Symmetry yrtemmyS

When learning the basics of composition it seems that above all else we're told to keep our object of interest away from the center of the frame. I've been told by various professors, YouTubers, and film books that these kinds of shots are boring to look at, visually unappealing, and overall can reduce the quality of a film. While in certain circumstances I admit that a symmetrical shot can come across as bland, I strongly believe that when done right these kinds of shot's can ut across a wealth of visual information.

Take for instance the work of Wes Anderson:

Though he may currently be the poster boy for symmetrical shots, I can think of very little instances in which the symmetry of the shot didn't add in some what to the content of the film. These kinds of shots don't take me out of the film, but rather draw me in to it's world and atmosphere. It's very rare that a serious drama would never design a shot that's as cloying twee as some of the examples posted above, but at the same time i don't think a lot of comedy films would benefit from the harsh lighting a lot of drama's benefit from.

It's all a matter of design really. If you feel that a shot would benefit from being arranged in a certain way, I really couldn't care less about what a book or professor might have to say. 

The Mathematics of Composition

Moderns Film could be considered one of the most advanced forms of media we have today. When done well, films effectively combine the elements of sound, composition, story, talent and more to create one fluid cinematic piece. It takes years of hard work and sheer talent to master all of these elements. Until then, it’s a good idea to focus in on one area of film that interests you more then the others.

Chris Knight, writer of fstoppers.com, has created an ultimate guide that makes learning one such element much easier. Specifically, composition – a defining element of film, and pretty much the defining element of photography.

Wait, You mean that rule of thirds thingy?

Ah yes, but as Knight proves in his article, it goes far beyond that nine-box rule.

With pictures and examples guiding his definitions all the way though, Knight provides a clear guide to the mathematics behind beautiful composition.

After reading his article, and in an effort to beat Arturo to the punch, I’ve decided to review some of my own work to see if it stands up to the test.

Center Composition

The first and most basic type of composition Knight mentions is center composition. For this I used a picture I took while in the middle of nowhere. The road stretched on for miles and the lighting was fantastic. With flat land on both sides of the road, this was a perfect time to use symmetry to my advantage.

It's not mathematically perfect, but still an effective example.

Rule of Thirds

The classic. The 101 of photography. When unsure how to compose a photo it's best to stick with the good 'ol threes. I found this photo of a prairie dog which falls right on the sweet spot. 

Golden Triangles 

When playing with angles, golden triangles are a great way to check composition. Knight uses a picture of the eiffel tower as a great example. 

I found one picture from Santa Monica that again, is not mathematically perfect, but shows how this type of composition can have a compelling effect. 

Frame Within a Frame

Another type of composition he mentions is the frame within a frame effect. 

It's a great way to give an extra layer of depth to the photo while at the same time putting extra focus on the subject. I managed to achieve this once this summer as Erin walked through the main gate at Mount Rushmore. I was lucky enough to capture the moment by chance, but usually you need to plan out shots like this. 

In this picture her figure does not fall right on the rule of thirds line. In fact, she's quite a bit under it. But it slightly dwarfs her and makes Mount Rushmore seem even larger. The point is that in the end, art is art, and mathematics can't always determine its effectiveness. But it's a great starting point for discovering what might look cool. 

First Reading Assignment Response

Chris Knight explains that composition is "Perhaps one of the most important parts of photography." Composition is how a photographer or filmmaker sees what he or she will be using for their project. If you can understand what good composition is, you'll know how to produce great photos or films.  Knight explains that there are multiple aspects of Composition including, Center Composition, The Rule of 3rd's, Golden Triangles, Diagonals, and Golden Ratios.
 
Center composition was as easy as it could get when it came to understanding the concept. Whatever object is in the center of your frame, that will be exactly where the viewer's eye will go. Thanks to the imaginary lines drawn in the Wes Anderson highlight reel, you are automatically drawn into the center of the frame more than you normally would.  When done properly, center composition can give a photo or film perfect symmetry, which for most of us is very, very aesthetically pleasing to the eye. "Symmetry creates equilibrium in an image."

