Rozov’s photo critique: there, beyond the horizon, is the framing line…

I tried to choose the photos worthy of rapturous interjections from those sent in for the editorial photo contest! “It didn’t work,” as they say these days! What a pity: photographs can be united by regrets for not fully exploiting their potential.

However, some pictures did catch my attention and are worthy of discussion. Not bad at all, I forget most of the images in a second. And this happens not only to me, but to most of the potential viewers of our pictures. There are too many pictures now. They are intrusive, and in order for someone to like them, they have to be different from most others. The photographer has to learn to find the shortest way to the heart of the viewer.

A famous photographer and teacher, author of popular books on technique and art of photography, gives a “Photocritic” column

Georgy Rozov

.

Analysis of photos submitted by readers of “Photo&Technika” magazine photo contest, the results of which were published in № 1 41 2012.

“Silver of Winter” Evgeny Bulin, 65 years old pos. Tomilino, New York region. .

The closest to the ideal, in my opinion, was the author of this winter landscape. I admire the technical perfection of the image. The dynamic range of the camera was fully realized here: all tones from white to pitch black gently change from one to the other. And the composition of the frame is flawless. I am not partial to winter pictures because I don’t like to freeze myself and I don’t like to freeze my technique either. I know very well how difficult it is to shoot such beauty, and therefore any good winter photo evokes in me a respectful attitude to the author.

However, in this case I’m disturbed by the rectangular boxes of khrushkas in the upper right part of the frame and above the hut. If I were the author, I would have stitched them up. The picture would have benefited from it. Technically it is not difficult to do. Anticipating reproaches from the adepts of “pure” photography I remind you that retouching has always been a common tool of non-event photography.

“Beach soccer”. Pavel Kostitsyn, 46 New York, America . Rybinsk, Yaroslavl region. .

This sea foam figure reminds me not of a soccer player, but Crocodile Gena without the body, but on legs. It looks like a slightly truncated version of a child’s drawing on a given theme. The picture might well be interesting to some part of the audience. I would only delete the empty space to the right of the main character. The author has made the mistake common to most beginner photographers: he has positioned his subject in the center of the frame. Most likely not because it was designed that way, but because there is a better and automatically triggered autofocus sensor in the center of the frame. This composition makes all the shots look alike, and the movement in the frame dies.

“About boldness and chutzpah.”. Vladimir Palchik, 44 years old Saint Petersburg .

Really, it’s not bad! True, if I had my way, I would have worked with the title. The thing is that some professional impudence of the photographer can be seen with the naked eye. But I did not find any courage. “Astronauts” in masks. There’s nothing to be afraid of: you can’t identify it by its eyes. Besides, you shouldn’t be rude: you’ve been ordered to endure! In my opinion, this is a photograph about the conflict of professionals. Approximately the same as a conflict between a buyer and a seller: they are on opposite sides of the counter, and that is the essence of the clash.

Considering the photographic merits of the image, I can’t help noticing that the horizon is crooked and the space above the “astronauts” heads is very aggressive due to the rhythmically repeated dark spots of windows against the light background. They draw the viewer’s attention and distract from the main thing, the clash between the photographer and the policeman. Ampupying this area makes the picture more laconic and austere. An informative and emotional message is read faster.

“Ice Desert.”. Leonid Ogarkov, 22 St. Petersburg .

I liked the restrained color scheme, the voluminous lighting, and the well placed accents. In short, a good landscape. But I wouldn’t look at it for long, because I’m missing something… main. All the objects in the frame equally pretend to capture the viewer’s attention. I call such pictures “mats.

It’s ornamental and even beautiful, but if all the objects are emphasized by the same means, and resemble one another, like the Chinese in the eyes of a European , then it’s very hard to understand what the picture is about. Now it’s just a visualization of the name – the icy wilderness. But if you add to the “rug” at least something different from the ice a man, a dog, a bear, a seagull… , the photo will acquire new meanings and associative links.

“On the bench.”. Maxim Bogdanov, 31 New York, America . Gelendzhik, Krasnodar region .

That’s a truly missed subject! Many photographers include a lot of unnecessary things in the frame. In this case only the area I have marked out in the lower right part of the frame is interesting and even funny. There’s a humorous comparison between a young man’s feet and a woman’s delicate fingers, which look like a blossoming flower. The lack of narration leaves the viewers free to fantasize about their own love story.

