| Question Home |
Position:Home>Visual Arts> How are these two photos different in composition?Question: How are these two photos different in composition!? I need to compare these two photos for an English class and i want to apply the 2/3rds rule to them!.
http://burmasitmone!.files!.wordpress!.com/!.!.!. http://blog!.alexgalmeanu!.com/wp-content/!.!.!. I think that the burning monk follows the 2/3 rule but the unknown rebel does not!. Is this correct!? And can you find any other noticeable differences in composition!? I have been using this site as a reference: http://www!.azuswebworks!.com/photography/!.!.!. thanks :]Www@QuestionHome@Com Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I think the 2/3rds rule is a bit ambiguous in both examples!. In the site you've referenced they show a picture of a spider as an example of the 2/3 rule!. I'm not sure that's a very good example, either!! Problem is the rule usually refers to placing the focal point of the photo off-centre, on one of the "thirds" lines, or by dividing the composition into two uneven parts, 1/3 and 2/3, such as with a horizon in a landscape shot!. I'd say the biggest difference between the photos is in the "static" versus "dynamic" composition!. The tanks photo uses a very "dynamic" composition: the photo is dominated by the tanks, which make the figure look even smaller and vulnerable in the corner of the frame!. By placing him in the corner the photo is unbalanced, adding to the sense of tension and the David v Goliath message!. The tanks also create a strong leading line that gives a sense of movement towards the figure, as does the strong diagonal element!. All these compositional elements give a dynamic tension that fits well with the subject, because it shows this little man stopping a seemingly unstoppable force!. The burning monk, by contrast, is a static composition!. The monk is bang in the centre of the frame!. The photo's composition is well balanced, almost symmetrical, giving a sense of stability rather than movement!. This static composition adds impact to the fact that the monk is calm and motionless despite burning to death!. Www@QuestionHome@Com Do you mean "rule of thirds"!? based on the theory that the eye goes naturally to a point about two-thirds up the page by visually dividing the image into thirds (tic-tac-toe design)!. The tank picture is more of the diagonal rule!. The burning man is not rule of thirds!. The focus on the man is in the center, not the tic-tac-toe rule of thirds!. Now there is a rule not mentioned on your website you gave, that in landscape and group photography that you should have 2/3 land and 1/3 sky!. I don't think that was the rule you were going for, though!. I hope this helps!Www@QuestionHome@Com |
