I wrote this 12 years ago on reddit. I’ve since deleted that account. I can’t stand reddit, but the advice stands.
Okay, I’ve been drinking so I’m gonna lay this shit out for you guys, otherwise I wouldn’t bother. Former university photo prof and former professional photographer here.
The rule of thirds is horse shit. The ‘critics’ looked at zillions of awesome photos and from them distilled out that things should be placed on the thirds but they didn’t understand why. This is the deal:
There is a balance point between tension and static in a photo. Static is near the center slightly above true center. Look at a portrait. Static to a Tee. The most tension in a photo is right at the extreme edge of the photo. It’s so much tension that you’ll rarely find a photo that uses the edge effectively. I had a student once though that did a shot of a girl in a pool with her face right at the edge of the photo and it was amazing.
The BALANCE between static and tension is halfway between the edge and the center which just so happens to be on the thirds. If you understand the reason the ‘rule of thirds’ works you can exploit it to your advantage. Put it closer to the edge for more tension and closer to the center for more static / relaxation and on the thirds for a good balance.
Second nugget for all y’all.
In painting we talk about composition. Composition means you’re adding elements to the picture. Unfortunately because photography came along way after painting we still use the same words but those words are horseshit in this artistic medium. You don’t compose fuckall unless you’re taking pictures of still lifes.
Photography is all about isolation.
You don’t get to compose, you certainly don’t get to compose mountains, or trees (unless you’re Fred Picker*). What you’re doing in photography is better called:
ISOLATION.
You’re isolating your subject from distractions. When people give you the advice to get closer? What they’re saying is to isolate from distractions only they’re idiots who are parroting shit they’ve read on the internet and don’t understand the underlying meaning.
Because you don’t get to compose your only tool in creating meaning and making that meaning powerful in a photograph is to isolate from distractions. You have to get in close, zoom in, walk up, get in your subject’s grill and take the pic so that there is nothing taking away from what you’re trying to convey. For big subjects like the Sistine Chapel you can’t get the whole thing in. That’s a tourist shot. Back up until you can take a picture of the whole thing. Bullshit, now you have a tiny cathedral in your wide angle lens and it looks like ass. Move in until you’re taking a detail. When you can’t see the edges of something then it might go on forever. Portraits? Don’t include the environment unless it helps tell the story and 99% of the time it doesn’t.
You’re a shitty editor, in most cases.
W Eugene Smith was one of the greatest photographers that ever lived but he was a shitty editor. You are not emotionally divested from your work and can’t make objective decisions about it. Be brutally honest about your work and don’t be afraid to throw away a photo you worked hard on. Sometimes it just doesn’t work. It breaks your heart but it is what it is.
Backgrounds are not subjects. 85% of the photography on the internet is a background in search of a subject. If you want a great photograph you need a center of interest and don’t bullshit yourself into thinking that tree over there is the center of interest. It’s not. It’s a fucking tree that doesn’t add shit to the photo. Backgrounds make great uh.. backgrounds on your desktop but they aren’t art. If you shoot landscapes carry a red poncho around and stick it on your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend and have them walk out into the scene and be your subject. You just need an anchor.
Finally, shoot, a lot. These days you don’t have to pay for film and developing. It’s a two-edged sword. On one hand it’s awesome because you can shoot mountains of images without cost. On the other hand the cost of fucking up is so low that you don’t learn important lessons. Forget to include the filter factor? Ah who cares, re-shoot. It won’t stick. When Ansel shot Moonrise over Hernandez he had literally ONE SHOT. He couldn’t find his meter and so he had to base the exposure on the known luminosity of the moon and go for it. After he exposed the first sheet the light went off the crosses and the picture was not worth shooting. He had one sheet and so he had to develop it to make everything come out like he wanted. Now we’d just composite in photoshop and it’d be fine but sometimes you don’t get a second chance. If you don’t learn those hard lessons about forgetting stuff it’s going to bite you in the ass one day. You’ll only get 10 seconds of good light, or something, and miss the opportunity because you were checking the screen. Know your tools, spend time being familiar with them, and shoot by God shoot your ass off. Shoot until you wear the shutter button out and then buy another camera and wear that out because that’s how you develop your eye.
All of you have unique vision. Some of you are probably best suited to shooting senior portraits. I believe you’re born with the eye for pictures, you have it or you don’t – however, all of you have a vision. Don’t take instruction from assholes who couldn’t make it as a pro, don’t take my word for shit. Shoot your OWN VISION, develop it. Don’t become a clone of someone you admire. The worst problem with photography schools is they create neat little clones of the professors. That’s horse shit. Break out of the mold and exploit your vision. Nobody becomes amazing by being what came before them.
That is all.
tl;dr: Fucking go read it you lazy fucker.
Also: cocks.
Leave a Reply