Some folks like to discuss the details, "rules" and philosophies about composition- some do not! Some feel it is of the utmost importance and othere could not give a rat's tail and there is everything in between. Some can compose effectively as per their innate talent and others may want to need to learn particular compositional skills. A few like to argue about it because they have nothing better to do. Takes all kinds.

My feeling is simple. "Rules" are not a dirty word. In art, there are no laws so you can take 'em or leave'em. For me, the is a language or nomenclature that can be used for discussion, teaching, learning reference, or analysis of any image.

So much of this forum is a giant PARADOX or OXYMORON. We oftentimes WRITE about images, ask questions, and provide answers about IMAGES, and do not post the image in question. Yet, we can communicate somewhat effectively because we use the terminology, and nomenclature about lighting, optics, cameras, and settings that most of us understand and relate to. Even if we post an image for advice, analysis, or teaching, we use our photographic language.

For all the naysayers- what is the big deal if we use a few terms and basic principles, show a diagram, or refer to a particular school of thought pertaining to composition?

Y'all count pixels, consider optical issues such as recognizing and correcting aberrations, and use lightig diagrams. What's wrong with illustrating how compositional principles come into play and affect our images?

If you have ever taught a series of classes or photographic seminars you will relate to this. You may have a dozen or more students. Some of them will easily absorb every technical or artistic concept or principle in discussion and be able to apply, modify, and interpret as per their own talent. Others will ask for a less philosophical and more mechanical methodology. They will say "'OK that's nice but where do I put this and how do I place that"-whatever! The teacher can no teeth they have no talent- perha the don't or likey the do but not everyone thinks. learns, and processes and applies information the same way.

Some eons ago, I had the privilege of attending classes given by Gerhardt Bakker. He was an iconic teacher of composition. I did not learn to shoot or compose things in any specific way but I tend to see things differently.

An analogy- You can memorize every lighting diagram, theory, and principle in the word but if you can not SEE light, you are working at a disadvantage.

Glitch!

You were a creative ABOVE-average kid. I got a camera at 8 years old and a benovelat family friend let me use his darkroom- 2 years later. Good thing- I was admonished for running up a tab at the drugstore!

In days of old when knights were bold...photoghay was practiced by few. When a late image formed on some coated plate, it had to be "developed" in a dark place with toxic metals and gasses, pungent, often deadly chemicals- not fothe average civilian! Perhaps it was thought of as some sort of witchcraft carried on by my mad scientist or wizard in cave-like places.

Then came old George Eastman (well after Deguerre and Nepeace) who sold folks simple box cameras with film and said these immortal words "push the button and leave the rest to us" or something like that- or was that Grayhoud, the bus folks who said 'leave the driving to us"? Well, y'all know waht I mean.

The "brownie" was very basic but as more folks became photo enthusiasts and pros, more complicated and adjustable cameras were designed proliferated, and sold tothe masses. Some folks wanted to do their own "driving" so they constructed darkrooms and processed and printed their own images. This went on for a very long time in both the consumer and professional worlds- things evolved

Serious photoghaer had to master various skills as to exposure, focus, depth of fielild or lack thereof, and all that good stuff. Exposure meters were popular. Then, meters were built into cameras. And the various basics- exposure, focus, etc. became automated. Nontheless, if your camera had an adjustable shutter, aperture, and a mechanism for focusing, and you knew about the basic triangle that governs their usage and how they interface for various effects- you were good to go. A little manual, a little auto, and a few cool gadgets- take your pick and do your thing.

Are we moving "forward" to digital photography or in a way moving backward? The Great Yellow Spirit of Rocherst is no longer with us - Kodak ain't what used to be but, has Gorige's ghost come to haunt us. Nowadays it's "press the button and leave the PHOTOGRAPHY to ME says your camera and if you want anything to say about it, you better read MY 300-page manual and figure out how to override my decisions"!

Alright, excuse the hyperbole! But I have reasons. In my days as a wedding and press photographer, we took every precaution to prevent accidental mis-settings. As soon as the press cameras came with front-end leaf shutters we all removed the rear end focal plane shutters to avoid possible activation. We screwed down the M-X Synch switch to X and any other switch, adjustment, or lever that could cause serious problems. We didn't want to miss vital shots because of all these possible glitches. KISS was the acronym.

Then came the day when I realized that my studio would need to go digital. I tested a few NEW and popular models and was horrified. One camera REFUSED to shoot if IT thought the exposure was off. The data in the viewfinder looks more like the flight deck of a jet aircraft. There were little batons all over the thing that could set the entire system off in another direction. The menu- forgetabout! Yes- I know, I can shut most of that stuff
off but I PAID for all of it. And...if I'd accidently pulled the wrong switch the robotic monster would come back from the dead.An accident waiting to happen! The first thing I did was go out and buy a digital conversion foty studio camer for ase I- $$$ just to keep things simple.

