|
Forums >
General Industry >
Are there really "rules" of photography?
If so, where can I find a copy? I have seen quite a few images taken by well known photographers that (pardon the pun) break the rules. I just saw another one today in the new W magazine. The photographers name eludes me right now but the shot is pretty dismal IMO. Its a black and white closeup of a man and woman in a room laughing and the photo is noisy and blurry like someone just snapped the pic while running into the room or something. One may argue its "artistic" but it looks like crap to me and if I put up that image for critique, I'm sure I would be scorned by everyone. When does a crappy looking image that breaks the unwritten rules of photography become "artistic"? and are there really any rules? Aug 02 05 12:06 am Link Posted by MichaelBell: i think the rules are there as guidelines. i feel they help you out but i think the more important thing to focus on is choice of subject matter. anyways, try a google search. the famous one is probably the rule of thirds... Aug 02 05 12:14 am Link Yea i see that all the time maybe full page.. I guess it depends how drunk the editor is.. It all my years of photography the only shot like that that i thought was worth anything was the shot of the lock ness monster.. Nikon used it in an add to show lousy comp and focus... All My speciall effects work in photoshop will never look as bad as the shots your talking about! I think it just sucks!! Aug 02 05 12:16 am Link Hobbiest, stock, and artistic photographers shoot images that appeal to them. Everyone else shoots to please a client. You're allowed to think it sucks, maybe even he thinks so too. However, if I had to guess I would say the photographer (David Sims) would just laugh. if I put up that image for critique, I'm sure I would be scorned by everyone. Not everyone, although you're probablly right that it wouldn't do well...HERE. You can't forget the audience, this site primarily attracts hobbiest and semi-professional photographers, about 95% of which shoot glamour. To anyone who's worked in that market, the critique of anyone who hasn't is worthless...Not trying to stir up anyone's emotions, but that's just the way it is. Aug 02 05 08:19 am Link Posted by A. H A M I L T O N: Perfectly summarized. Aug 02 05 08:27 am Link I think artists should learn the "rules" of art, so they can break them... correctly! Aug 02 05 08:35 am Link In portraiture, there are certain rules of composition. If you go to most any portrait studio, whether it be a place like Olan Mills or an individual in your town, they will follow similar rules for a pleasing portrait. Dark Matter Zone made a very accurate statement: You have to know the rules in order to break them - correctly! Aug 02 05 08:43 am Link I just knew that was going to be good. I could smell it a mile away. Aug 02 05 08:45 am Link Posted by MichaelBell: Hmm ... way back in the 1890s there was a big battle between photographers who believed photography was/could be an expressive medium and photographers who thought photography was/should be a primarily documentary medium. The documentary crowd grew larger, one of the primary expressives switched sides, some talented and well-connected photographers joined the ranks of the documentarians, and eventually the idea that photographs must be as sharp as possible and document the physical subject became the norm. However there are still people who strive to photograph feelings, moods, and emotions rather than things and who recognize that motion and emotion can be the legitimate subject of an image, even if it's produced with light-sensitive media rather than paint. Aug 02 05 08:57 am Link Art has no limits Aug 02 05 08:59 am Link Rule #1 Try not to S*** Aug 02 05 09:26 am Link Well, photographers seem to crap on each other and each other's work more than any other artists in any other medium, so maybe that's the deffinitive rule of photography. I've never heard of watercolorists going to war over what paper they chose to use, but I've seen photographers do it. I've never seen oil painters attack one another about how a painting was composed but I've seen photographers do it. I've never seen sculpters loudly ridicule the tools of choice of other sculpters, but I've sure seen photographers do it. Is it a lack of maturity or professionalism? I don't know, but it's there. As a rule. Daniel Aug 02 05 10:37 am Link Posted by Daniel R. Kane: Sorry but I disagree with that. You are just familar with photographers. I have seen plenty of mud from painter to painter, artist to artist. I respectfully disagree. Aug 02 05 10:42 am Link Posted by Dark Matter Zone: Exactly. Aug 02 05 11:06 am Link Jack's right, Daniel is... perhaps, underexposed to the world of the arts.  One of my co-workers is a professional artist, her husband is a very successful artist (with his own gallery) and a professor of art at a university. We've had this very discussion. Trust me when I say that any criticism I've *ever* seen on an Internet photography board was but a mild love tap compared to the Steel Cage Death Match that is academic/gallery art criticism. The modern art scene is probably the best example I know of the philosophy: "It is not enough that I succeed. Everyone else must fail." M Aug 02 05 11:44 am Link Posted by Ched: Posted by Dark Matter Zone: Exactly. Curious: whose job *is* it to fire people if the director doesn't do it? Aug 02 05 11:49 am Link Posted by Dark Matter Zone: Absolutely! There's a difference between deliberately breaking a "rule" in the name of creative self expression and turning out garbage because you don't know what you're doing. Far too many of today's photographers lack discipline, don't know diddly about lighting and composition, and are almost entirely dependent on happy accidents or BS-ing someone into thinking that their garbage is art. Aug 02 05 12:00 pm Link Posted by Jack D Trute: No. I attended art school and was a professional painter in half a dozen galleries for almost a decade. I also managed a gallery and currated the shows. I've met and done business with hundreds of artists and dozens of gallery and museum directors. Aug 