The author intuitively grasped the subject from his surroundings, but could not bring it to the viewer in a photographically literate and accurate manner: the idea got lost in the mass of secondary spots. The figures above the bench were unnecessary, because the person in the frame is always in charge. The horizontals of the bench boards – heavy, dark – are rhythmically repetitive and take up a lot of space. Verticals of tree trunks tearing off the upper part of the frame add nothing to the message at all.

In short, after framing the idea is exposed. The work of singling out the main thing in the frame should have been done during the shooting. You should also have looked for a point of view closer to the legs of the characters, and lower. Closer, because in this case the legs would be larger, and the background would be blurred because of the reduced depth of field. The low point of view would have drawn more attention to the delicate legs of the girl.

Compare the photos before and after retouching

“Waiting.”. Evgeny Zhernakov, 24 Gelendzhik, Krasnodar Territory . Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine .

Left: original photo

Right: after cropping and retouching

I love photographs that grab the eye, that make you ponder and think things through. “Waiting” is just such a picture. We value dogs for their loyalty and selfless love for their owners. And that’s why the picture did not leave me indifferent. In addition, this picture has other merits. It is photographic! Three-dimensional world turned into a two-dimensional image cleverly enough. The illusion of depth of space is not lost. Unfortunately, technically the photo is not flawless. I had to retouch the picture.

First of all, I removed everything unnecessary. For example, I had to part with the lantern because it appeared to be a very bright spot in the frame and attracted the viewer’s attention. Framing part of the foreground brought the dog into the foreground and really made it the main thing in the frame.

Then I highlighted space in the back of the frame where I could make out the silhouettes of people. And finally, I painted the contours of the dog silhouette so it became sharp. The thing is, the entire picture is “blurred,” that is, it’s not sharp. To put it crudely, it’s a marriage. Something in the frame has to be sharp. Otherwise with few exceptions the human eye rejects the blurred image.

“Morning on Lake Baikal. Pavel Dedyukhin, 30 years old New York . Irkutsk .

There is a whole bunch of compositional and pictorial mistakes.An object at or near the intersection of diagonals automatically becomes the focus of the viewer’s attention.

The fisherman is rowing, so the boat in the center of the frame should be moving, but it froze in place.

In the center of the frame the motion usually freezes, so experienced photographers place here quiet, symmetrical, balanced objects, which motion is contraindicated.

“The foreground is always foreground” – that is one of the canons learned through the experience of several generations of photographers. In this case there is a strip of land on the foreground which is sharply different from the overall tone of the picture. The shore is darker and should, according to the author’s idea, make the composition deeper. The author succeeded, but there is a conflict between the boat and the foreground. The conflict is resolved in favor of the center, because a person is always more important. That’s why I suggest you amputate the strip of ground.

The composition has improved after cropping, but it has not lost any depth: the waves in the foreground are still tonally darker than the water in the back of the composition.

Now I have a feeling of an overabundance of blue sky in the upper part of the frame. I’ve halved the blue. The picture became even slimmer, but now a flying island is dominating in the frame, contrary to all the rules. I’m willing to believe that the fog looked exactly like that when it was photographed, that its brightness and location did not change during the editing of the original file. But the fog strip is the brightest spot in the frame, and the boat is highlighted on the principle “dark on light”. I was tempted to advise the author to tone down the brightness a bit to restore the sense of connection between the island and the water.

However, there’s another good solution: to rename the picture “Flying Island”.

“Reeds. Sunset”. Mikhail Meshkov, 38 New York, America . Pavlovsky Posad, New York region. .

It’s not a new subject, but everyone has been known to marvel at the play of sunset light. The trouble is, it’s a difficult subject. It is contrasting, and it is not easy to capture details in both shadows and light in such a situation. This worked for the author.

The second problem he had to solve was the compositional division of the picture into two: the sky and the ground. Each half is good on its own, but they don’t live together. The solution to the problem has been contrived long ago: they introduce some vertical lines in the frame that unite the upper and lower halves of the frame. The author used this technique as well. It remains to be decided which of the halves to prioritize.

The skyline divides the photo in half and puts the viewer before the problem of choosing which is more beautiful in the piece? This kind of choice is difficult and should be made by the author, but since the author has withdrawn himself, I will give my opinion: there is more beauty at the bottom. That’s why I suggest framing the upper part of the firmament.