How to construct photography?

One of the puzzles of composition: the subject is centered

This is the most common composition confusion. Many photos centered on the subject can't make people feel. Why? The photographer can't help but ask, it's not like this when shooting. When they see very attractive scenery, they really have an impulse to create. They tried their best to stare at it through the viewfinder, for fear of not capturing the scene. Finally, the photos still can't attract others' attention. Although the photos are clear and colorful, why can't they attract people? Confusion dampened our creative enthusiasm. What is the reason for this confusion?

The emergence of this confusion is a physiological and natural problem, and the solution to this confusion begins with understanding ourselves. Photos are seen with our eyes, and photos are taken through our eyes. All through our eyes. Why is there such a big difference between seeing and not seeing Through the analysis of the phenomenon, we can know that when we look at the picture, we look at the big picture with our eyes, and when we shoot, we look at the small picture with our eyes (even our eyes). The focusing and metering functions of the camera are all designed in the center of the viewfinder. How can there be two kinds of viewing feelings, big picture and small picture, when you look at the picture with both eyes and one eye? From the point of view that the picture is for viewing, it is the key to determine the success or failure of the picture composition with both eyes, and what role is the eye playing?

Our eyes are the only organs that can feel the light and dark colors of the outside world. Looking around, we can also tell the distance between objects, which depends on our eyes. The two eyes see different horizons, and after overlapping, we feel a three-dimensional scene. Because the eyes are different fields of vision, there will be places where two scenes cannot overlap, which is generally called blind spots. The blind spots of both eyes are in the center. No wonder the eyes turn a blind eye to the central object. It turns out that the eyes can't see the object in the middle. Every point in the middle of the photo can be seen, but the important point is that we are seldom interested in it. If the physiological needs are really realized, will we arrange the picture from the perspective of taking care of our own needs?

Why didn't this phenomenon attract our attention when shooting? When shooting, we also feel the scenery with our eyes. How can the feeling of framing be different from the feeling of the picture? We all ignored the fact that we looked with one eye when shooting. There is no blind spot in one eye, but the scenery is not three-dimensional. Even our eyes see the viewfinder thumbnail, which is only a part of our eyes. At this time, the little finger can only be regarded as a point in the eye. Our macro eyes can't be fully integrated into the thumbnail to experience the look and feel of the eyes. All we can do is try our best to catch and seldom arrange.

In addition, camera manufacturers are also inducing us to center the subject. Focusing (autofocus) and photometry are designed in the center of the viewfinder, which makes our subject inseparable from the middle part, resulting in a dull picture.

Having said that, I just don't want to put the subject in the center of the picture. Where is suitable? Have you seen the position where the stage announcer stands? At 1/3 or 2/3 of the stage, the picture is a square plane. If you treat the picture like this, you should put the main body in the position of 1/3 or 2/3, which I think should attract the attention of most viewers.

It's not that you can't center the subject at all, it depends on what kind of subject it is. If it is a symmetrical figure or a golden pagoda structure, it is time to break through this box.

The second problem of composition: disordered lines

Line is the basic method of painting expression and also plays an important role in photography. Why can't many of our photos be registered in the Art Palace? Many reasons are that the relationship between the subject and other lines is not handled well, and the lines can't piece together and set off the subject well, which makes the lines and the subject overlap in disorder. In the end, our elaborate pictures were ruthlessly "chopped".

Lines have played such a big role, how can we ignore all kinds of lines, how can we make lines fill the picture in disorder, what are our eyes usually concerned about, and why are there so many lines in the picture? It has to be said that the way we watch, the eyes see a three-dimensional scene when watching the real scene, and the viewpoints are always the same. No matter how you use your eyes, you can only see one point. Some people say that we have not seen the whole picture of the plate facing the direction. How can you say that you only saw a little? The reason why we can see a large area of the scene clearly is the impression that our eyes keep moving and changing the focal length. The scene stayed in our minds for a while.

The picture is a plane scene, and both sides of the real scene are reflected on the same plane. The scene has solidified, and the reality can no longer be adjusted by the eyes. The front and back of the scene overlap on a picture, so these criss-crossing lines do not have a strong visual impact!

Because of the operation of our eyes, we ignore the existence of irrelevant lines before and after the main object, so that branches, long branches on our heads, oblique corners and so on often appear in our pictures. This has a destructive effect on our composition.

How to avoid the influence of chaotic lines, we need to constantly exercise our eyes' observation ability, let our eyes pay attention to the light, shadow, color and objects that have nothing to do with the shooting scene, and use skills to avoid or deal with influential lines to make the picture neat and consistent.

