1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What is a fundamental rule?

Discussion in 'Talking Pictures' started by the dingo, Jan 13, 2014.

  1. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    Very similar to Paul but in my case the fundamental rule is "Is the nearest eye in focus?" That's really why I usually use just one focus point.
  2. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    Any and all of those things apply.

    When It comes to composition I rarely go beyond the practical....
    Does it show what I want it to show?... click
    is there a better point of view, to show it better?....click
    I am an ancient and decrepit dog when it comes to most things.
  3. TheFatControlleR

    TheFatControlleR :Devil's Advocaat: Forum Admin

    Or perhaps in this instance;

  4. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Or maybe more appositely;

  5. TheFatControlleR

    TheFatControlleR :Devil's Advocaat: Forum Admin

    Quite. Contrary views are drivers of discussion (and change, on occasion, in the broader sense), but unnecessary aggression runs counter to learned discourse. ;)
  6. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I am actually quite surprised how this discussion has continued in such a polite manner by all responders to the OP. I thought it would have broken down by page 2!
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2014
  7. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    Nah, we've heard it all many times before. Just keeping it going for amusement. ;)
  8. RovingMike

    RovingMike Crucifixion's a doddle...

    I do agree, but mainly because you have now narrowed your comments down to referring to your uses of photography and not absolute comments on all photography, which is where you started out, denying that one photo could be compared against another. The "rules" are all perfectly valid in their own ways, but the vast majority of snappers either don't know, or don't care. Like Les Dawson's piano playing, it can take a lot to break rules and still create something successful as an image. But any image can be perfectly appreciated for what it is. This discussion sends waves of deja vu over many of us and in the Appraisals section usually leads a conclusion that one isn't going to make much progress with those ideas. But that's in Appraisals where people usually want to.
  9. daft_biker

    daft_biker Action Man!

    Same here. I usually go with a "use it or lose it" approach to composition and just try to minimise distracting elements.
  10. MickLL

    MickLL Well-Known Member

    What an odd reply. Where did I claim that I was 'in your head'. You apparently deny the use/existence of these so called rules (don't start - I don't really think that they are rules let alone fundamental ones) and I made the point that whatever you think that you are doing your output fits pretty neatly into obeying all of the common rules. What I disagreed with is that the output that you chose to show breaks any of the rules. They don't.

    How near is near? I don't know - nor do I care. Photographers (proper ones that is) are not sticklers for mathematical precision. Near enough is when you think that it's near enough. Quite ridiculous to try to tie it down with any more precision.

    Of course you do (take it as you see fit) and because of that the timing is your choice not mine and so the eye direction of your subjects is your choice and not mine.If the chap in number 2 had been looking straight forward you would have had a completely different picture and IMHO a less effective one. As I said you chose the timing and you therefore chose to create some sort of link between the walker and the pair on the steps. Not my interpretation - yours. Also you gave us some words as well in this case so the thoughts are partly yours too - my thoughts, again in this case, are subsidiary to yours.

    BTW look at the fourth picture in the Penarth thread (appraisal) if you want to see an effective picture that breaks the rules (at least the common ones).

    Last edited: Jan 14, 2014
  11. the dingo

    the dingo Well-Known Member

    Well, that was fun.
    Unnecessarily aggressive is it now? I thought I was being quite reserved in my approach. Someone tells me something I might find useful, I research it to see the factual basis for the information, I find it's more of a myth than anything, I question the logic of applying a mathematical relationship to something as esoteric as photography and I get told it wasn't meant to be so pedantic and that almost anything goes. Then I find a few individuals running the show with dogma as if it were a religious cult and I shouldn't be discussing such things in an open and forceful manner.
    so what is this forum about?
    I appreciate your openness and honesty, Phil. Thanks for that. There are a few here who might take a page from your book.
  12. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    I just wonder where, and what, research you have done, as compared with several hundred years worth of various artists, photographers, most of whom have used the various rules in their images.
  13. Catriona

    Catriona Well-Known Member

    I do agree.
    Where did you research before rubbishing what others here said? Was it the internet - or did you visit Galleries perhaps, or read books, or take a course in Art History and appreciation? I'm most interested in your sources of 'facts' which show what myths we all believe.
  14. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    If you come out with statments like

    then yes, I think you're being unnecessarily aggressive and far from restrained. It's got absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with whether I agree with you or not; you're more than welcome to state your point of view, and forcibly, too, for that matter, but there are boundaries to civilised debate, and that's the issue we're talking about - nothing to do with the content of what you're saying. The reality is that you actually detract from your argument with your behaviour. Your choice, but don't be surprised if people call you on it, and please don't go over the line of what's acceptable - phrases like the one I've quoted are rather too close to that line to be comfortable.
  15. Barney

    Barney Well-Known Member

    Well, for it's worth, all The Dingo has done with this thread is remind me why I no longer frequent photography forums on a regular basis. :(

    I'm off out to take some pictures, I may be some time.
  16. dangie

    dangie Senior Knobhead

    Don't say that Barney. Beats daytime telly any day..... :D
  17. Fen

    Fen Well-Known Member

    But Barney... the rule you clearly display in your avatar (f/8 and be there)... blah... blah... blah... parp... blah... blah... blah...

  18. NosamLuap

    NosamLuap Rebmem Roines

    Fen, I think you've hit on something... Barney, your SB900 may not overheat so much if you drop to f/4 ;)
  19. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    It seems that there is little if any evidence that the Old masters ever used rules. The "rules" were established by analysing the works of the old masters themselves.

    Prior to the old master period (13th to 18th centuries) the "Primitive period" artists
    used all sorts of conventions which could certainly be thought of as "rules". which distinguish them very clearly from more naturalistic later "Masters."
    In the 19th century through to modern times, scholars have studied and analysed these old works to a nicety, to draw from them their "secrets". These are the "Rules" that modern day photographers like to slavishly obey.

    When I was studying Photography at college in the 50's we spent more of our time in Art galleries and exhibitions, graphic art and life drawing, than we ever did in the photographic studio. It was thought that even the technical photographers needed a grounding in Art and culture. Even if many of us chose a rather bohemian, Jazz centric lifestyle out of class.
  20. 0lybacker

    0lybacker In the Stop Bath

    Welcome to 'Hotel California'. ;):):eek:

Share This Page