The rule of thirds is another easy concept Knight explained very well. I think that the rule of thirds is the most important rule to composition. Without it, I don't think that you can properly frame an image. The rule of thirds has become so essential, you can't pick up a camera without seeing the rule of thirds lines on the viewfinder. Much like center composition, it makes images aesthetically pleasing to the eye.

Different from center composition and the rule of thirds, gold triangles allow photographers and cinematographers to make images seem off. Knight explains that where the lines intersect are where the viewer's eye are supposed to be drawn to. However, in the Eiffel Tower photo the photo is off centered. So could this mean that the lines could intersect somewhere else on the photo? Who's to say everyone will draw the same lines that will intersect in the exact same spot?

Diagonals I thought of as a tool to help viewers find the center of the composition.  However, Knight's explanation was a little off when he said that the viewer's eye will directly go to the ballerina dancer facing us. I understand that because she is facing us we as viewers might see her first but, isn't there a possibility that the viewers eye might be drawn to somewhere else. Perhaps the viewer might be looking at the center pillar first, or another dancer?

Lastly, golden ratios I found to be the most interesting of the composition aspect. Using mathematics to frame an image I found to be fascinating. Now if I wasn't a Park School student, I might be better at math and could potentially be a better photographer.

Aside from Knight's explanation of the aspects of composition there were some things he said that really stuck with me after reading these two articles. Knight said, "One of the best things a photographer can do is study painting and art history. Studying great painters is key to expert composition." What better way to understand the aspects of composition than to learn it from the people who first used proper composition in their work?

Another thing Knight wrote about that really stuck with me was his section about framing. Knight said, "Frame can add context, meaning or depth to a photo." Framing has such an important impact on an image. What a photographer or cinematographer decides to do with the frame can drastically change what a viewer might see or think about an image.  
-Patrick Ring

First Assignment: Understanding the basics of good composition

According to Chris Knight, the writer of The Ultimate Guide to Composition, there are 5 main 'guidelines' to follow in order to achieve at least half-decent composition in a photograph (or a film shot). These guidelines include the following techniques: center composition, the rule of thirds, golden triangles, the diagonals, and the golden ratio/rectangles/spiral. It's been brought to my attention by this composition guru that you pretty much need one of these 5 framing techniques in order to have a shot that even has a chance of being a pleasant one. Well, here's my opinion on these 5 composition guidelines as laid out by Mr. Knight. I'm sorry in advance.

Center composition, put simply, places the most important objects in an image in the center. When done correctly (as displayed in the image to the right), this type of composition can work very effectively in creating a certain feel to a shot. What is that person doing all the way out there? Are they lost? Reminiscent? Suicidal? I have no idea. The shot certainly makes you wonder, though, doesn't it? Not only does it evoke some sort of emotion, but it's also extremely aesthetically pleasing. The person is placed exactly in the vertical center of the frame along with the horizon in the horizontal center. Knight did a decent job explaining this.

Next we have the rule of thirds. Now, if you've ever attended a Park class, picked up a camera, or have lived in the modern world, you've heard about the rule of thirds. It's not a particularly hard concept to grasp. You basically just imagine (or many cameras will even show you on the viewfinder) four evenly spaced lines that divide the shot into nine sections. You then place the important objects in the shot on these lines, and you place the absolute most important objects on the intersections, like the subject's eyes. Knight explains that this kind of off-center composition adds more visual interest and tension for viewers. I mean, he's right. I don't know why there needed to be such a detailed explanation of the topic, but what the hell. Power to you, Guru Knight.