Years have passed and today I am well-steeped in too much technology. I am still a bit reactionary when it comes to gear. The new Nikon digital model looks like an F-series body but is a modern mirrorless camera, that appeals to me- I like dials.

I do read manuals- thoroughly. I will try to secure a manual even before I make a major camera purchase. Some seem to be written a secret code and a few are poorly translated from the language spoken in the place they were made. You have got to do the homework or you can always neglect the manual and then post on UHH and ask waht you did wrong and start a 12-page argument!

8:15 PM 2024/23/01 Rant (2) Over!

This section ain't judgmental. Why throw away a lovely smile? Screwups are part of photography. Murphy's Law looms overhead like the albatrosses in the Ancient Mariner.

So, you take what you got, work it up, put in it a frame, and give it to the nice lady with that smile.

RING lights woud not be my choice.

If your subject is wearing eyeglasses will be difficult to use a ring light as a fill source in its basic intended position whereby it is an encircling lens. You will get very distracting donut-shaped reflections in the glasses. Off camer, as the main lig, it is still problematic- it will like show you eyeglasses eyeglasses and if you place it hig enough to avoid the reflection, you will probably not sufficiently illuminantehth eyes and the eye sockets.

I do know what other gear you have access to. If all you need is a simple and pleasant likeness of each person, you may be better off with a simple bounced Speedlight setup. If you can access such a unt, I can suggest a few simple methods.

Nice article! It illustrates how color, contrast, and othere components have to do with composition. It's just not only where to place things in the frame.

There are endless arguments over their rule of theirs and a few othere popular theories. Kinda silyl when the is so much more to delvein to, study, and try out.

With the pure economy of digital photograhy- no expensive film and chemistry to buy. You can experiment your head off, try various compositions, control color saturation, contrast, and brightness, and do local controls with the flick of a switch or the move of a slider. Image the film and paper inventory you would need to do for that

Etymology is fun and so are Euphisiams (the substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant the expression so substituted). The components and their composition are fun, interesting, enlightening, and helpful to study- call them whatever you want if "rules " are offensive or antithetical to your philosophy or nature.

I have mentioned on numerous occasions that these so-called "rules:" are not laws but are guidelines and visual aspects to consider in you work. There are, however, some REAl rules in the physics of light, electronics, optics, etc. that should be considered to be important and learned.

I am not a university or college professor, however, I have been in a position to train rookee or aspiring professional photographers. I have presented many workshops and seminars. In that environment, there's little time to philosophize because students are spendig time and money learning practical methodologies. So, what should I do? I could show my work, brag about my experiences, and tell them to go out and do whatever the heck they feel like and eventualy they will find their path. Or will it be of benefit to furnish them with some foundational theory, analyze images, illustrate how composition can strengthen or weakg the impact of images, and set forth a series of basic approaches and guidelines? This should not stunt the creative growth of a real artist nor will it make a less talented individual into an instant artist. I may need diagrams and formulas to illustrate any of these concepts or theories. They are not inted as the likes of electronic schematic diagrams where an alteration will cause a short circuit.

"Rules" are not a dirty word. Rules in art have many wonderful exceptions. When presenting a workshop I may have a dozen or more folks in a class. Some probably have more artistic talent than I will ever possess, some may have no artistic talent but are good technicians, ad there's everything in between. I just want them all to leeav the class with a few more tools in their box, more awarenessof their own potential, and at least a few important tips or tricks to make their work more efficient and easy to accomplish. Knowledge is power!

I am upgrading mine. Scraping the old clunky relay and replacing it with the latest sold-state circuitry- like the lates Optical Switch that handle trillions of operations per second. I'm going to need it for this forum!

EXACTLY!!!

Research and studies of the paintings The Old Masters revealed the concept of what no call aspect ratio, proportion, useof space and dynamic symmetry was aroud way before the invention of photograhy or cinematography. That is where may of the rules and foundational aesthetics came from.

If you REALLY want to getting or improve and fully and fully understand and appreciate the POWER OF composition, there is a lot of great theory and concepts to consider. It goes way beyond the rule of thirds, etc. You don't need any expensive equipment, just your eyes and an open mind.

Besides, it's fun and you begin to see things differetly when you are shooting and when you analyze an image.

Think about this, folks!

So-called rules, standards, methods, approaches, schools of thought, and attitudes about ART are not LAWS and are punishable if violated, disputed, or ignored.

Most people are not stupid. They can be exposed to all sorts of education, training, various schools of thought, different opinions, methodologies, and attitudes and, at the end of the day, make up their own minds and take their own paths.

Telling one's own thoughts, or approach to any issue is not always an attempt at indoctrination.

Some of the folks on this forum argue for the sake of arguing and launch unnecessary personal attacks that accomplish nothing more than resentment.

If there was any REAL moderation here, some of these threads woud be closed down as soon as they begin to "go south"! Perhaps that would encourage folks to come up with some creative ideas and subjects rather than kicking the proverbial dead horse.

Sadly, some of the childish and troll-like behavior does get on one's nerves.

