jim quist Loc: Missouri

My eyes go straight to the empty space in the middle. The second photos are nice

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Yikes, that is not good - lol. Thanks so much, Jim.

Snap Shot Loc: California

Not leaving well enough alone, I would have colored the bird in the second photo!

photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA

I favor 1 because it has the most contrast Linda.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

A fun idea, Bill, and why not?! Thanks so much for your visit

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thank you very kindly for your time and comments, Karin.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Having the bird "looking out of the frame" doesn't bother me - I guess I figure the view over there is just as boring as the view the other direction. I guess that is just another way of saying that I personally find the whole thing to be boring - too much nothing, not enough anything, no color and lots of area of no contrast.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I enjoyed your gentle lead-in to the hammer drop, rehess Thanks so much for your time and opinion.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I really hate to express an opinion like that since I am a self-admitted non-artist, so I miss some things that are totally obvious to someone who has the least artistic bent.

added: you've seen enough of my stuff to know that sometimes I break a rule simply because I didn't know the rule was there.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I appreciated your honesty! You are more a documentary photographer, and I respect that. Even more, I respect and admire that you understand the difference between opinion and the "Great Truths" we sometimes hear

(edit - the comment on page 1 of this topic about "rules" of composition being more about suggestions/guidelines is worth considering)

Cwilson341 Loc: Central Florida

To me this seems to be a bit of a test. It isn't a simple yes or no question. I decided to form my thoughts without reading what has already been written. I think I prefer the second version. It seems a little smoother or softer than one. There is also a bit of a painterly feel. I like the composition - what there is of it. For me, it feels like there is a missing middle. The two stalks are fine but they seem to have their backs turned to each other with a void between them. I feel like something needs to tie the two sides together - a third stalk, overlapping leaves, something. I do not mind that the bird is looking out of the frame, I think because he is not close to the edge and he is just one element of the overall. My thought processes aren't particularly artistic so I may have it all wrong!

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

There is no right or wrong, Carol, only reactions and opinions

One other person mentioned the empty middle as being a negative, and I very much like your description of "backs turned." That makes a good visual for me to help understand your pov.

Thank you so much for your detailed and thoughtful feedback. It's great to receive such diverse and interesting responses.

tbell7D Loc: Houston

Linda, I first have to say this is not a photo that I would have taken. And I must admit, it took some effort to decide what it was that I liked about it. As for composition, I do like the fact that the two sunflowers seem to be positioned back to back. And the limbs of each one bending in opposite directions adds some degree of balance. And the bird is such a small part of the image that I think the image would not suffer if the bird were not there at all. Of the three you posted, I like the second best, because I generally do not like pure white, or nearly white backgrounds. Kind of hard to critique a photo that I would not have taken. As for breaking the "rules" of composition, I'm going to let you off with a warning this time, but if this happens again, I may have to call the composition police.

G_Manos Loc: Bala Cynwyd, PA

I guess I'm the odd man out, since I like #3 in terms of contrast (or rather, lack of it). As to composition, you surely are breaking the rules! I agree that, with the stalk on the right in the picture, it's hard to figure out what the message is, and what that stalk has to do with it. I/O/W the right stalk adds little if anything to the scene. Like others, I'd crop it out and compose what's left. I also agree that there are no rules, as such, but there are guides - the rule of thirds being one. It seems to work much of the time.

As to the contrast aspect: technically, it's a really good photograph. However, as to message, it's mixed. With the stalk on the right cropped out, however, now there is just the bird sitting on the (whatever that is . . .). So then, what is that about? Whiting out the whole scene and making the context less specific produces a dreamy effect that lets the viewer's mind wander to what the bird in a sea of white is doing there.

The last two pics you posted go off in a different direction completely, no comment on those.

It's great that these kinds of discussions can go on. Keep 'em coming!

-George-

Elliern Loc: Myrtle Beach, SC

You should have posed the question....how many rules were broken 😄😄?

I did like the contrast, details and textures in #1 and #2.

Oddly, I preferred #1 in the download, but #2 as it appeared before the download. I tried to figure out why that was, but still don't know that answer.

I really liked the left side of the image. Not sure what was to the left in the scene, but it might have worked with the bird looking either out of or into the frame.

Overall I found it slightly uncomfortable viewing the image. I could not figure out the 'story' nor the subject. My eye kept going back and forth from left to right. It was difficult focusing on the image as a whole.

I must say you do make us think, Linda. I love how your creative and artistic mind works when you view a scene. You see or imagne things I might never notice, or I would see them last, or discount them completely. That is one of the readons you are an artist, and I will never be. 😊