Graphic Design and Photography

[amolitor]

I am as guilty as anyone of suggesting that one should look at graphic design ideas when trying to understand photography. The more I dig in to this, the more I think this might actually be a terrible idea.

Take the business with lines: horizontal lines suggest stability, vertical lines suggest instability (or, if you poke around the web, it turns out they can suggest pretty much anything you like: power, stability, peace, energy, strength, and so on).

In graphic design this makes sense. Well, the business with "vertical lines can suggest anything at all" but that does not seem to appear in discussions of actual graphic design, only on ad-baiting "pep ur snaps up" photography sites. In graphic design, lines are actual things on the page, you're actually drawing a line. A horizontal line is a real thing in your design, and the fact that it IS horizontal makes it, in fact, look like it can't fall over. It looks like it's lying down. This sort of thing is also going to be true about an abstract photograph, which one could argue is just a graphic design anyways.

A photograph of real things doesn't actually have any lines, it has things. It has trees, not vertical lines. It has railroad tracks, not horizontal lines. Even if there is some suggestion of "repose" purely in the horizontal line an object suggests, the actuality of the object will dominate. A person lying down appears to be at rest because he or she is at rest, not because he or she is parallel to some horizontal line. A thing that is powerful will look powerful because it is powerful, not because it is in a vertical orientation. The diagonal line on the edge of a 4500 year old pyramid no more suggests "dynamism" and "action" than a picture of a snail.

The chain of reasoning from:

1) such and such a feature in a graphic design tends to evoke such and such a response
2) this feature in your photograph bears a superficial resemblance to that feature of the graphic design
3) therefore this feature of your photograph will tend to evoke the same response

strikes me as little better than sympathetic magic.

 

[Derrel]

Lines do not have to be "actual", amolitor...lines can be implied....line of gaze of a subject for example...

I think you've bitten off a big chunk of nonsensical over-thinking this AM, on this,specific post dude...

I do quite often enjoy your thoughts, and meanderings, and challenging ways of looking at things amolitor, but this post??? Ehhhh...I'm just gonna let this one sliiiiiide into the ether that is the TPF atmosphere after one day's time....

 

[amolitor]

Leading lines seem to be a real thing, for reference. At least, MY eyes follow the lines around, and I assume most other people's do as well. There's a very strong neurological basis for gaze-following, in particular.

It's the 'such and such lines convey such and such an emotion' thing that is irking me this morning!

 

[Derrel]

The elements and principles of design are what govern the visual arts. They are the underlying fundamentals of visual communication, and are "real", and defined. The elements and principles of design are worth studying, from qualified, expert sources. You do well to make note that the claptrap found on "ad-baiting "pep ur snaps up" photography sites." is often just that....nonsensical, worthless claptrap. We ought not confuse the genuine fundamentals of the fine arts with the B.S. that's been spread across the fields of the web. Half-baked, uneducated misinterpretations spewed all over the web simply are not worthy of discussing, for me at least.

The way I see it, your presentation of this topic contains wayyyyyyy too much potential for damage on the part of those who seek guidance but instead are given nonsensical misunderstandings by those posing as qualified,expert sources.

 

[amolitor]

The way I see it, your presentation of this topic contains wayyyyyyy too much potential for damage on the part of those who seek guidance but instead are given nonsensical misunderstandings by those posing as qualified,expert sources.

My secret plan! Noo! You know too much!

 

[tirediron]

Dude... it's 8.00am! That is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too deep for this time of the morning!

 

[Designer]

Dude... it's 8.00am! That is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too deep for this time of the morning!

Maybe he's still up from yesterday.

 

[KenC]

Dude... it's 8.00am! That is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy too deep for this time of the morning!

Maybe he's still up from yesterday.

Maybe he never sleeps because he's an alien cyborg planted among us to sow confusion and disorder ...

 

[Designer]

It's the 'such and such lines convey such and such an emotion' thing that is irking me this morning!

I'm going to throw in with Derrel on this one. Too simplistic an approach for outside of academia.

I have the idea that someone made that claim to you, which quite naturally got your dander up. I say ignore it.

Get some sleep.

 

[amolitor]

Wait, I'm supposed to be asleep at 10am? Sweet. Someone alert my 3 year old!

Anyways, the thing with 'horizontal lines are blah' and 'vertical lines are foo' is a real trope out there. It's not as common as the rule of thirds, but you run across it from time to time. It's something that makes sense in graphic design, but which translates poorly to photography, or at any rate has been translated poorly to photography.

 

[Designer]

It must be a natural quest for humans to attempt to simplify a complicated idea. Everybody seems to want the quick and dirty answer to whatever question they have at the moment.