- This topic is empty.
Technically Correct vs. Composition
-
I’ve been thinking about this for a while now and the question stemmed from a shot that was taken of me a while ago by Ciaran – Thorsten knows the one…and i hope it’s still one of your favs :)
The majority of the time i prefer a technically correct shot – don’t we all.That said i find that with shots that are extremely well composed i’m taken away from any fundamental technical flaws that the shot may have. As a result, i appreciate it just as much (if not more) than a shot that is technically correct but lacks composition, emotions, creativity, flair etc.
In the recent fashion thread it was stated that a shot needs a little it of both to succeed…but does it really? Personally i feel that alot of us are caught up in the technical merits of shots. I would rather see a well composed and technically poor shot, than a technically correct and poorly composed shot. Would be very interested in hearing your views on this.
The technical side of the shot could either be by design or chance. I’m sure we’ve all over/underexposed for an effect. The blown out fashion shot or underexposed sunset etc.
One of my most viewed shots is technically apalling, it was a quick snap of a moment in time. I love it anyway :)
Si
I am pro but again the picture has to have some technical quality.
I preffer not perfect technical photo and done against some rules of composition but with emotion and creativity vs. perfect photo done by rules but ’empty’.
I look any photos as picture of art (except photos of fact).Ali wrote:
I’ve been thinking about this for a while now and the question stemmed from a shot that was taken of me a while ago by Ciaran – Thorsten knows the one…and i hope it’s still one of your favs :)
Sure is!
Ali wrote:
The majority of the time i prefer a technically correct shot – don’t we all.That said i find that with shots that are extremely well composed i’m taken away from any fundamental technical flaws that the shot may have. As a result, i appreciate it just as much (if not more) than a shot that is technically correct but lacks composition, emotions, creativity, flair etc.
I’m of the opinion that composition is as much a technical skill as exposure and focusing. In fact, elsewhere on this site Ciaran has reinforced that line of thinking by illustrating the underlying science of composition (golden mean, fibonacci numbers, etc.).
Furthermore, it is only by the correct application of the technical elements of photography, whether by accident or by design, that one can create an appealing image. How one uses light, shape and form in an image determines the final outcome of the image. One way of looking at this is if one was to think of new or inexperienced photographers as children. Children haven’t yet learned the “rules and regulations” of life, so will regularly come up with creative ideas on different things that us adults would not have bothered with because they don’t “conform”. Similarly, I often find that less experienced photographers aren’t constrained by the technical aspects of photography and therefore tend to let their imaginations run riot without regard to technical issues and this can often be the makings of a great image.
Ali wrote:
In the recent fashion thread it was stated that a shot needs a little it of both to succeed…but does it really? Personally i feel that alot of us are caught up in the technical merits of shots. I would rather see a well composed and technically poor shot, than a technically correct and poorly composed shot. Would be very interested in hearing your views on this.
Hmm, I’m not so sure about this – I can’t say I’ve ever seen images at either of these extreme’s, so it’s difficult to imagine what my opinion would be.
Allinthemind wrote:
One of my most viewed shots is technically apalling, it was a quick snap of a moment in time. I love it anyway :)
Si
I think you’re being too hard on yourself. I think this shot has a lot going for it, both technically and aesthetically. Some of these “appalling” technical elements are what make this shot so appealing, for example the grain/noise and the high contrast. I think it’s a bad example to illustrate your argument :wink:
Hey y’all
For me creativity and composition win hands down all the time,the technical aspect can be fixed later in PS(sometimes) allthough you cannot expect to turn back time to re-compose your subject(s) to that moment where your brain tells you to fire the shutter! Nor can a fleeting moment where you just happen to have a camera in hand see the shot but dont have time to fool around with the white balance etc.
Digital has given us that allowance now to get the ratio’s wrong and allow us a greater margin to regain lost info from either shadow or highlights and still manage to save the shot, where as with film maybe two stops over and above and there is little comeback.
Ben 8)ben wrote:
Hey y’all
For me creativity and composition win hands down all the time,the technical aspect can be fixed later in PS(sometimes) allthough you cannot expect to turn back time to re-compose your subject(s) to that moment where your brain tells you to fire the shutter! Nor can a fleeting moment where you just happen to have a camera in hand see the shot but dont have time to fool around with the white balance etc.
