Once again the group seems to have gotten away from the topic of
photography.  Why does the topic of "cheese doodles", "parachute cord", or
"railfan activity" bring about more response than any photographic technique?

To try and steer the direction of discussion towards photographic topics
that will help each of us to possibly improve our photographic abilities, I
would like to bring up the topic of composition.

The topic came to my mind this afternoon while looking at the Sporrs web
site.  There are now 94 pictures on display there.  Of that number, thirty
of them display terminal flaws in their composition and framing of the
image.  Thirty of them!  That is almost one third.  And before you jump my
ass about finding fault with others photographic abilities, two of the four
images of mine on the site are damn close to falling into this same
downfall.  That would be 50% for me alone.  

What could this one flagrant flaw be?  Before you read further, take a
little test.  Drop to the bottom of this Email and click on the Sporrs web
site and look at all 94 of the thumbnail pictures.  You don't have to look
at them up close or at the details of the images to see the flaws.  That is
the wonder of the low resolution.  An artist will squint his eyes to look
at his work so that he could look at the composition and balance of what he
is working on without being bothered by all of the details.

Go ahead, take the time to do it before continuing on.  Take mental notes
of which images you don't find pleasing for one reason or another and see
if this is repeated in the other images. 


What did you find?  If you found a repeated flaw in 20 or more of the
images on the web page, it is probably the first thing that an editor would
pick up on and discard the image for consideration of publishing.  That is
of course, unless the image is of something so rare or unusual that it is
the only one available to be published.

Come on you say, what is it get to it!  Well, the repeated flaw is that the
image is cropped too close.  In other words, the focus of attention comes
too close to the edge of the picture.  This makes the image appear to be
crowded in the pictures limits or frame.  It also can make the image appear
that it is running off of the page and is going to drop on the floor.

The biggest reason editors will not use such an image is that it totally
restricts their ability to crop the image to their needs or format.  For
instance for a cover shot, there is not enough sky above the image to put
their mast head, or not enough space below the image to put copy telling
what stories are inside this issue.

But more than anything, it will destroy the balance of the image forcing an
abrupt ending to the flow of the smooth train gracefully snaking through an
"S" curve.  This can be corrected by allowing a little more space between
the front of the locomotive and the edge of the slide or print.  Allowing
for the rail to continue ahead of the locomotive.  It gives a place for the
train to go, other than abruptly ending at the edge of the frame.

This problem has basically been explained as the use of thirds.  I really
don't like this term as it seems to put a mathematical formula to an art
form were none exists.  But it does work.  If you are not familiar with the
concept.  The railroad photography terms, the center of the front of the
locomotive should be approximately one third of the way either across the
frame horizontally, vertically, or both.  This is one of the easiest ways
to achieve balance in the image.

There are many, many points to composition that can be discussed on this
page and with Dave's help, maybe I can get him to scan an image and I can
have him print it two or three different ways to show how this one
particular point can ruin an otherwise great shot.  We could also carry the
concept a little further and use different images to show how different
elements of composition improve the image.

But for now and the sake of discussion, lets take a look at my vertical
image near tunnel four in Montana.  If I had waited for the train to get a
little further down the track (I do have shots with it there thanks to the
power film waster.) the flow of the movement of the train would have been
abruptly stopped by the trees sticking up above the track in bottom left
corner.  Yes more of the locomotives would have been visible, but the
overall balance of the image would have been disrupted.

However, this particular picture is not a good example of the
rule-of-thirds.  It defies the rule-of-thirds in fact, which shows that
rules in art are made to be broken when the situation calls for it.
Balance is achieved in this particular photograph by the image essentially
being divided in have with the lower half being a little heavier image wise
because of the brown earthy color of the rocks and the train.  The heavier
part of the image is of course at the bottom where you would expect the
heavier part of something to be.  If it wasn't, the picture hanging on the
wall will constantly want to swing around on the nail and hang upside down.
 The cloud sky and fog help to lighten the top half of the image.

One other point of composition that makes this particular image interesting
is that the eye has a tendency to follow strong lines through the image in
an "S" curve.  Starting at the top right, the eye has a tendency to follow
the top of the mountain down the middle left.  At the middle left, the eye
has a tendency to follow the light silver and white train against its dark
background to the right side, then swing back to the left to the locomotive
consist.  The near side shore line of the river also has a tendency to
guide the eye to the locomotives.

But instead of it ending here, the is also a tendency for the eye to
continue on down the tack and along the river out of the picture.  If the
train was cropped closer to the edge of the picture, instead of the train
appearing to be going out of the picture, it would appear to be ready to
fall off of the picture and onto the floor.  To achieve this difference,
there has to be some strong lines continuing through the picture and right
through the edge.  Without them, the image will appear to bump into the
edge of the image.

I must admit that before going to work for the railroad, my background and
training was as a commercial artist in layout and design.  Compositional
lines, the play of lights and darks are more important to me than the
technical jargon of how to determine the correct exposure.  That kind of
information has been published in so many places that you have to try to
avoid seeing it, not to.

Just like an out of focus or poorly exposed picture separates the beginning
novice from the more knowledgeable photographer, pore composition separates
the want-a-be's from the truly great photographers.  

Charlie
Charlie Dischinger


-> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects
-> Web Site: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs
-> Message © SPORRS® 1998 - All Rights Reserved


Reply via email to