last week we experimented with light

this week we ask "What makes a successful composition?" composition is what's one of the critical elements of creating an image that allows us to communicate a message or an emotion.
Today when we look at the photos I'll be paying special attention to the compostion using 4 tools simplicity, asymmetry, eye lines and point of view.

Four pillars of successful composition:these provide a solid consistent means for analysing photos

"What makes a successful composition?" because composition is what's one of the critical elements of creating an image that allows us to communicate a message or an emotion

"What makes a successful composition?" because composition is what's one of the critical elements of creating an image that allows us to communicate a message or an emotion

same dog in the same place photographed by the same person but lacks internal complexity, separate elements,

"What makes a successful composition?" because composition is what's one of the critical elements of creating an image that allows us to communicate a message or an emotion

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

how many visual elements? internal complexity?seperation of elements? primary vis element

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

how many visual elements? internal complexity?seperation of elements? primary vis element

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

"What makes a successful composition?" because composition is what's one of the critical elements of creating an image that allows us to communicate a message or an emotion

, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

First, I draw a horizontal line through the middle of the image, make sure top and bottom are different. Then I draw a line down through the middle, make sure that right and left are different. Then I look at all four quadrants. I can do this in just a matter of seconds, and this allows me to create good asymmetrical composition to move things out of the center, which is one of the central ideas behind asymmetry and the Rule of Thirds, is moving things out of the center, off towards the edges because it encourages the movement of the eye around the image.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity

primary element should stand out from the rest

assymettry dynamic image. avoid symmetry--makes for a static image, eye reads from right to left, used to move across the surface of an image rather than just landing there

horizon falls above horizontal half

each of the 4 quadrants are different to each other,tree is moved out to the edges of the image, eye follows shadow to get there

good use of perspective and eyelines which we'll come to later. but show this eg because demonstrates the rule of thrids also your eye moves along the platform and arrives at the man reading the paper

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

First, I draw a horizontal line through the middle of the image, make sure top and bottom are different. Then I draw a line down through the middle, make sure that right and left are different. Then I look at all four quadrants. I can do this in just a matter of seconds, and this allows me to create good asymmetrical composition to move things out of the center, which is one of the central ideas behind asymmetry and the Rule of Thirds, is moving things out of the center, off towards the edges because it encourages the movement of the eye around the image.

physical objects in the image that lead the eye through--asymmtry also leads the eye

depth in frame perspective-foreground, mid &background

Variations in tone/ contrast color (dark to light)

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

vertical eye lines conflict with format of photo

First, I draw a horizontal line through the middle of the image, make sure top and bottom are different. Then I draw a line down through the middle, make sure that right and left are different. Then I look at all four quadrants. I can do this in just a matter of seconds, and this allows me to create good asymmetrical composition to move things out of the center, which is one of the central ideas behind asymmetry and the Rule of Thirds, is moving things out of the center, off towards the edges because it encourages the movement of the eye around the image.

physical objects in the image that lead the eye through--asymmtry also leads the eye

depth in frame perspective-foreground, mid &background

Variations in tone/ contrast color (dark to light)

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

no more than 4 visual elements

internal complexity: is detail of each element clear--if unclear/muddy results in visual noise/complexity--

primary element should stand out from the restDEPTH of field can be used to simplify

One, it's very simple, there's only two components, right, the background and the tree. So that definitely satisfies the less than or equal to four. Internal complexity, background is flat black, the tree has a lot of detail but because the detail is very visible it's not complex and that's the difference, you can have lots of detail so long as it's complex.

We'll see some images where that's not true. Separation, great separation between the beautiful white tree and the background, and obviously there's a primary visual element. So this is a fairly easy image, a simple image to critique. Let's move on and look at some others. This is one of the images we looked at in the first presentation, this is that powerful Kodiak wave, and we look at why this image is successful, and let's break it down into these four components. One - one, two, three elements. Internal complexity, they're all internally simple, detail is visible but it's all very visible and distinguishable.

Well-separated image components, a wave, from the mountain, from the sky. Primary visual element, absolutely, it's the wave, and that's why this image is successful. So you have three to four well-separated elements and good eye lines, which we'll talk about later, and a nice primary element.

halve the distance

play with scale--add elements that give a sense of scale

The eye has a much more dynamic range than the camera and also eye and mind work together to filter out the visual noise in a scene and focus on a subject. The camera does not have that ability. So often what you see when you look at a phto there is a whole lot of noise and clutter that detratcts from the subject.----avoid clutter, little visible detail .