dark light

  • mixtec

composition tutorials

It seems all the books on photography cover all the technical details of film, lenses and exposure but I have never seen any books that actually teach you how to take professional quality photos, actually how to frame the area you are shooting the way photographers in magazines do so naturally. Can anyone recommend books or online tutorials on that?

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,269

Send private message

By: seahawk - 9th August 2005 at 16:46

Well for landscape, portrait or architekture there are many tutorials and books around.

And I find that guide from Nikon quite usefull for the beginner in aviation photography.

http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/feelnikon/cbp/cbp2-1e.htm

However that is no holy grail and the rules certain photosites are enforcing are surely no holy grail either.

Imho there are few simple rules to get better pictures :

1. If you are not paid for the shooting, every picture you like is a good picture.

2. Make up your mind, are you an aircraft spotter taking pictures, or a photographer shooting aircrafts.

3. Light and weather is very important. A boring side shot taken in sunlight around noon, is just a boring side shot taken at …. (you get thepoint) Add a late evening light and some fog, the same plane might look very different.

4. Beauty can lie in the detail, but detail can also be boring.

5. bad weather is not always bad

6. aircrafts in flight are moving subjects, show the movement

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

19,065

Send private message

By: Moggy C - 9th August 2005 at 15:27

Moggy’s tip.

Don’t restrict your thinking to 6 x 4.

Wide shots can be powerful.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,017

Send private message

By: paulc - 9th August 2005 at 15:07

another thing to consider is joining a photographic club in your area – you will find it worthwhile and will learn a lot.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

552

Send private message

By: David2386 - 9th August 2005 at 15:04

Creativity is something which I lack. I always favoured maths and science over English and art in school (particularly since in art no matter how hard I tried, I was always marked poorly)

My creativity used to extend as far as going slightly more than +4 with saturation…but as they say, experience is a beautiful thing and the more I play the more creative I become through accident.

Rule of thirds and your camera isn’t fixed 5ft10 above the ground are two good tips. Too often I have taken pictures across Loughs/Lochs/Lakes (delete as appropiate) with the horizon dead centred and half sea, half sky. Boring, akward, dead, lifeless…trying to spice it up I get lower and try to get some rocks on the shore in, maybe fill 2/3s with sea, helps to reinforce it going on and on, and finally reaching the sky. Throw in a sunset or moon light and it’s far more arty.

I was in Scotland over the weekend and took some interesting shots of Ailsa Craig (for those that know it) from along the coast, during sunset and then the clear blue skies on Sunday, as well as some hills and valleys. A few years ago I’d have taken them, subject centred, horizon in the midlle etc…and thought great. Of course now I still think great when I have made them look more creative when I take them again this year, but I have progressed and continue too. Criticise your own work, note the good points.

I studied media for two years for GCSE and learnt some things that help along the way. If you want to be creative I think you have to look at the connotation as opposed the denotation. Think beyond what you see with your eyes, don’t see a hill, a field and clouds, see a landscape, fluffy white clouds, all the colours of Skittle sweets etc..

I took some shots of trucks at a truckshow from down low, to make them look tall, imposing, powerful, as they are. It was made even better by the dark grey clouds giving it more character. If I had shot from my eye level, it’s just another picture to me. Shoot from above looking down and it looks small, insignifcation and vulnerable (not referring to trucks, but things in general).

Yes, I know I know, I talk rubbish 😀 What’s more worrying is I haven’t been drinking, totally sober when writing this.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,646

Send private message

By: JDK - 9th August 2005 at 12:59

I’m nowhere near the greatest photog here, but I do know some of the theory, so I’ll bang up some pics for example. Not the greatest, but these were to hand.

Pic one is ‘the record shot’ Two – I moved in (to the fence) and got down (through the fence) three – waited for the sun – you can (I hope!) see the improvement in ‘interest’ in the photo.

The other thing is to ‘tell a story’. The chocks shot is the sort of little item that Magazine designers love; really adds to a feature.

I add the final P-40 shot as an example of get in close & stay alive.

