Composition: effective use of negative space
Dec 31, 2017 07:20:37 #
CO wrote:
I did this quickly with a retouch brush in Nikon Capture NX2. I wanted to see how it would be without the poles. For better results I would have spent a lot more time with it and worked on it in Photoshop.
Never used Nikon Capture. Now I'm glad.
Dec 31, 2017 07:37:50 #
jcboy3 wrote:
Never used Nikon Capture. Now I'm glad.
This is pathetic. You don't have any other posts on this thread. Nothing for the OP's original question.
Dec 31, 2017 08:12:11 #
GENorkus wrote:
Linda, when I displayed a print of a "resting... (show quote)
I'm very glad you included this comment as a reminder of one of the many differences between fine art and commercial. And I see it's been discussed further in this topic. Thanks so much!
Dec 31, 2017 08:21:39 #
RichardTaylor wrote:
I think these two examples qualify for negative space.
(#1 is similar to Linda's deer photograph)
(#1 is similar to Linda's deer photograph)
Richard, thanks so much for posting. A subject as tiny and delicate as #2 most definitely shines when the background is soft and complimentary. Regarding #1, the article I linked at the bottom of page 6 has some excellent suggestions about "busy" negative space - pushing your eye to the subject, making it stand out and so forth. I don't get that same feeling of impact with the space around the racing vehicle.
With apologies for using my very modest deer shot to compare, mine perhaps has the additional aspect of making you feel the deer is nearly hidden in the tall weeds. To be more effective, though, I think I need an even wider view + less saturation on the green (make the subject pop out).
Dec 31, 2017 08:23:42 #
rdubreuil
Loc: Dummer, NH USA
Linda From Maine wrote:
Do you equate effective negative space in photography as only dark? Are there any in this thread or elsewhere where lighter colors work?
I would be inclined to say negative space is negative space regardless of color.
Dec 31, 2017 08:24:18 #
artBob wrote:
Negative space, in art, is the space around and between the subject(s) of an image. Negative space may be most evident when the space around a subject, not the subject itself, forms an interesting or artistically relevant shape, and such space occasionally is used to artistic effect as the "real" subject of an image.
Some examples: http://www.creativebloq.com/art/art-negative-space-8133765/2
Some examples: http://www.creativebloq.com/art/art-negative-space-8133765/2
Graphic design and logos - thank you for introducing another aspect!
Dec 31, 2017 08:27:04 #
Larrymc wrote:
Another Negative space entry
The grasses and tree are showcased by their position in the otherwise empty frame. A strong POV in my opinion. Your sunset watchers shot: two subjects - sky/cloud color + the people with a barrier of sorts - the trees - in the way. I feel there's too much going on for there to be effective negative space (which would be the water). If they were gazing across the ocean to that sky, then I would say you betcha!
Dec 31, 2017 08:29:17 #
jj56 wrote:
I did not know what "negative space" was until I posted this image on this forum and was commended for good use of negative space!
Had to look it up.....
Had to look it up.....
I see that others commented on this stunning shot further on the thread. The strongest "wowsa" point for me, among all the strong points, is the lack of defined horizon line. Thank you so much for this beautiful work.
Dec 31, 2017 08:30:38 #
Fotomacher wrote:
The negative space provides the area for the sailboat to move into.
Indeed it does. And allows us to imagine the long journey ahead, provides breathing room and a feeling of motion. Gorgeous color! Thanks so much for posting.
Dec 31, 2017 08:35:41 #
RichardQ wrote:
This photo (actually two negatives combined in the enlarger) incorporates empty space across the entire frame. Or does it? Do the cables criss-crossing the space negate my attempt to designate it an example of "negative space"?
Richard, you are such an accomplished artist, you need to tell us how it all works together
I think the visual and literal weight of the structures make them feel like they're floating, regardless of the wires. The composition has such great impact, I can't even put into words. The obvious reply with respect to the topic is there would be no image here without the negative space; it's all about that. But it's also all about the lines and angles. Please tell us more about your vision!
Dec 31, 2017 08:42:01 #
Thanks so much for joining the thread, db!
In #2 the scale is difficult to discern. If the trees in lower left are mature, we can get some sense, but they are hard to see. There are similar difficulties for those who have never stood in front of volcanoes (I'm in Washington State) or who try to take pictures of the Badlands. Without a person, or some other universally accepted element whose size we can relate to, it's a challenge.
With #1, I feel the subject is the entire scene (not just the tree, not just the land). Many landscapes are like that, and I love them. But I think to be defined as containing negative space, the story would have to be different, for example about a sole surving tree in a wider scene of distant landscape, one that shows devastation from the mining practices perhaps.
Just my opinion, please take all you read in all forums with a large grain of salt
In #2 the scale is difficult to discern. If the trees in lower left are mature, we can get some sense, but they are hard to see. There are similar difficulties for those who have never stood in front of volcanoes (I'm in Washington State) or who try to take pictures of the Badlands. Without a person, or some other universally accepted element whose size we can relate to, it's a challenge.
With #1, I feel the subject is the entire scene (not just the tree, not just the land). Many landscapes are like that, and I love them. But I think to be defined as containing negative space, the story would have to be different, for example about a sole surving tree in a wider scene of distant landscape, one that shows devastation from the mining practices perhaps.
Just my opinion, please take all you read in all forums with a large grain of salt
Dec 31, 2017 08:43:52 #
rdubreuil wrote:
I would be inclined to say negative space is negative space regardless of color.
Thanks much.
Dec 31, 2017 09:04:34 #
Probably not because the area around the main subject conveys a lot of information -- here, grassland. Negative space carries little if any information while still providing a compositional function.
Linda From Maine wrote:
Can areas with "stuff" be considered negative space? If yes, is this an effective use?
Dec 31, 2017 09:10:16 #
rdubreuil
Loc: Dummer, NH USA
Linda From Maine wrote:
I doubt that any photographer, no matter how accomplished will say they have learned all there is to know. And I agree with you, a journey of exploration and joy!
Thanks so much for the pics. #3 really speaks to me because of the receding dof, taking us on and on into the meadow. That feeling is supported by the negative space of the tall aspect.
Thanks so much for the pics. #3 really speaks to me because of the receding dof, taking us on and on into the meadow. That feeling is supported by the negative space of the tall aspect.
Thank you so much Linda
Dec 31, 2017 09:11:11 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Would be very grateful if you take on the task, Michael!
Linda:
Thanks for reading my reply and responding. I'd really have to think about an image of mine using negative space in the fashion you define (correctly). My use mainly is to isolate a subject from the background and frame but has no dynamic effect on flow or movement thru the image. I might be able to find some with a diagonal "blank" area. Usually I don't like that.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.