Composition and Photo Journalism
Do compositional rules, like the rule of thirds, apply to journalistic photographs or is capturing the moment more important?
Bret
Loc: Dayton Ohio
Get the shot....and let the editors sort it out later.
Rules are meant to be bent or broken. But I would think that the basics of good composition would apply to any time you need a Wow photo, especially one that will tell a story. Whether the way the photo was captured in the first place (the ideal) or if it benefits from post processing.
Yes, composition and rule of thirds still count in photojournalism.
At least that is what we were told in PJ school.
However, 20 years ago when I was shooting for a daily paper in upstate NY, I had an editor who was an idiot. He would crop images so much that all the drama, emotion, and style were left on the cutting room floor.
I still get miffed when I think of all my great shots he trashed.
Moles
Loc: South Carolina
Sure, it applies, but often you don't have time to do anything but capture the action. Editors can't always have exactly what they want, they have to publish what they have.
Mr PC wrote:
Rules are meant to be bent or broken. But I would think that the basics of good composition would apply to any time you need a Wow photo, especially one that will tell a story. Whether the way the photo was captured in the first place (the ideal) or if it benefits from post processing.
well said!
There is no such thing as the rule of thirds, it is a guide that can be and should often be broken. However, as with any notions of composition, yes they apply.
Some of the great photojournalistic shots are great because they not only tell the story, but the composition of the photograph is also great and helps in every way to convey that story.
All concepts of doing photography always apply yet circumstances may necessitate deviating from best practices.
PJ often takes place during the rush of events in which almost any image that captures the moment or part of it will do to convey interest and understanding as an adjunct to text.
As a wordless medium of human expression, no photograph tells a story in the conventional sense.
The movie "Close Up" is about a photo that had a murder going on in the back ground. Rule of thirds would have lost that part of the image!!! A street shot includes the smells and experience of all that is going on and puts the viewer on that street in that moment of time.
Shakey
Loc: Traveling again to Norway and other places.
Yes and no. The photo editor's task is to select photo's that convey mood, raise emotion in the reader, or match the agenda of the newspaper. All newspapers and magazines have an agenda that advertisers can support. That agenda may be political or economic or teaching a subject that appeals to the reader. Obvious examples are photos of the President: attractive in Democratic newspapers, anything but attractive in Republican newspapers. That's the way of the world. As a photo-journalist you always set out to capture what the editor needs, not what you think is a great photo. Plus, unless the photo is truly outstanding, the editor will only have so much space to spare for a photo. That's why editors will hack your photos around and destroy your original concept. Yes, I've been there and wept, too.
The Rule of Thirds is in reality just a Suggestion of Thirds, every photo and situation is different never more so then in photojournalism.
Plus for publications like newspapers an editor will likely crop a photo anyway to fill a space they have.
Doesn't matter if your prize winning shot works best as a horizontal, they have a vertical space to fill...your shot is being cropped into a vertical.
I don't think you have ever worked on a newspaper!
The editorial pages are separate from the ad pages. There is a wall.
Shakey wrote:
Yes and no. The photo editor's task is to select photo's that convey mood, raise emotion in the reader, or match the agenda of the newspaper. All newspapers and magazines have an agenda that advertisers can support. That agenda may be political or economic or teaching a subject that appeals to the reader. Obvious examples are photos of the President: attractive in Democratic newspapers, anything but attractive in Republican newspapers. That's the way of the world. As a photo-journalist you always set out to capture what the editor needs, not what you think is a great photo. Plus, unless the photo is truly outstanding, the editor will only have so much space to spare for a photo. That's why editors will hack your photos around and destroy your original concept. Yes, I've been there and wept, too.
Yes and no. The photo editor's task is to select p... (
show quote)
ole sarg wrote:
I don't think you have ever worked on a newspaper!
The editorial pages are separate from the ad pages. There is a wall.
Exactly. There is a definite wall. However, ad placement does affect photographs when it comes to design. As a photo editor, I work with the designer to compromise so that my photographers composition isn't hatched and to protect the journalistic integrity of the image. Making a newspaper is a very sloppy process.
Jer
Loc: Mesa, Arizona
I agree. What most people don't understand is that photojournalist always composes. Composition always adds to the shot.I don't understand why people I think we don't compose, we do. However, what the editor does to us is a different story.
jkaye65 wrote:
Yes, composition and rule of thirds still count in photojournalism.
At least that is what we were told in PJ school.
However, 20 years ago when I was shooting for a daily paper in upstate NY, I had an editor who was an idiot. He would crop images so much that all the drama, emotion, and style were left on the cutting room floor.
I still get miffed when I think of all my great shots he trashed.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.