I don't get it...

[gravity0]

I'm new to photography, but have always wanted to do it. Now with the new Digital Age I can afford it. I have taken a few classes and understand a few things I had no idea I needed to do. You know little things like Photo Shop editing, rule of thirds, The Golden ratio, I get it now but is what I don't get are the pictures people take. These pictures that are in magazines or posted here I don't find worthy of posting as they don't follow any rule. I was told an image in the center of the picture is wrong, but then I see pictures winning competition that do just that. I've only been out with my camera a handful of times and I need to practice more but work and other things are keeping me from doing just that. It doesn't mean I am not studying magazines or the difference between F-stop and shutter speed, or ISO for that matter. I understand that now, I'll admit it took some time but I finally got it down. I had no idea this hobby was going to be so frustrating and hard. Anyway just thought I'd post some on here to see if any other Noob had this same frustration. Sorry for the long first post. :cheers:

 

[AlexColeman]

I don't really see what you are asking.
If you are talking about the need to break rules, rues apply for situations, but of course not for all. One scene has many different options, rules are guidelines for how to shoot, but it is whatever you feel.

 

[Jaszek]

Welcome to the forum,
Remember, there are only two rules in photography.
1) There is only one rule
2) The Rule is that there are no rules.

All these so called "rules" are there to make the shot more pleasing to the eye. I sometimes think about the rules but when I'm looking through the viewfinder I usually automatically compose the shots following the "rules". But there are many photographs out there that don't use the "rules" and are just awesome.

 

[gravity0]

I don't really see what you are asking.
If you are talking about the need to break rules, rues apply for situations, but of course not for all. One scene has many different options, rules are guidelines for how to shoot, but it is whatever you feel.

I understand what you are saying it's an art, which I get. But after taking the class they taught me about these rules which "should" be followed. To me that took the art out of, but now I'm realizing that it's still an art, rules or not. I'm going to keep the rules in the back of my head while shooting but I'm going to try and shoot what I see, or what I want my audience to see/feel.

 

[Sherman Banks]

These pictures that are in magazines or posted here I don't find worthy of posting as they don't follow any rule.

Wow, bold statement for somebody on their first post. You obviously haven't looked around much because many of the photographers here, including those new to it, have posted up some quality work. And I don't know what magazines you're referring to but the assumption that professional photographers aren't properly earning their dough because they don't follow the "rules" of photography is quite hilarious. If you think you have f-stop, shutter speed and ISO down, you should just take some photos for yourself to see what it is you like, not what a textbook or teacher tells you.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

I'm new to photography, but have always wanted to do it. Now with the new Digital Age I can afford it. I have taken a few classes and understand a few things I had no idea I needed to do. You know little things like Photo Shop editing, rule of thirds, The Golden ratio, I get it now but is what I don't get are the pictures people take. These pictures that are in magazines or posted here I don't find worthy of posting as they don't follow any rule. I was told an image in the center of the picture is wrong, but then I see pictures winning competition that do just that. I've only been out with my camera a handful of times and I need to practice more but work and other things are keeping me from doing just that. It doesn't mean I am not studying magazines or the difference between F-stop and shutter speed, or ISO for that matter. I understand that now, I'll admit it took some time but I finally got it down. I had no idea this hobby was going to be so frustrating and hard. Anyway just thought I'd post some on here to see if any other Noob had this same frustration. Sorry for the long first post. :cheers:

Rome wasn't built in a day.

 

[abraxas]

I'm new to photography, ...

First, congratulations on learning to walk. The rules are simple, and at first you may have stumbled a bit, but once learned these rules become a part of you.

Next, someday maybe, you will learn to chew gum while you walk.

And maybe run,

and juggle,

with your eyes closed,

backwards,

with scissors

while singing

etc...

Somewhere along this all, you won't even think of the rules anymore. But because you spent the time learning the rules, chances are you won't find yourself laying on the floor, quivering in a pile of junk.