02 05 12:02 pm Link I'm proposing a rule for photographers... - Log off of Modelmayhem for a few hours, grab your camera and go make photographs! Aug 02 05 12:11 pm Link Posted by MichaelBell: Rules - If you look at photography as a technical art you have rules to run by but if you take it as art itself and there are no rules - the rules are set by what people are willing to pay for and buy - just like other fine arts, perception and money then determine what rules stay and which are broken. Aug 02 05 12:37 pm Link Posted by Daniel R. Kane: I would have to add performance artists like singers and also moviemakers to the list of "most critical of their piers". Aug 02 05 12:45 pm Link If you are applying the "rules" after the image has been taken, you've missed the point. The rules of composition and exposure are there to help photographers create photographs that communicate with the viewer. Once the photo is captured all that matters is how effectively it communicates with the viewer. An image can leave unerasable marks on your brain while breaking every single rule, but you cannot go back and undo it because it didn't follow the rule of thirds. A photographer should know their tools, including the "rules" and all the viewer should care about is the impact of the image. There are a lot of "photography" site on the internet where the members debate the technical merits of their equipment and images. So many of these images are technical strong (rule of thirds, subject in focus, well exposed to create a broad range of tones) but have absolutely no impact on the viewer because there really is nothing there to care about. Sorry for the rambling reply... guess my point was that we have rules that can help in creating photographs but nothing that can be used to determine if an image is good or bad. The second part is completely subjective and depends on the viewer. Aug 02 05 01:21 pm Link First rule is, dont forget to put film in your camera. second,,,,,,,remove the dang lens cap! heh Aug 02 05 01:25 pm Link i got my .02 worth on that, basically its ART and everyone is correct, it is both good and bad because it is like time, everything is 'relative' to the observer. what makes it 'art' in this context is the reputation of the creator. if you or i did it its a blurry image, if ansel addams did it it would be art. the blind eye sees. i like tack sharp & acurate large printworks. the less 'flaws' the better. you know when something is great when nobodyelse can make any further 'adjustments'! Aug 02 05 01:40 pm Link Posted by Daniel R. Kane: Posted by Jack D Trute: No. I attended art school and was a professional painter in half a dozen galleries for almost a decade. I also managed a gallery and currated the shows. I've met and done business with hundreds of artists and dozens of gallery and museum directors. Well, then, my speculation that you were underexposed to the world of the arts looks pretty silly, dunnit? Aug 02 05 01:51 pm Link Posted by StMarc: Posted by Daniel R. Kane: Posted by Jack D Trute: No. I attended art school and was a professional painter in half a dozen galleries for almost a decade. I also managed a gallery and currated the shows. I've met and done business with hundreds of artists and dozens of gallery and museum directors. Well, then, my speculation that you were underexposed to the world of the arts looks pretty silly, dunnit? Agreed. I don't know everyone and it could be a regional thing. Aug 02 05 01:56 pm Link Quote from earlier - the html tag is missing "Hmm ... way back in the 1890s there was a big battle between photographers who believed photography was/could be an expressive medium and photographers who thought photography was/should be a primarily documentary medium. The documentary crowd grew larger, one of the primary expressives switched sides, some talented and well-connected photographers joined the ranks of the documentarians, and eventually the idea that photographs must be as sharp as possible and document the physical subject became the norm. However there are still people who strive to photograph feelings, moods, and emotions rather than things and who recognize that motion and emotion can be the legitimate subject of an image, even if it's produced with light-sensitive media rather than paint." Unquote Aug 06 05 07:24 pm Link Every rule has an exception. Aug 07 05 12:36 pm Link I think "Rule" is not the right word. A better word would be "technique". Go to the library or bookstore and you will find more books than you can read about photographic techniques. There is no reason to waste time reinventing the wheel by stumbling through trial and error when you can capitalize on the experience of those who have already learned by their mistakes. You can build a solid foundation by studying the techniques of the artists who create the kinds of images you like most, and then use this foundation of knowledge to do it your own way. Experiment with variations until you get it the way you want it to look. Along the way your own taste can change as you keep experimenting with doing things a little different in each shoot, and that's how your style evolves. You tend to keep repeating the things you like, and stop doing the things you don't like as much. The only "rules" are the ones you make for yourself. So you don't really break rules in photography, you make up your own as you go. Aug 07 05 01:18 pm Link If you've never heard artists talk bad about each other, well, you must not know many "serious" artists. By that I mean artists trying to create fine art. whatever that might mean. They may not attack each other online (I've never been to an art forum) but they do it in private and in person. Let's face it, if you're serious about any type of work, you put your heart and soul in it. That's bound to spark some little bit of jealousy when you see someone not as talented as you and they succeed. Plus if you put your heart and soul in something, that's the way you believe it should be done. If someone does it a different way that may appear "wrong" to you. Aug 07 05 02:00 pm Link The first rule is know how to use your camera. Aug 07 05 02:35 pm Link |