How did I get there? Being sensible, asking nicely, hanging around, getting to know people. That was the first step. Second is decent kit. Third is taking the pic. Fourth is making sure you thank those that burned petrol for you with a shot. You want to be invited back, don’t you? 😀

HTH.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

2,569

Send private message

By: BlueRobin - 9th August 2005 at 12:50

If they’re still being repeated, catch the “Photo of Britain” series on BBC4.

Situation and being in the right place at the right time helps composition immensely imho.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,646

Send private message

By: JDK - 9th August 2005 at 12:45

I think the best ‘creative’ tip I was ever given is “You camera isn’t fixed 5’10” from the ground.”

Most subjects can be taken better by moving your feet and taking the pic from higher or lower. Don’t be afraid to hijack a platform or grovel on the ground; go in close with a wide angle, or get right back with a tele.

Look at press shots in your local free paper ect. Note how they’ve made a ‘boring’ subject interesting by getting in close, taking an unusual angle.

I’d say the posts above are a great start. The rule of thirds or the golden rule is something covered in many art theory books. Get a good one from the library.

One last point, with aircraft, your subject can kill you. Don’t die trying to get the perfect shot – you aren’t a war reporter!

Cheers!

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

1,017

Send private message

By: paulc - 9th August 2005 at 09:32

Often a judge at a photographic society I belong to will comment on an image as ‘well seen’ – to me this means that the author has perhaps seen something unusual in what might be an everyday scene / object or by adding a touch of their own creativity have made something ordinary just that little bit different.

Would agree with all LesB comments regarding horizons / thirds / space to move into etc and are fine as guidelines but if by being creative these are ignored then that equally is ok (and is to be encouraged)

Remember that you take photographs for your own pleasure / benefit – no one else.

If you want your pictures to be looked at (and commented upon) by other photographers then the photosig website is quite good.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

681

Send private message

By: LesB - 9th August 2005 at 08:50

mixtec

You really won’t see such info in books. You can find any amount of tutorial texts that purport to “teach” you how to “see” photo opportunities and framing and composing subjects, but all of them discount the basic fact that it’s a thing you either can do or can’t – it’s called creativity.

Best way is to go to Art College for three years. A cheaper way is to study the images produced by others. Take note of what you find pleasing in their “look”. Things like differences of approach (shooting angles, etc), framing techniques, creative cropping, image subject balance, the “thirds” rule, etc. These, and many more aspects, are what makes a “good” photo. Some people can do it without thinking, others need to work at it. By working at it I mean, take plenty of pictures, analyse them, study them, develope an eye for an image and hone this over a few years.

A tip I’ll give is that in any pic showing a horizontally moving object (train, plane, car or ship) always try to leave more space in front of the object than behind (no centralising for example). In my old Art College days this was called “Leaving space for the subject to move into”. For some reason the brain regards this trick favourably resulting in a “pleasing” composition. Fortunately this can be best accomplished in photography at the processing stage when deciding on a crop area.

Consider Damien’s pix. The impact of those comes from his imaginative cropping of a few selected images out of probably hundreds. The pix we see posted here are those that are pleasing to Damien, luckily his application of creativity in that area is pleasing to most of us as well, bordering on the dramatic at times. And that’s why Damien’s such a fine photog, it’s not just his kit (which helps of course :rolleyes: )

Another tip is not to have the horizon cut the image in half. Again, this makes the picture look awkward somehow when there is equal amounts of sky and ground. This is particularly evident in photos taken on airfields but can usually be sorted at the processing/cropping stage. Try to keep the horizon in the lower third of the image if the shot allows it.

There’s stacks more in this area and I’m sure there will be other replies to your query but don’t forget, you can’t just adopt (or download) someone else’s style, you have to develope your own from asiduous practice and the study of others.

Doubt this helps, but there you go! 😉

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

10,347

Send private message

By: SOC - 8th August 2005 at 23:42

While I don’t have tremendous amounts of experience, I will be posting some basic tutorials here covering the things I’ve managed to master relatively well through a lot of trial and error. Stay tuned!

Sign in to post a reply