The third puzzle of composition: share the world equally

If we treat every landscape as a small world, and then think of this world as bigger, and each one is our world, then how can we allocate this world well? See how most of us divide it. The sky and the earth are equally divided, and the sky and the sea are equally divided, equally divided and equally divided, but we always feel that the distribution is uneven and the picture is unstable. Why? We deal with the world fairly, but the world is not peaceful enough. Think about the history that left a deep impression on us. In addition to the era of great unification, the Three Kingdoms is the richest history of the times, and it is also the era that impressed us the most. In order to let Liu Bei, who does not have the competitive strength, exist, Kong Ming proposed to carry out the trend of three pillars and let Liu Bei develop in a relatively stable stage of the world.

What does the tripartite confrontation have to do with our photography? Two points are lines, three points are surfaces, two points are indistinguishable, and three points can stand firm on the surface. Why can't a stable mode be applied?

We only saw the sky and the earth in the actual shooting, big sea and the sky. Is it necessary to add something between the two to achieve the so-called three-thirds of the world and the balance we want? Then where is this thing that can balance our picture?

Don't worry! Just between heaven and earth, between heaven and sea, this balance should be mastered by photographers themselves. How? In my own mind, I have always regarded the world of pictures as three parts. How to apply this three-point world between heaven and earth is not a strategy of far-reaching and near-attacking! This part in the middle is either occupied by the sky or swallowed up by the earth, so that the world will be peaceful and a picture that feels good will appear in front of us.

Remember, I want to feel the depth of the landscape, with more ground or sea. I want to feel broad, so let the sky be wider.

The fourth puzzle of composition: the secret of trend

What is the trend? Trend is the direction that things may reach but have not yet reached. Finding a certain trend can lead many followers to pursue the same goal. Is there room to explore trends in a photographic work? Where are these trends hidden in the picture? What role are these hidden trends playing? What are the specific trends in the picture?

The trend in the picture has no specific direction, and the performance of the trend is basically implied in the indication of lines or things. What kind of lines have the function of trend? Do you have parallel lines? It can be said that no parallel lines can intersect even after several turns on the earth, which means there is no direction to reach. Are there any crisscross lines in the picture? No, because the intersection line has reached the destination.

Under what circumstances will lines show the trend we want? Non-parallel lines, non-staggered lines in the figure (the line segments in the figure may be staggered, but there is no substantial interleaving), lines that intersect not far in the figure, and hidden lines that fall outside the figure in the direction of things are all lines with trend function.

What can I get by using trend function to find the line? With these trends, the picture can give the audience a broad imagination space, give full play to the space of thinking, and have endless fun, so that the audience can find their own answers outside the picture, thus expanding the role of the picture. For example, a person or a group of people in a painting is looking at a point outside the painting, and the viewer will be attracted by these lines of sight and imagine what is outside the painting. Also, if the trend line is well used in the landscape picture, there will be infinite imagination charm in this landscape picture. After discovering this secret, can we still let go of these trend lines and hidden lines?

The fifth mystery of composition: the charm of curve

Curves attract people's attention easily. Moreover, we have an inexplicable love for curves. In nature, there are living animals or plants and some moving objects that can perfectly embody curves. In addition to these potential symbolic meanings representing life and movement, are there other mysteries about curves that fascinate us?

Usually when we look at a picture and see some simple curves, we will use arcs and S lines to express our wonderful feelings about the curves. But when the curve is more twisted and the combination is more complicated, the emotions will be more and more stimulated. How did the motivation of this emotional source come into being? How can I feel endless?

It is not easy to simply find the charm of curves. If we cut the curve into line segments, we will see that these line segments are the boundaries of circles of different sizes, so that we can understand that there are many circles hidden in these curves. What's the point of seeing these circles? What answers can these give us about the charm of curves?

Circle, as we know, has never stopped searching for it since human beings were infatuated with it. Since Zu Chongzhi first put pi in front of us 1500 years ago, this answer has been endlessly counted. In our picture, there are some circles hidden in the curve. The more complex the curve is, the more circles it contains, and the more attractive it is. Does this charm have anything to do with this endless arithmetic? If not, what can be a more perfect explanation! ?

No matter how we interpret it, circles and curves are what we strive to grasp when composing a composition, so that the charm of curves can be found in our pictures, especially human photography, which only shows the surface light perception and texture of the human body and ignores the curves existing in the human body. I think this picture is only a record of human beings, and there is no art at all, which will fundamentally lose the charm of human art.

