I prefer square images or just slightly longer on the verticle... I'm not sure one can say composition is more difficult within a square images area but since most experiences of a traditional nature are with the more rectangle picture spaces (35mm, 4x5, 8x10, 8.4 x 11, etc., etc.) it makes composition within a square 'different' than what one might be used to. To help with the adjustment one might seek out other visual artist's (photographers, painters, etc.) work that tend to work in square formats. One photographer that comes to mind is Michael Kenna.
__________________
Regards,
Wally
Member:
National Sarcasm Society
(like we need your support)
. . . Isn`t a balanced composition harder to achieve than with the familiar rectangle?
I don't know, André. Balance may be more obvious with a rectangular format, but it's not clear that it's easier, as such. The square seems to give both vertical and horizontal balance equal attention.
To me, the square 6x6 format is perhaps more neutral. One can compose to the square, or see an alternative composition within the square. In print, the square may also be more neutral, avoiding both the imposing feel of portrait orientation and the relaxing quality of landscape orientation.
Ultimately, one might posit that if the final image depends on the format to achieve its visual objective, more time might have been spent on subject and composition selection.
__________________
[COLOR=SlateGray]"You can't depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus." -Mark Twain[/COLOR]
This will sound a little crazy, but I don't really like square for color landscapes...however I love it for b&w (especially at night). I like my color stuff to be in wider rectangles for some reason...
That said, I've recently taken several color landscapes with my Rollieflex...
..."suck it and see"!
See if you can compose in square format(I'm the proud owner of a beautiful Mamiya TLR ),and if you think the image would look better rectangular just raise your enlarger head until the bits you don't like "fall off" the edges of the paper-ultimately,if you do that the grain you end up with will still be comparable to a 645 image.
__________________
A common mistake people made when designing something completely foolproof was to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
Computers are incredibly stupid,but they are capable of being incredibly stupid many millions of times a second.
Both said by Doug Adams
Only put off until tomorrow that which you are prepared to die having not done-Pablo Picasso
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
I'm with Eagleowl and Leon on this one. I use a Mamiya 330, and I tend to shoot first and sort it out in the darkroom later. If it suits square that's fine, otherwise I chop it up. I don't like being constrained by film format.
Well, if I have to crop it, I do it, but I like to make it happen (or try) within the square on the field.
The 6x6 is a great visual/compositional challenge, IMO!
Gave me a lot of discipline.
I've just purchased a Mamiya C220 to experiment with 6x6. Haven't shot a frame yet! But, if you want to see some truly inspired 6x6 format landscapes then I suggest that you take a look at Charlie Waite at www.charliewaite.com
For myself, the format is often chosen to fit the subject. I have long used the 6x6, 6x7. 6x9 format, but to say I preferred one of them the over another
I couldn't do.
When packing a 6x6 I compose full frame, as I do with all formats. If there is a question in my mind that perhaps some one else (photo editor etc) might prefer a horizontal or vertical image I manage the image in such a way it can be cropped. Actually unless shooting to a script, I allow myself to make the image any way I feel it or see fit. I do a lot of square images, but in no way feel that it is a favorite. I do not set out with a Haselblad in hand looking or searching for subject matter to fit into a square.
Uhmmm, upon thinking more about it perhaps I do lean a bit toward 6x7. I don't however lean enough towards it to call it a favorite.
I almost always crop my negatives so shooting with my Blad gives me negatives that I can play with under the enlarger. Often I find that I can print both a vertical AND a horizontal picture from the same negative.
I NEVER crop too tight when taking my pictures, ( You can never print something that is not on the negative ). I limit my Images to 11" x 14" prints .
),and if you think the image would look better rectangular just raise your enlarger head until the bits you don't like "fall off" the edges of the paper-ultimately,if you do that the grain you end up with will still be comparable to a 645 image.
Linear Mode
