Minimalist landscapes

[feppe]

I recently started a new project shooting simple landscapes - although I think I should call them minimalist so they won't get offended.

Please note they are also part of my ongoing War Against Rule Of Thirds.

Here first three. Any constructive positive and especially negative critique welcomed. I'll get my head filled with the positive and ignore the negative.

[Phil Indeblanc]

they are tranquil. I can see it covering a wall for a mood set.  As much as the 1/3 rule works, a rule is just a boundry. If you don't step out the boundry, you will never make your own rules.

[stamper]

You should just go ahead and shoot without waging war! A pacifist approach. If it pleases you then that is what counts. If you are confident in your own ability and tastes then if someone criticizes your image then you can safely ignore them? You don't need to battle against them. Number 1 and 3 are nicely balanced compositions - imo - and prove your point.

[John R Smith]

Feppe

I like your pictures. I do quite similar things in B/W, very often. But I don't understand your "war".

If we take frame #1, the pathway through the crop (which is our leading-line) falls on 1/3 in from the left. And the horizon line may be below the third, but actually the real tonal transition is the light sky immediately above the horizon, which is also 1/3 from the bottom of the frame. So this picture is in fact a very good example of the so-called "rule" of thirds.

John

[ognita]

I use to be bothered by those rules before, then I just grew tired of it.
Soon enough, you'll be tired of this war of yours as well.

[Chairman Bill]

I like the way that you've split the second one into thirds. You've got the foreground with the mountains taking up the lower third, then that strip of blue sky deliniating the split between the top & middle third.

[Nacnud]

LOL at this war!
Years ago my Mum did a HND in photography and was set an assignment about the using the photographic rules; including the rule of thirds.
She hates that sort of thing - so set herself a personal challenge.

To take a single image that BROKE as many rules as possible but still be a good photograph.

She managed a wonky horizon, sheep's bum sticking in one edge of the frame, telegraph pole right in the middle of the image, blown highlights, clutter and rubbish which she might have been able to remove by moving a step or two and many other sins which I can't remember.
That image became her best selling post card.

Personally I think the rules make a good starting point when trying to explain why some images work better than others.
There are some people whose images (annoyingly) seem to work regardless of the technical problems in the image; the rest of us have to work at it.

[John R]

Feppe

I like your pictures. I do quite similar things in B/W, very often. But I don't understand your "war".

If we take frame #1, the pathway through the crop (which is our leading-line) falls on 1/3 in from the left. And the horizon line may be below the third, but actually the real tonal transition is the light sky immediately above the horizon, which is also 1/3 from the bottom of the frame. So this picture is in fact a very good example of the so-called "rule" of thirds.

John

I agree with JRS. Rules, like the Golden mean, rule of thirds and others, are really guidelines, which are very helpful to both photographers and painters, especially beginners. But ultimately, we must strike a balance between all the elements in order to convey what we want as effectively as possible.

JMR

[Ed Blagden]

I like the photos.  In Number 3 you have the little islet intersecting the vertical third on the left and the transition from blue to orange water makes a nice horizontal third.

[feppe]

Thanks for all the comments. I agree fully that rules are optional, and to be broken. Judging how you all find thirds everywhere it seems like the war has already been lost. If I didn't know better I'd think you're all in on it and looking for them on purpose

[EduPerez]

Please, keep breaking rules!

[Paulo Bizarro]

I like the photos, but they are not very good attempts at breaking the rule of thirds, I'm afraid...

[John R Smith]

Judging how you all find thirds everywhere it seems like the war has already been lost. If I didn't know better I'd think you're all in on it and looking for them on purpose

I'm afraid that we were all having a little bit of fun at your expense . . .

But it was meant in the nicest possible way  

John

[Rob C]

I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules because there is an instinctive need to balance things out, make the weights work in the overall favour of the frame. To do otherwise would be to offend your own eye - why would you do that?

Taking your claim about avoiding any 'thirds' seriously, you can see that you obviously couldn't do it even if you believed that you were.

You do nice work, feppe, don't mess with your mind or invite others to try!

Rob C

[stamper]

I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules because there is an instinctive need to balance things out, make the weights work in the overall favour of the frame. To do otherwise would be to offend your own eye - why would you do that?

Taking your claim about avoiding any 'thirds' seriously, you can see that you obviously couldn't do it even if you believed that you were.

You do nice work, feppe, don't mess with your mind or invite others to try!

Rob C

I was about to post something in a similar vein, but the wise old man summed it up nicely

[NikoJorj]

I think that the natural truth lies in the fact that it is almost impossible to make a picture that does not follow the rules [...]

Especially if you work with the exact phrasing of the rule or thirds :
"In any image, the subject is closer than 1/6th of frame of the 1/3rd or 2/3rds lines (or maybe it's the borders)".

[tom b]

The rule of thirds is valuable for two things:

It gets the photographer to avoid putting objects in the middle of the frame which is the number one problem with beginning photographers.

It is difficult to have symmetrical images if you place objects on the thirds. Symmetry is a natural response to the environment but it can be boring.

At the moment I am at a loss to think of one photographer who is considered to be a master of photography who makes highly simplified images. The problem is that every time you look at that image you see the same thing. It quickly becomes boring.

Rules are meant to be broken. Thinking about the person looking at your images and creating images that are interesting and long lasting is much more important.

Cheers,

[feppe]

At the moment I am at a loss to think of one photographer who is considered to be a master of photography who makes highly simplified images. The problem is that every time you look at that image you see the same thing. It quickly becomes boring.

John Paul Caponigro comes immediately to my mind - he has some of the most insightful views and opinions on color, and it shows in his photography. I would categorize many of them as simplified images. But definitely not boring.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

John Paul Caponigro comes immediately to my mind - he has some of the most insightful views and opinions on color, and it shows in his photography. I would categorize many of them as simplified images. But definitely not boring.

I agree! And as for the "Rule of Thirds", I've noticed that a great many of John Paul's images have a horizon line that is (a) not in the middle of the picture, and ( b ) very deliberately not one third of the way from either the top or the bottom.


He's a good role model I'd say.

Eric

[popnfresh]

I agree! And as for the "Rule of Thirds", I've noticed that a great many of John Paul's images have a horizon line that is (a) not in the middle of the picture, and ( b ) very deliberately not one third of the way from either the top or the bottom.


He's a good role model I'd say.

John Paul can get away with bending the rules because he's mastered them. People like to say that rules are meant to be broken, but I say that rules are meant to keep the clueless from looking like idiots. Only break a rule when you're good enough to know what you're doing.