Thursday, December 07, 2006

What Photographs Well?

We can discuss landcsapes versus street photography, abstract vs. glamour, but what I wanted to discuss here is what kinds of material photograph well, and for that matter which ones don't.

Ever think about whether dark subjects photograph better than light or the other way round. Do gradations have to be smooth or can they be harsh? Do patterned objects photograph ok?

I can spout off about my own theories but it might be more instructive to analyse the great photographs and see if there are any patterns. I'm going to make some observations from my experience looking at good photogtraphy

Observations

1) Light objects are much more important than dark. Think of Moonrise over Hernandez - it's the light buildings, the gravestones and the clouds that make the image. In Pepper # 30, it's the silvery highlights that make the image, not the dark tones. Far more good images have the light tone as the focus of the image. There are exceptions, but if you were a betting man...

2) Gradual changes in tone photograph better than sudden changes, other than to define a pattern. Think of the way that water photographs, or driftwood, peppers, skin, round objects...

3) Triangles photograph better than squares.

4) Light things look better against zone III - IV background than they do against a Zone V.

5) Diagonal lines generally look better than horizontal lines - and do a better job keeping your eye in the picture.

6) Wet photographs better than dry - makes you wonder why we all scurry indoors when it starts to rain.

7) Long soft shadows are generally better than short sharp deep ones (not much of a problem here in Calgary in December - we have decent shadows most of the day.

8) Partial sun is better than full sun.

9) Uneven clouds are better than completely even cloud cover as a light source.

10)Patchy sunlight (as in a noon day forest) is very hard to photograph.

11) Light coloured rocks photograph better than dark coloured ones. On the east coast we had lovely granite, on the west coast dull almost black rock covered in white bits (not all of which was bird poop) - guess which photographed better.

12) Age photographs better than new (except in people, and sometimes then too if you aren't trying to please the subject).

13) Tidy photographs better than clutter.

14) Circles photograph well and when shot off to one side are ovals which are even better.

15) S bends look great.

I'm sure you can think of exceptions to all of the above 'rules', hell, so can I, but they're a good place to start.

4 comments:

Andy Ilachinski said...

This may be a bit "over philosophizing" your aesthetic list (which I like BTW), but I suspect you might find the work of Christopher Alexander (an architect, and trained in mathematics) stimulating. I cannot possibly summarize the ideas in a short note, so will leave a link; I will only suggest here that while Alexander has tried to distill the essence of "architectural design", his ideas are obviously universal. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.03/play.html

Anonymous said...

And then there are those who make their living by exceptions to the rule. I'm thinking of #13 on this list and Josef Sudek! Of course not all of Sudek's photographs are untidy but I've never untidieness made more beautiful than in some of his photographs.

Anonymous said...

Andy,
That's a very interesting list from Alexander, and is obviously relevant to your work. I've long been a fan of A Pattern Language, but hadn't thought of applying it to photography before. Thanks for that insightful connection!

But Alexander seems to be addressing a different issue from the post, which is about what sorts of subject material "photograph well," which I took to mean "are likely to result in a pleasing image." I tend to think that a photographer can do well with any material that he or she has a sincere feeling for (though that's not to say it's easy). The Alexander list gives ways to think about the images that result, in an attempt to better understand why they "work" or don't. I would use the list not to select subjects, but to study ways to create effective images from them.

SteveR said...

Very nice post - I have several "useful clichés" that I keep in the back of my mind that often contribute to good images:

- strong diagonal(s)
- repeating patterns
- 'a little something in a lot of nothing'