Rules of composition - rule of thirds, etc (Page 12): I posted the image because someone brought it up as an example of a striking photo that failed to follow the rules of thirds. I...

Burkley Loc: Park City

I posted the image because someone brought it up as an example of a striking photo that failed to follow the rules of thirds. I disagree and showed the picture to explain why. I didn’t give a thought that such a ubiquitous photo would offend on a photography site. The war casts a long shadow on all those involved or who even know those involved. There was no desire to shock or offend, only to look at composition.

Artists have been using rules of composition juxtaposed against unsettling content for centuries. For famous examples, Manet’s paintings like “Olympia” and “Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe,” or even earlier Gustav Courbet’s “The Origin of The World” are pictures that were considered scandalous at the time and are still unsettling images that obey many rules of artistic balance. If nudity offends don’t look them up.

User ID

Burkley wrote:

The famous shot of Phan Thị Kim Phúc, the napalm girl, roughly obeys the rule of 3rds. The row of soldiers in the background, the boy to the left is in the foreground and the girl and the other children in the mid ground. The kid to the left, the girl and a soldier and the kids to the right and 2 soldiers create the vertical thirds.

Theres nothing especially sacred about how the newsroom editor cropped this image over 50 yrs ago. His choice was dictated by page layout concerns. The semi-pano suggests that it might have run above several newspaper collumns.

(Download)

Burkley Loc: Park City

User ID wrote:

Theres nothing especially sacred about how a newsroom editor cropped this image over 50 yrs ago. His choice was dictated by page layout concerns. (The semi-pano suggests that it might have run above several narrow collumns).

Nick Ut was the Vietnamese American photographer working for the AP and LA Times. Here is his picture. Expand it to see the negative print. When comparing the cropped and original photos, thank you for making my point clearer.

User ID

EJMcD wrote:

I don't mean to offend you but that image (famous though it was) has always been disturbing to me. There are many more viewer friendly examples of the Rule of Thirds.

True as youve said, and that powerfully supports the choice of this image. It is verrrrrry clearly not a scenic landscape aimed at nit picking brain dead camera club judges or offered for "critique" by internet lemmings.

EJMcD

I would have preferred the scenic landscape or one of thousands or millions of other examples rather than that disturbing image. Don't understand why anyone would want to crop in on an image of a young child whose clothing and skin were burnt by napalm.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

EJMcD wrote:

I would have preferred the scenic landscape or one of thousands or millions of other examples rather than that disturbing image. Don't understand why anyone would want to crop in on an image of a young child whose clothing and skin were burnt by napalm.

EJMcD

burkphoto wrote:

The image is supposed to be disturbing. It illustrates the horror of war.

Vietnam was the first war covered extensively on TV and the first war photographed extensively in color. It was also the second major conflict after WWII that had no real value for American involvement other than building up our military-industrial complex. I lost two high school friends to that war.

I get that but why anyone would use that to demonstrate the Rule of Thirds on a photography forum is beyond me when there are countless other examples to be found. Maybe the fact that I am a US Army Veteran, Father to four children and Grandfather to 9, strikes me as a very unusual and disgusting addition to the topic.

sxrich

EJMcD wrote:

I get that but why anyone would use that to demonstrate the Rule of Thirds on a photography forum is beyond me when there are countless other examples to be found. Maybe the fact that I am a US Army Veteran, Father to four children and Grandfather to 9, strikes me as a very unusual and disgusting addition to the topic.

You're right......

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

EJMcD wrote:

I get that but why anyone would use that to demonstrate the Rule of Thirds on a photography forum is beyond me when there are countless other examples to be found. Maybe the fact that I am a US Army Veteran, Father to four children and Grandfather to 9, strikes me as a very unusual and disgusting addition to the topic.

I did two tours in-country. I was an aerial recconnance photograhic specialist but also did extensive combat documentation on the ground. Unfortunately, I can not "un-see" many of the tragic and gory events I witnessed and photographed. Those have their place, utility, and relevance in the also history and war-time photojournalism but not in a discussion of artistic elements.

At 78 years old and still a work photogher, I am fortunate enough not to suffer from PTSD. but grotesque imagery might trigger it.

Mostof my image from Vietnam remains in U.S.Army archives. What image I did take home- I donated them to various veterans organizations, VFW and JWV Legions, etc. I certainly did not want to show them to my kids, grandkids, or my wife.

I can say this- when I was shooting a "Tunnel Detection Run" from the door of a helicopter with incoming fire for the ground, the last thing to consider is the composition area anythig artistic. You have no time to fuss, the flight crew wants to "get the hell out of there" in record time! The same philosophy applies on the ground in dangerous circumstances.

All these arguments about composition rules are gettg old. It's not rocket science or brain surgery. If someone creates a faulty composition, nothing blows up and falls out of the sky and nobody dies on the operating table! Some folks are sticklers for rules or certain traditional approaches and some folks ain't! Some folks have the eye, and some fols don't. If you submit your work for critiquing or competitions you need to conform to the rules and standards of that venue. Most of these contests and organizations will state their judging criteria. If you don't agree- don't go there! My philosophy on critiques is "if you can't take a punch, don't get into the ring"! If all you expect is accolades and awards- it ain't gonna happen. Use every success or failure as a learning experience!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

E.L.. Shapiro wrote:

...
...
...
All these arguments about composition rules are getting old. It's not rocket science or brain surgery. If someone creates a faulty composition, nothing blows up and falls out of the sky and nobody dies on the operating table! Some folks are sticklers for rules or certain traditional approaches and some folks ain't! Some folks have the eye, and some folks don't. ...
...

And some folks are "This is my method/opinion, so should yours be."

EJMcD

E.L.. Shapiro wrote:

I did two tours in-country. I was an aerial recco... (show quote)

Apparently us Veteran Septuagenarians agree. With regard to composition, photography is extremely subjective. What looks good to one may not look good to all. Use the rules or create your own.

Bill_de Loc: US

Longshadow wrote:

And some folks are "This is my method/opinion, so should yours be."

Your camera in your hands ... your rules.
My camera in my hands ... my rules.
My camera in your hands ... somebody is gonna be hurtin'.

---

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

EJMcD wrote:

I get that but why anyone would use that to demonstrate the Rule of Thirds on a photography forum is beyond me when there are countless other examples to be found. Maybe the fact that I am a US Army Veteran, Father to four children and Grandfather to 9, strikes me as a very unusual and disgusting addition to the topic.

Personally, as another VietNam vet, I’d like to forget all those images.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Bill_de wrote:

Your camera in your hands ... your rules.
My camera in my hands ... my rules.
My camera in your hands ... somebody is gonna be hurtin'.

---

EJMcD

TriX wrote:

Personally, as another VietNam vet, I’d like to forget all those images.

Wish you would have directed your post to the member that chose to post that image.