The sixth problem in writing: the meaning of relevance

Relevance is the internal connection between things with some similarity or contrast. When two (or more) things need to appear in the picture at the same time, if there is no correlation, this will only lead to scattered viewpoints. When shooting, we sometimes want to take pictures of everything we see, but when the photos come out, we find that we don't know what to look at. At this time, we thought of subtraction, and subtraction was used. If it doesn't fit, we'll delete the meaning of the picture. Under what circumstances can those multiple subjects be combined into a picture? What method should be used to do it?

After learning the processing method of the interesting center of the viewpoint, I mastered the processing method of the single subject position in the picture. When there are two or three or more topics, the composition becomes at a loss. When there are more than two so-called figurative subjects, the subject is no longer a concrete object, and this subject is already a certain connection contained in the figurative subject, which is called association here. When this association exists, although there are many objects in the picture, it will not cause the viewpoint to be scattered. For example, no one would have thought that the most common commemorative photos are actually not directly related to people, but taken separately. There is an internal connection here, that is, a trip here. Also, when we want to show the gap between the rich and the poor, we always want to have an image representing the rich and a background of the poor. Even if they do their own thing, they won't distract the audience. This is their internal connection at work, and the connection makes the picture look harmonious.

What's the significance of mastering relevant methods to deal with pictures? Related photography is mostly used in documentary photography, and this method is widely used in hot news photography. This way of shooting can reveal the internal problems in the process of social development through superficial phenomena, which is helpful to quickly understand the changes of social contradictions from real images and promote the development of society in the right direction.

It is easy to compare things in the picture, achieve the purpose of irony and humor, try to find the internal relationship of multiple things, and take some responsibility for social development.

The seventh puzzle of composition: the function of parallelism

The picture reflects the three-dimensional scene of the shooting range through the plane, and the scene is compressed on a plane regardless of distance. In this way, many scenes with depth effect can not be well represented by shooting, and sometimes scenes that look good are shot. However, the picture that came out lacked a lot of depth that we saw at that time, which virtually eliminated the impact of the picture, and the plane made us lose a lot.

Can the plane show a three-dimensional effect and a sense of depth, so that the picture has considerable visual impact? What method should be used to do it?

The method of expressing the distance of a plane picture is realized by using the different sizes of objects, but not all objects with different sizes can show this characteristic in a plane picture. We often use objects of different sizes to shoot the sun or another distant figure, thus creating the illusion that this hand is really magical. This is the result of plane compression, which makes the sense of far and near perspective disappear, and these objects of different sizes do not show the effect of far and near impact.

How to do it well? It is found that shooting an object with arrangement and combination from a certain angle is easy to find the distance relationship of this object, and using the plane effectively will make the picture visually active.

Parallelism can bring us visual effects beyond the plane, especially in landscape shooting, which will make the picture particularly eye-catching.

The eighth puzzle of composition: looking for motivation

When seeing some pictures, the viewer will be driven by some force in the picture and can't help but admire: "The picture is so imposing." What is the specific form of momentum? How does the momentum in the picture exist?

Before we know what momentum is, let's feel our intuition about the state of things. When the state of an object is not great, we don't feel heavy about it. When something is near and far from us, we have no sense of urgency about it. When in a dark environment, although there is some light, we still have fear. If we put these feelings together, how will our hearts feel? We will be oppressed by heavy feelings, driven by urgency, driven by fear, and finally shocked by these feelings until we give in. The result of this comprehensive feeling is the embodiment of the motivation of things.

How to make good use of these aspects in the picture? The sense of heaviness is formed by the subject occupying a considerable space in the picture, the sense of urgency is that the objects in the picture have the direction of movement, and the fear is produced by the dark color.

Then the subject occupies the whole picture, the object moves in a fast line, and the picture is dark. Will these be motivated? I don't think so. The subject occupies the whole picture and lacks contrast. It doesn't feel big enough. The direction of motion of an object is a possible trend, not a distant trend, not the actual state of motion. Black is complete and cannot be counted as color. On the contrary, black will feel peaceful, suggesting that you can rest in peace. A large area of dignified color can only be felt through a small amount of light contrast.

Can you try to find the momentum, so that things with dark colors and a sense of movement towards the photographer occupy most of the space in the picture to realize the feeling of momentum? Sometimes color is not absolute, such as rolling white clouds and surging waves can also create momentum.