This third composition technique is completely beyond my understanding. The golden triangles is basically when the photographer divides the frame into three or four triangles, with the 'major line' dividing the image diagonally, and with one or two 'reciprocal lines' perpendicularly intersecting the major line from the corners of the frame. Just look at the image of the Eiffel Tower. It'll save you a whole lot of grief rather than trying to understand my explanation. Now, I'm not sure if I'm just not grasping the concept, or if Knight's explanation is simply terrible. Probably the first one, but hear me out. When looking at the Eiffel Tower, nothing particularly important is on the lines' intersection. Yeah, it's the center of the tower, but I feel that the shot would look exactly the same if the photographer had just aligned the tower with the major line. Am I wrong? I don't think so. If there's something obvious that I'm missing, comment on the post. I'd love to better understand this concept. Please and thank you.

I usually like to think of myself as a reasonably intelligent guy, but in this case, unfortunately, I don't quite understand the composition technique of the diagonals either. You win some, you lose some. Am I right? Anyway, Knight explains the concept of diagonals as splitting an image from corner to corner with either a Baroque Diagonal (read left to right) or a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). I have two things to say about Knight's explanation of the ballerina image. He says the diagonal used in the composition is a Sinister Diagonal (read right to left). He says the ballerina's eyes line up with the ballerina's pointed toe on the right. First of all, wouldn't a person looking at the photograph immediately look at the ballerina facing us, forcing the viewer to start at the left of the image? Second, the ballerina isn't looking anywhere near the pointed toe. She's looking off to the right, not down. How was the pointed toe chosen as the second object to decide which way the diagonal would lean? Either this photograph is a very poor example of the use of diagonals for composition, or I'm missing something very important here. I usually like to assume I'm not the wrong one.

Last but not least, we have our famous golden ratio/rectangles/spiral concept. This is probably the most useful composition technique out there. It's not only used in photography, but can even be found in architecture and music. For its high level of universality, the golden ratio is an unbelievably simple concept. I'm not going to go into specifics (you can find those here), but all it takes is a little math, really. Knight doesn't do a terrible job of explaining the technique, either. Even I understood it. Kind of. The golden ratio is a fascinating concept. I strongly recommend you look more into it. You'd be absolutely amazed at all of its applications.

All in all, Composition Guru Knight did a quasi decent job of explaining the five main composition techniques all photographers should take into consideration when framing a shot. For all of you folks out there with a camera, take note.

Reenactment Shot Shoot- Quiet Riot

After our film shoot last weekend, I realized how important it is know your footage, actors, and location before shooting a shot as detail heavy as our recreation shot. I also learned that it is extremely difficult to find actors if you are not organized and ambitious. Despite all of our efforts we could not find enough actors to do the original shot we chose and had to change our shot at the very last minute, creating a source of stress within the group. I also learned that it is important to know upcoming events and activities dealing with your location to prevent conflicts in scheduling. Because we filmed in the commons for our original shot, we were unable to shoot there for the recreation shot due to a community activity that was taking place on our scheduled shooting day. It was also very difficult to film around the public and to capture the natural state of people with a  camera  present.

For the actual film shoot, I was the Director of Photography and we decided to use the Sony FS-100. I have not really used the camera before and it was much easier to achieve the look of the original shot by using picture profiles. Using profile pictures, allowed me to view the shot through several types of settings and help me achieve the perfect look for our recreation shot. It was also a great challenge to frame the shot the same as the original. I found it to be very beneficial to study the location of the actors in relation to their environment. I used physical attributes of the location, such as lines on the wall and staircases, to frame the shot within the camera.

As far as the directing was concerned, it worked the best to provide our actors with countdowns  for their actions and used verbal cues to move the actors forward in the shot. Using a countdown was very beneficial to our actors. In the end we got a shot that was almost identical to the first shot, concerning the physical and facial expressions of our actors. It was also very important that we used similar wardrobe choices and actors with similar physical features.

Overall,  I am really impressed with myself and my groups's ability to overcome the difficulties we faced during this project. I wished that our shot was much longer than it ended up being but I think we did an excellent job on our recreation shot. This was a very challenging experience but was a great learning experience and tons of fun.