Digital has given us that allowance now to get the ratio’s wrong and allow us a greater margin to regain lost info from either shadow or highlights and still manage to save the shot, where as with film maybe two stops over and above and there is little comeback.
Ben 8):? :shock:
Really intersting thread Ali. I’m not as technically minded as others here (we’re not worthy, we’re not worthy!!!) but I do teach the basics to many people. I’m forever pointing out the bits, both technical and compositional, that my students need to keep in mind when trying to take a good shot. But as I tell them regularly ‘you have to know the rules before you can break them’.
At the end of the day I look at a shot with my stomach (I know, sounds strange). If a shot is good for me I get this feeling that’s purely emotional, like a kick. I know the technicals and I know what I like. My stomach goes for the latter even if the former isn’t completely up to scratch, and Ciaran’s shot fits that bill for me. I manage to take one of these types of shots once in a blue moon, if I’m lucky.
This is another great thread to set people thinking.
One question that might offer another perspective on the topic is “Who do we shoot for?” (Should be “For whom..”, but I’m less pedantic nowadays. lol)
If we shoot to sell then we really need to aim at the highest levels of technical correctness AND composition. Any compromise of either or anything less will usually get rejected – especially by stock libraries and magazines.
If we shoot for our own pleasure then there are many situations where we can relax the rules. One situation where I find this is in my own love for travel photography. I visit many places which are pleasing to the eye but there isn’t really a good photo to be captured at that spot. I shoot something anyway, making the best I can of the scene, as I want a memoir of the location for my own private interest and pleasure. I feel it would be a loss to walk on and shoot nothing just because there wasn’t an outstanding photo to be captured.
I would strongly recommend, however, that we don’t relax our standards too much or too often and make things like this an overused excuse.
Just my ?0.02
BertieWooster wrote:
I feel it would be a loss to walk on and shoot nothing just because there wasn’t an outstanding photo to be captured.
Hey Bertie, can you talk to my gf? :-) She’s always giving out that I take too many photos when we’re on holiday. Bringing her round to your way of thinking would make things easier for me :lol: :D
davenewt wrote:
Hey Bertie, can you talk to my gf?
This is one of the best offers I’ve got since I signed up here. This place just keeps getting better and better! Thanks, Dave.
lol :-)
Ali, I agree with you on your preference for composition over technical. I have always had a lot of respect for shots that are perfectly composed even if they have technical flaws and composition is the area that I need to work on most.
My mother took 3 shots of an old mill/bridge and entered them in a local photography competition about 20 years ago and won 1st. and 3rd. prize. My dad had to set the camera up for her as she doesnt know the first thing about aperture values and shutter speeds but she has a wicked eye for composition. We can all learn the technical aspects of photography over time if we have the interest and we can learn a certain amount about composition too but “a wicked eye for composition” is a gift and something to be cherished.
Its just a pity I didnt inherit that from my mother. :wink:
Thorsten wrote:
ben wrote:
Hey y’all
For me creativity and composition win hands down all the time,the technical aspect can be fixed later in PS(sometimes) allthough you cannot expect to turn back time to re-compose your subject(s) to that moment where your brain tells you to fire the shutter! Nor can a fleeting moment where you just happen to have a camera in hand see the shot but dont have time to fool around with the white balance etc.
Digital has given us that allowance now to get the ratio’s wrong and allow us a greater margin to regain lost info from either shadow or highlights and still manage to save the shot, where as with film maybe two stops over and above and there is little comeback.
Ben 8):? :shock:
:roll: :roll: :roll:
Ali wrote:
In the recent fashion thread it was stated that a shot needs a little it of both to succeed…but does it really? Personally i feel that alot of us are caught up in the technical merits of shots. I would rather see a well composed and technically poor shot, than a technically correct and poorly composed shot. Would be very interested in hearing your views on this.
Spot on ALi,say in your field an editor would be much more likely to comment on the athmosphere or mood of the image rather than get hung up on the technical ability,as i would presume he/she would have left this for you to figure out. Even in my game i sold a portrait to a customer which in my eyes was not tecnically sound,but they loved it because i caught their actual expressions and they picked it out themselves. I refer to this as STUDIO BLINDNESS.. this is when you need to take a step back from it all and re-asess your direction.
Ben 8)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
