Center composition...

[Rolleiflexible]

Look at the lighting and posing – your subjects shouldn’t
be dead-center in the image, lighting should be be subtle
– no hot spots or blown-out highlights.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandersnyc/3918549678/

I have sooo much to learn to be a good photographer. >8^/

[keithwms]

If everybody composed using the 'rule' of thirds, then the advice could have been: "Try something really unusual, e.g. compose with the subject centered in the frame."

[shotgun1a]

Actually, I think you're exactly ON topic.

One important distinction, I think, is that there's a difference between shooting for money and shooting for a living. If you shoot for a living, you're necessarily (with possible exceptions) going to be working for the client rather than yourself and, by definition, you're going to temper your "artistic vision" according to what the client wants. Sure, you'll seek out clients that agree with your vision. And, if you're particularly successful, you'll be able to turn away clients that don't. However, at the base of it all you're still working for hire and as such not entirely at liberty to follow your own whims--the compulsion to eat and live indoors is strong among humans and difficult to ignore.

Shooting for money (as opposed to for a living) allows you much greater freedom, but even so, one will (either conciously or not) consider the client's wishes when making an image.

Exactly at what point one becomes able to both generate income from an artistic pursuit and pursue it entirely at one's own liberty is a very unclear point indeed. It's a point that certainly exists, though. My point on restrictive contests, though, is that they put you in neither group by default.

[rmolson]

You are not suppose to use a horizontal format for portraits either, b ut Arnold Newman blew that idea away

[Q.G.]

You are supposed to do everything, anything, you need to do to get the picture the way you like it.

Anyone who thinks something else should find another hobby.
Typically, people who do like to tell other people what to do more than anything else, and would do the same, whatever hobby they choose.
The overwhelming desire to tell people what to do is also why those people gravitate towards the executive committees of clubs, and end up being judges at competitions.

[Rick A]

Some thoughts and questions:

This is from the copy on the 8x10 competition via WPPI:


/soapbox Ok, so the thing that gets me is, why should the subject NOT be in the direct center? There are loads of photos in the Gallery that have just this; center subject. Now, I don't think that a picture with some naked lady softly lit on the beach way off to the left is any more attractive than an orchid direct center, hard lit with loads of contrast.

Second, if I think an image needs the highlights blown out, then I do it. I mean, I understand that this competition is for people that want to fit a cookie cutter, which is NOT me, but the question remains.

I don't know how to even approach the last statement. I don't know anything about "treatments" and "enhancements" in photochop, but could the same thing be said about darkroom time? Could a photo be too burned or dodged? I don't think so. Why should the light be subtle. What if the bride specifically asked to be lit in hard shadows because she is having a murder mystery wedding and wanted a noir feel?

Sure, some of these images are good, but I don't get it.

I don't think competitions like this make art, photographers, or unique images. I think they shouldn't be called competitions. Well, maybe if they want to be called "everyone should make the exact same image competition".

I searched for any information I could find on WHY one would not put the subject in the center, and then I found about 8 trillion images from 1850 on with just that. I just can't wrap my mind around it.

Those are displays not competitions. Just because they are juried(usually by self described"experts")doesnt make these venues worth attending. Let the di#$%#@l morons use them to feel good about themselves.IMHO true art is meant to evoke emotion of any sort. If anyone can display a work that compels the viewer to fret and stew about what they have seen, has done his(or her)job. Any photographer that is willing to step out of the "norm" deserves some accolades, and never be ashamed or afraid to put their work up for public viewing. Okay, I'm done ranting.
Rick

[GeorgeDexter]

Rules are meant to be broken by those who a) actually understand, fundamentally, why it is considered a rule in the first place and b) who know how and when to break rules in order to add to the impact of the result. Rules should not be broken by those who a) have no idea why it is a rule, or worse, don't even know that it is a rule b) have no idea what they are trying to say in the first place, and/or c) are more concerned with impressing and/or emulating others than with expressing themselves. At least in my humble opinion. Also in my opinion, since we're ranting these sorts of competitions tend to be filled primarily with the latter rather than the former, but I could be wrong...

- Randy

I generally agree with this: You have to understand the conventions of the genre before you can make the artistic decision to disregard them. On the other hand, learning, and following, these basic conventions does stifle creativity somewhat. I think this is one of the oldest philisophical debates in the art world, and there is no real answer. Invariably, the creators of this contest will get some of what they expressly asked people not to submit, so in the end it will balance out. They will have both, submissions that follow the 'rules' and those that break them. May the best photos win.

[jnanian]

what i find to be kind of funny about the website / contest linked to
is that it is a professional organization with an international scope for
portrait and wedding photographers ( kind of like the asmp but different).
usually people who shoot weddings and portraits for a living have a clue when it comes
to composition &C. it seems to be talking to
these people as if they just picked up a camera and are trying to find
their way ...

[JohnRichard]

what i find to be kind of funny about the website / contest linked to
is that it is a professional organization with an international scope for
portrait and wedding photographers ( kind of like the asmp but different).
usually people who shoot weddings and portraits for a living have a clue when it comes
to composition &C. it seems to be talking to
these people as if they just picked up a camera and are trying to find
their way ...

I guess that's what set me off in the first place. I don't think I will ever join the WPPI, just like I don't think I will ever join the ASCAP. Now if the ASC, american society of cinematographers wants to give me an honorary membership, I wouldn't pass that up. I don't know... maybe its just my
"I'm not really a fan of 'societies'" attitude. I am freelancing a wedding for my cousin, because she likes my "flavor". She is having a "professional" do her ceremony, and I am anxious to see what he will produce.

[markbarendt]

it seems to be talking to
these people as if they just picked up a camera and are trying to find
their way ...

Obviously you have no idea how true that is. :o