I have a coping mechanism to deal with philsosphies and techniques I disagree with. I have had several occasions where I paid good money, spent valuable time, and traveled a good distac to attend a class, convention, seminar, or workshop. At the end of the class, I considered the entire thing a misadventure, a waste of time and money- a FLOP! Usually, there were several othere attendees, out in the lobby, grumbling and complaining while I was smiling. My classmate questions my upbeat attitude. I simply confessed that I learned two important things- what techniques NOT to apply and how NOT to present a seminar!

We all can learn from our mistakes and those of others. After a while, as you age and grow, you will develop a unique neurological mechanism. You can retain whatever information you hear or read tha you deem valid, or automatically activate your "nonsense" switch which allows it to go in one ear and out of the other!

Not funny! Attic material!

"Wabi-sabi is a Japanese philosophy that emphasizes the beauty of imperfection, impermanence, and simplicity 1. It is a worldview centered on the acceptance of transience and imperfection, and appreciating beauty that is “imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete” in nature 1. Wabi-sabi is prevalent in many forms of Japanese art and design 1. It reminds us that all things, including us and life itself, are impermanent, incomplete, and imperfect 2. Perfection, then, is impossible and impermanence is the only way 2. Here are some teachings of Wabi-Sabi that you can apply in your daily life 2:

Find beauty in imperfection: Instead of striving for perfection, embrace the beauty of imperfection.
Simplicity: Embrace simplicity and minimalism in your life.
Acceptance: Accept the natural cycle of life and the impermanence of all things.
Appreciation: Appreciate the beauty in everyday objects and moments".

The above is an excerpt from an encyclopedia. Seems like a nice philosophy that may apply to an approach to art and photography. Not something to make fun of. Y'all may learn something!

I like that approach! For some folks sometimes, however, the image appears in the photographer's mind's eye before it appears on the camera's sensor, and alas, somewhere along the way, the image as it was perceived did not make it!

So, waht happened? I am not talking about exposure or color issues but the beautiful scene did not come through. The photographer saw the scene, stopped his or her car, breathed in the fresh country air, listened to the waterfall, took in the aroma of the flowers- all ther senses were at work and hopefully their visual prowess was also in play. But the resulting first shot is kinda blah!

To the rescue comes "working the scene"! This is where your technical knowledge, perhaps some rules and references come in handy. Why does the scene look different from what made you stop the car and get out and shoot? Is the issue in your shot perspective, choice of focal lengh or distance, point of view, did my slight overexposure desaturate the colors, would a longer or shorter exposure prove a better interpretation of the waterfall or any one or combination of issues that need to need to be solved?

This theory or method does not only apply to landscape photography. It can be any kind of work under any kind of situation. A stilllife or product shot of a single or group of objects can preset many challenges and yo may need to work diligently to come up wit an impactful composition that will tellthe story, sell the product, or simply satisfy you artistic appreciation.

The more rules, theories, techniques, and knowledge you have in your toolbox the faster you will troubleshoot problems and create successful images.

Something else to consider. Psychologists and neurologists tell me that there are three kinds of folks when it comes to waht influences their art or craft and perhaps may othere decisions and behaviors. The are Visuals, who react to and absorb more easily what they SEE. Auditories, will respond or learn more from waht they hear or read, and Kinostetics will tend to react more strongly to what they feel or touch. The VISUALS should (?) make for better visual artists but we all still have the other senses. So, in a visual creative situation, can we isolate our visual percept for othere influences?

Even in the controlled studio or studio-like portraiture, you may need to "work the scene".Not ever subjects a model. You may see a very attractive person who is not particularly photogenic. They cou be lovely pers with great personality but once you get past ther personable attitude you fine facial asymmetries, all maner of beemishes or a person that is nervios and freezes in for of a camera. You then have your"work" on this scene, cut out for you. Get out your toolbox!

Too many folks go to extremes- stick to the rules! vs. forget about the rule!- it kida silly. Like lots of other things in photography- differet camers, filters, various kinds of lighing hear, differet techniques- there is a time and a place for most logical things, methods and techniques. You are the final arbiter of your methodology so it is wise to utulize whatever you can to perfect your work and enjoy the results.

If you are photographing a bird in flight, a high-speed athletic event, or motorsport, you are not gonna refer to a diagram, read a book, or worry about rules- you will shoot instinctively. If, however, you have studied, practiced, and successfully mastered some of the foundational principles of composition, you will put some of these techniques into play in split seconds. You might leave sufficient negative space in front or in the back of the subject to illustrate movement and direction. You will know how to direct the viewers' eyes to the motif of your images. You can tell the story! You will not only change focal lengths to bring things in closer or encompass a wider view but to create, exaggerate, or compress leading lines.

Some photographers are indeed "artists" but we are not painters. We can not always change every element of any scene or subject to arrive at our final statement or story as we perceive it. We often have to capture a scene, event, or expression in a split second. When effective composition becomes a kind of muscle memory, your results will be more satisfying.