Skip to main content

Image structure

In my last post I mentioned the structure of an image. One of the most important aspects of visual structure is the range of tones between light and dark and their distribution across the frame.

Imagine a photograph of a white fish bone skeleton lying on a flat, almost black stone surface. The white bones stand out against the dark background. The contrast is easy to see and you're literally looking at the skeletal structure of the image.

Of course every image you take has skeletal structure. The success of the composition often depends on getting the distribution of light and dark right. The Great Masters of painting knew this as did the impressionists but sadly this way of seeing is often not taught to photographers. Yes, photography is all about light but even more it is about the distribution of that light within the image.

If you've worked with black and white film and viewed a negative in front of a light source the structure is easy to see. With digital its a different kettle of fish, so to speak. There are two ways to assess the light structure in an image. A quick and handy way is to use the depth of field preview button on your camera. By stopping down the lens you will more easily see the distribution of light across the frame. Another way, which works well with a bit of practice, is the almost close your eyes, in effect stopping them down, to see the lighting skeletal structure in the image.

Once you've got the image into your image editing software package there are several ways to check, for example using curves to exaggerate the contrasts, or simply going mono and heightening contrast.

The real message here though is to pay attention to the structure. Making sure that it works in your image will help you to improve your photography.

Cheers for now.

Paul

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Approach to taking a portrait

Portrait of Amitabh Bachchan. Click on the image to see larger version. Every portrait is different but there are also elements which are the same, whether you’re shooting the famous or the locally famous. Fame is of course all relative. It depends on profession, accomplishments or media celebrity status. Whoever the ‘famous’ individual is there are millions of people in the world who will never have heard them. For example I photographed the legendary Indian Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan, who amongst his many accolades was awarded the Legion d'Honneur, the highest civilian award of France. But I’m positive that many people in North America will not have heard of him – although he has more fans than Tom Cruise, Jack Nicholson and Robert De Niro put together. I find that however well known a person is cracking through egos and insecurities is really important when it comes to getting authentic strong portraits. However I hasten to add that when it came to photographing Amitabh th

The portrait photographer's motivation

Easy access to the Internet and digital photography has resulted in an ever growing number of photographers uploading their images for comments and ratings from peers. Online communities evolve and these mini-societies each have their pecking order, internal groups and communal preferences. Photographers learn from each other. On sites that have a rating system there is often pressure to conform to certain styles, techniques and even subject matter. Although I participate in numerous sites (it's great fun), I recognise the danger of becoming a herd animal and losing the edge of individual creativity. There will always be the creatives that lead the way and the imitators that can only try to follow in their footsteps. This lead me to think about classifying photographers according their inner motivation. So as a bit of fun here are a few different types: The innovator Driven to always find something new, different and creative. Wants to be leading edge. Motivated by creative satisfa

Is professional photography still a viable career?

I am not against amateurs and semi-professionals selling their photography. It's a great way to earn some extra cash. However I am concerned about the level of high quality published work and the standards that clients and the public accept these days. It seems that just about everyone is a photographer. The line between amateur enthusiast and professional is fuzzy to say the least. Photography enthusiasts are selling their images through stock libraries and microstock websites, directly to magazines or through their own and third party sites. They're accepting commissions to shoot weddings, being hired to shoot for magazines and selling fine art prints from their websites. They're teaching photography on the weekend and guiding photographic holidays and safaris. Photography became accessible to the masses with the first non-expert cameras and the famous Kodak slogan"You press the button, we do the rest." The digital camera age has taken the whole thing to a ne