Advanced Composition Article

I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
found on my web site at:

http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm

I apologize in advance, but the navigation system on my web site does
not yet link to this article. I am not going to alter the navigation
system until I am sure that such articles are of value to my web site
visitors. If you leave this article to visit the rest of my site and
wish to return to the article, you will need to add the page to the
favorites section in your browser or use the back button to return to
the article.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com

Didn't have time for a full read, but a skim, along with looking at the
images (most of which are very good examples) indicated that it is nice
work - well done. It's nice to see a bit more in-depth coverage than
is frequently offered, along with some of the psychology involved in
choosing a particular composition or style. To me the definition of a
great image is one which imparts emotional impact.. so I like your
approach. (O:

On 4 Jul 2005 20:51:05 -0700, in
.com, "ron"
said:

I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
of value, and would you like to see future articles?

I enjoyed reading your article & liked your choices in example photos.
Do please continue the series.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

ron wrote:
I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the
article of value, and would you like to see future articles?

Ron,

Yes, I would like to see more in the series, please. Your ideas gave me
food for thought, and the examples illustrated your points well.

Cheers,
David

4 Jul 2005 20:51:05 -0700 skrev ron:
I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will

I find the article interesting. Haven't have time yet to read it
carefully, but what I have read this far is of value to me. I'm not a
very experienced 'picture-taker' (dare not to call my self a
photographer...), and am looking around the 'net from time to time to
get information along the lines you provide. Unfortunately, most of what
you can find out there are just technical (read: equipment bashing?)

So, your article, which focus solely on what it is all about - good
images - is a nice break.

Please, continue the series!

And thanks for the first article!

--
Mandus - the only mandus around.

"ron" wrote:

I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article.

http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm

Sorry to be a spoil-sport; your photos are very good but your ex-post-facto
intellectualizing about them is just so much artsy-fartsy BS. Too many
artists delight in ascribing deep philosophical underpinnings to works
which actually had been instinctive and intuitive, or simply happy
accidents.

Composition "rules" will not help photographers who have no basic artistic
sensibilities. At best, such rules may help them avoid their worst
mistakes. Owning a computer does not automatically turn you into a
programmer, and simply owning a camera does not make a photgrapher.

In my book, a photographer is an artist who uses a camera... and the art
comes first. Study art, not photography.

--
Anti-Spam address: my last name at his dot com
Charles Gillen -- Reston, Virginia, USA

I found the article useful. The photos are very nice and, although this
does not relate to composition, I would be interested in a summary of the
exposure information for each.

--
Remove -NOSPAM- to contact me.

Ron,
The article is good. I've saved it for future reference.
I would appreciate the opportunity to read more articles in this series.
Thank, Jack

"ron" wrote in message
oups.com...
I have written part one of an article on advanced composition. I would
like your opinion on the article. Particularly, do you find the article
of value, and would you like to see future articles? If so, I will
complete the additional parts of this article and, over time, prepare
other articles to be made available on my web site. The article can be
found on my web site at:

http://ronbigelow.com/articles/adv_comp/adv_comp.htm

I apologize in advance, but the navigation system on my web site does
not yet link to this article. I am not going to alter the navigation
system until I am sure that such articles are of value to my web site
visitors. If you leave this article to visit the rest of my site and
wish to return to the article, you will need to add the page to the
favorites section in your browser or use the back button to return to
the article.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com

I would have thought calling someone's work artsy-fartsy Bull**** (why
hide the words?) is pretty rude.

Too many artists delight..
Nice generalisation - based on what exactly, other than your own
perceptions? And you therefore apply this to the OP on what basis?

..in ascribing deep philosophical underpinnings..
So there is no such thing as philosophical underpinnings? Or are
'deep' ones particularly unpleasant?

.. to works which actually had been instinctive and intuitive, or simply
happy accidents.
So, 'happy accidents' should be enough for anyone, I suppose - we
shouldn't try to learn why it was 'happy'? What do you mean,
'instinctive and intuitive'? Does that mean *you* like them? Why,
exactly, do you like them? What, exactly, is the problem in trying to
determine *why* something works? How about things like shooting down
at a subject to indicate a position of superiority - is that purely
instinctual and doesn't need explanation? As a person who teaches
photography, I spend a lot of time on composition, because the clients
*want* it, *enjoy* it, and some of the most frequently asked questions
are - "Why didn't this work?" and "how could I have done better here?".
When we go through some of these issues, I can watch the little lights
turning on in their heads - "Aha - I will know what to do next time!"
Getting exposure right is pretty easy, but making a picture work does
NOT require you to be an 'artist', who somehow just *knows*. And you
can learn and apply these concepts, and they make a lot more sense if
you look at what is behind them, or in your words, the 'deep
philosophical underpinnings'..

And what *do* you learn when you study art, pray tell? Shall I drag
out some of the syllabus topics that discuss exactly the issues the OP
is outlining..? Or more to the point, why don't you actually point out
which bits are bull****, and which bits are useless, so the reasons for
your attitude can be discussed. It sounds rather like trolling,
frankly.

I agree with you. It is interesting to read some of Galen Rowell's
writings about how poor his first attempts at photography turned out,
and how he studied and practiced to improve his photos. Later on, I am
sure everything was pretty instinctual to him when he produced his
images. However, his writings make it clear that he didn't start out
that way. If Mr. Rowell can do it, so can some of us.

Ron Bigelow
http://ronbigelow.com