Now, say you see someone walking backwards on their hands on a powerline in the rain and juggling scissors with a ball in their mouth. Rather than wonder why they get away with it, try it yourself, or your own special variation.

If you screw up too bad, check the fundamentals and try again.

However, if quivering on the floor in a pile of junk is what you like, maybe you've found a niche worth developing.

Just walking is boring.

Express yourself.

Nothing is easy.

 

[Jon_Are]

Wow, bold statement for somebody on their first post.

The OP raises a legitimate question, no need to hammer him over the head with it.

Gravity0: You've already learned the most important lesson: you have a lot to learn.

If photography were easy, anyone could do it.

Good luck,

Jon

 

[Torus34]

You seem to be making a distinction between 'photographs' in general and 'pictures worth posting.' 'Bravo!', I say, 'Bravo!' There most certainly is a distinction between a 'snapshot' [my word] and a picture that I wish to matte, frame and hang on my wall. The final pictures we strive to make --no matter how arrived at -- are those which cause the viewer to pause and look more carefully.

A few pages back in response to another post I chugged out a one-sentence description of photography: "Photography is a process for putting a frame around something you see so that it becomes something you say." I suspect this comes within a few Zip codes of your own conceptualization of it. Taking the 'say' a bit further, you distinguish between a photograph which mumbles or babbles and one which speaks in clean declarative sentences.

On rules: Attention-grabbing pictures can often be analyzed in terms of one or more specific 'rules.' This is delightfully done in Freeman's 'The Photographer's Eye.' But there are many rules. Any given picture may well 'follow' one or more of them, but there will be many, many more rules which will not apply. Rule application is a selective process, rather similar to picking out that specific bon mot whilst writing a sentence.

Learn all you can about the rules, with the goal of forming a mental 'tool kit' from which you will almost unconsciously select the appropriate one [or ones] depending [to return to my definition] on what it is that you wish to frame -- and say.

 

[tsaraleksi]

I read a very interesting analysis of the way that people look at work. The conclusion was that when people are asked simply to identify what they like, they are usually fairly in-line with what experts in the field would say about whatever they are looking at. When people (who are not experts) are asked to explain why they like and dislike something, they begin to question their own judgment, trying to fit it into what they know as "the rules" and will often conclude that they like something that they really do not, and vice versa because of these rules.

What does this mean? It's all about whether or not you like an image. Saying that something is good looking but no good because it breaks the rules misses the point! There is nothing more than making an image that works, whether or not it follows all of the rules.

That said, the "RULES" are taught at early stages of photography because it is critical that you know the rules before you can break them.

edit: I'm interested to know what kind of images you're defining as 'not worthy of posting' or not worthy of being in magazines. I mean, it is quite possible that people are posting images online that are not very good, which is why they've posted them for critique!

 

[Village Idiot]

You do as I say, not as I do...

 

[AlexColeman]

All I can say is to forget the rules, you can use them when the time comes or when you are submitting for technical judging, but art is a much different creature, without rules, the artist is unencumbered for making art from their view.

 

[LarryD]

Welcome to the forum

It seems that you are confusing a classroom situation where you "must" follow the rules in order to get a grade, with the well known artistic "rules" of composition which aren't really rules, but merely guidelines for what is considered most pleasing to the average eye.

The rule of thirds that you mention, is really a simplified base for the Golden Ratio, The Golden Curve, and the Golden Angles of artistic creativity.....all of them put the "subject" in a slightly different place..

But, then you might get into lines of direction, shading and shadows, and directive focus or Depth-of-field that may be used in these same areas to gently direct the viewer into the subject.

You can't just say that "The subject isn't placed at position X; therefore the picture isn't worthy"

 

[gravity0]

I mean no disrespect to the fellow photographers on this site. I was just voicing my frustration. I guess learning the "rules" if you will, took away from the artistic frame that got me interested in photography many years ago. I just couldn't afford the film, dark room, etc. So I never really got into it fully until recently. So again I know it was a bold first post, but I did get my point across, and I did get the answers, so thank you.