sharp at before anything else. This is a great forum where we learn many things. Photography is CAPTURE. Whatever you capture is fine... just don't use the net. Whatever you shoot is fine, just don't use the gun. When you use the camera, be good at it, share and be happy. If you win a contest, celebrate! For the losers... there are no losers! The losers are those who do not even recognize the Master Creator of all the subjects he shoots. When one worships the created and not the Creator, when one has becomes a slave to his gears, that spells L.O. S.E.R. Shoot with joy, share with joy. Watch, teach, learn, have fun! No one is better than the one who is always happy and thankful for the gift of nature. Make every trip, every capture a worship to the one who said "Look at the birds of the air..." telyds in a happy mood, always in a happy mood
|
|