Composition questions/discussion: two subjects of equal importance? 1. I have no idea which is the primary subject here. Are they equal? Do the two cancel each other out, or is there...

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject here. Are they equal? Do the two cancel each other out, or is there interest in seeing them together?

Can you offer suggestions for successful compositions involving two subjects?

2. One concern I have with a simple composition involving the moon is it looks like could easily be a composite :) A problem?

3. Image #3 was shot first, from a slightly different location and time (moon moving quickly from left to right, setting). If you find more interest in this one, can you explain why please. Thank you!

(Download)

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Linda From Maine wrote:

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject her... (show quote)

Personally, I like the first one. I think each subject in the photo supports the other. In a way, the scene is a bit more dynamic.

If you were to post either of the two subjects, mountains or moon, positioned as they are, but without the other, the photograph would be less interesting.
--Bob

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

rmalarz wrote:

Personally, I like the first one. I think each subject in the photo supports the other. In a way, the scene is a bit more dynamic.

If you were to post either of the two subjects, mountains or moon, positioned as they are, but without the other, the photograph would be less interesting.
--Bob

Thank you, Bob. "More dynamic" - I can see that. Appreciate your time!

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Linda From Maine wrote:

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject her... (show quote)

Images #1 and #2 win...hands down!
Why! Both objects of interest, the moon and mountain, are encompassed by the eye in a single gance. (These statements apply, of course, to Normal Viewing Distance.) the differences attributable to color and brightness make nonevermind to me.

In #3 the gaze must shift from one to the other. To avoid that necessity, it must be viewed at greater than NVD.

Dave

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thanks so much, Dave! I greatly appreciate your time and viewpoint.

Uuglypher wrote:

Images #1 and #2 win...hands down!
Why! Both objects of interest, the moon and mountain, are encompassed by the eye in a single gance. (These statements apply, of course, to Normal Viewing Distance.) the differences attributable to color and brightness make nonevermind to me.

In #3 the gaze must shift from one to the other. To avoid that necessity, it must be viewed at greater than NVD.

Dave

rockdog Loc: Berkeley, Ca.

Linda From Maine wrote:

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject her... (show quote)

I like them all and wish I had these kind of choices. I'm not feeling any confusion about primary subject. I always enjoy views of the Cascades and Sierras from the east side. These are beautiful.
Phil

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

rockdog wrote:

I like them all and wish I had these kind of choices. I'm not feeling any confusion about primary subject. I always enjoy views of the Cascades and Sierras from the east side. These are beautiful.
Phil

Thank you so much, Phil! I am very thankful for the unique beauty of this area.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Linda From Maine wrote:

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject her... (show quote)

Bob and Dave have covered the bases. I do like the tones and haze in 3 though.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Frank2013 wrote:

Bob and Dave have covered the bases. I do like the tones and haze in 3 though.

Thank you very kindly, Frank.

carlysue Loc: Columbus

Interesting questions to ponder,Linda. question #1-I think the combination of the 2 objects in this instance makes the subject. One without the other has no impact.

Question #2 I'm not sure. Sometimes you just know its a composite and it still works. Othertimes, I'm disappointed that one enhanced the scene by dropping the moon/bird/younameit into the scene. When you are excited by a landscape, you really want to believe that it appeared just like it is shown.

Question#3 The rainbow of colors in the sky's haze add to the composition. It is gorgeous. But the B&W of #1 has the most drama & impact

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thanks so much for your time and input, Carla! Greatly appreciated.

Excellent point about being disappointed when learning a landscape is a composite after your initial excitement. That makes me think that seeing a single element added to a shot, as you suggest, is not nearly as "effective" for the pleasure of the viewer as seeing a creation - a complex and artistic composite of photographic (or graphic) art. A great subject for a new topic of discussion! Or here is fine too :)

Thanks again!

carlysue wrote:

Interesting questions to ponder,Linda. question #1... (show quote)

carlysue Loc: Columbus

Linda From Maine wrote:

Thanks so much for your time and input, Carla! Gre... (show quote)

I'd be interested in others' views on this. I see art images such as Jim Hill makes where objects/people are purposely placed into the scene and I am fascinated. It becomes more of a story. Then there are times that (e.g.)a bird flies into the scene at just the right spot and no one will believe that it happened because they see so much "contrived" scapes.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Linda From Maine wrote:

1. I have no idea which is the primary subject her... (show quote)

There needs to be something of interest. Drama. Not necessarily drama as in fireworks, a bomb going off, or a rhino attacking you, but something to keep the viewer awake.

Dig up a copy of "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico" and compare it to those three shots. Number 3 is the one that has similarities...

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

carlysue wrote:

I'd be interested in others' views on this. I see art images such as Jim Hill makes where objects/people are purposely placed into the scene and I am fascinated. It becomes more of a story. Then there are times that (e.g.)a bird flies into the scene at just the right spot and no one will believe that it happened because they see so much "contrived" scapes.

I was thinking about Jim Hill's wonderfully fanciful creations when I wrote back to you!

I was also later thinking about how cloning figures into the equation. I posted a shot to Photo Gallery taken at same time as these, where there were about 4 birds flying in front of the mountain. I mentioned that I added two more, but didn't feel I needed to say I had also deleted one (because it was just a "torpedo" shape) :)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Apaflo wrote:

There needs to be something of interest. Drama. Not necessarily drama as in fireworks, a bomb going off, or a rhino attacking you, but something to keep the viewer awake.

Dig up a copy of "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico" and compare it to those three shots. Number 3 is the one that has similarities...

Thoughts of comparing any facet of mine to Ansel's is mind boggling :) But thank you so much for your comments, Apaflo.

Your point about needing drama maybe also speaks to how much we are exposed (so to speak :) ) to the huge numbers of images on the internet, and how maybe it takes more to hold our interest.