Breaking all the "rules"....does it work?

[YvetteC]

This was my son's first trip to the beach. He loved playing in the sand but at times, he just sat there and watched the waves.

He's not looking at the camera, there is a lot of empty space, he is in focus (or at least his back is) and the waves aren't. Since you can't see his face, should I have used a larger DOF and had both in focus? Does it work anyway? Suggestions for capturing his fascination? I do have some shots of his profile but there is something about this one that I just liked better. Thank you!


DSC_7739 by Yvette C., on Flickr

 

[kathyt]

I like this shot. I don't love it. I wish you would have got his complete shadow in the frame. Sometimes that helps with this sort of thing. I would have stepped back for this shot. Need a wider view.

 

[Derrel]

While you are breaking some rules, you are also FOLLOWING other so-called rules.

For example...his implied line of gaze is good. And, even better, you allowed ample room for his line of gaze "to look into", by placing him more off to one side of the frame and not dead-center. You kept the horizone line low, and did not "split the frame" dead-center with the horizon line. You used "selective focus", to show the boy, and the sand, sharply, while allowing the background to be rendered out of focus. You also composed tightly, and made sure there is a clear, simple, obvious subject, and not a confusing mess, shot from far away.

 

[mishele]

You know, sometimes you just need to forget about everything and just enjoy your shot. This is a memory for you to treasure and that is all you should worry about...:hug::

 

[amolitor]

I agree with Derrel. This is basically a good shot. It's not a radical rules-breaker, it's just good. I hope merely goodness is enough for you

 

[ronlane]

I'm in agreement with what has been said above with two additional thoughts. 1) a pano would be interesting in this one with the bulk of it being on the left side. 2) it's hard to believe a young man of his age just sitting there in the sand when there was so much water to play with.

Nice photo.

 

[weepete]

I like it. My eye keeps getting drawn back to the red in his jumper, a good use of dramatic colour in this shot I think

 

[YvetteC]

I like this shot. I don't love it. I wish you would have got his complete shadow in the frame. Sometimes that helps with this sort of thing. I would have stepped back for this shot. Need a wider view.

Thanks for the suggestion....I went back to see if I have the complete shadow in the original....I don't. Something to keep in mind for next time! Thank you!

While you are breaking some rules, you are also FOLLOWING other so-called rules.

For example...his implied line of gaze is good. And, even better, you allowed ample room for his line of gaze "to look into", by placing him more off to one side of the frame and not dead-center. You kept the horizone line low, and did not "split the frame" dead-center with the horizon line. You used "selective focus", to show the boy, and the sand, sharply, while allowing the background to be rendered out of focus. You also composed tightly, and made sure there is a clear, simple, obvious subject, and not a confusing mess, shot from far away.

Thank you so much for your comments! So, in your opinion, is it more important to have ample room for line of gaze or for a complete shadow to be included in the shot?

You know, sometimes you just need to forget about everything and just enjoy your shot. This is a memory for you to treasure and that is all you should worry about...:hug::

You're right! I have a hard time doing that sometimes. I'm "type A" even when trying to be creative

 

[YvetteC]

I agree with Derrel. This is basically a good shot. It's not a radical rules-breaker, it's just good. I hope merely goodness is enough for you ;-)

Awww...I was going for bad a** rule-breaker

I'm in agreement with what has been said above with two additional thoughts. 1) a pano would be interesting in this one with the bulk of it being on the left side. 2) it's hard to believe a young man of his age just sitting there in the sand when there was so much water to play with. ;-)

Nice photo.

Thank you....I wish I had thought of panoramic....that would have been really cool. He loved the water but he REALLY loved eating sand. I have the photos to prove it

I like it. My eye keeps getting drawn back to the red in his jumper, a good use of dramatic colour in this shot I think

Thank you!

 

[Ilovemycam]

Your an over thinker. Nice shot, don't ruin it in your brain

 

[Derrel]

To answer your question, is it more important to have ample room for his line of gaze, or to include the entire shadow? Good question!!!

The answer is almost always that MORE physical/compositional space needs to be allotted to the line of gaze, or the direction of movement. If the line of gaze direction were to have less space give to it, it would look simply dreadful. We see the same thing, often, on photos taken of race cars; if the car does not have MORE space in front of the front bumper (here, the direction little dude is looking) than it does behind the back bumper (or here, the shadowed side of junior), it feels as if there is terrible "tension" in the picture.

The shadow in this shot is right at the corner, and comes in on a diagonal. The thing about shadows is that the human brain sees them, at an almost subconscious level, and they provide us clues about the position of the sun, and the time of day, but we sublimate them quite readily too...we do not obsess over them, or fixate on shadows in everyday scenes. But we DO however, tend to fixate on people who appear to be looking at something with a steady gaze...we go back to that gaze, over and over, and over. Since we can not see his face, the line of gaze is implied. It's a very powerful method to almost force the viewer's eye in the direction of the gaze. The shadow is much less important in this shot I think.

Hold your hand up to the image on-screen and cover it, to the extend that would have allowed more room for the shadow; the image falls apart.

 

[pixelwhip]

i think it works.. he looks like he is 'navel gazing' the ocean in quiet contemplation.. agreed you could push your composition further..

 

[amolitor]

But we DO however, tend to fixate on people who appear to be looking at something with a steady gaze...we go back to that gaze, over and over, and over.

Just to emphasize this: gaze following is a HUGE cognitive thing. our brains are wired at a very low and powerful level to look at eyes and to follow gaze.

 

[Derrel]

But we DO however, tend to fixate on people who appear to be looking at something with a steady gaze...we go back to that gaze, over and over, and over.

Just to emphasize this: gaze following is a HUGE cognitive thing. our brains are wired at a very low and powerful level to look at eyes and to follow gaze.

Yes, very true. In fact, it's kind of fun to mess with the minds of domestic pets, like cats and dogs...just gaze out a window for more than about 15,20 seconds and they too become involved...if you persist, and move your head side to side and appear to be looking intently, a cat will often become utterly engrossed in whatever it is that you are fake-looking at!

 

[YvetteC]

Thank you for all the great info!

The gaze issue is what I was struggling with most when looking at this one. My finished product just feels "right" to me but I thought it may have been a stronger image if we could clearly see what he was looking at. I have been working on composition, so this seemed like one to learn from since I just wasn't sure.