Rule of thirds--maybe not?

Rules are made to be broken as they say but i feel in this instance, the image would be improved by having the dog on a third. It doesn't bother me as such, I just feel that the composition would work better as the dog is looking to its left, having it on a third would give it more room to 'look' into.
Other than that, its a sharp well exposed image, with a good looking subject. All of the above IMHO, regards Iain
 
Sorry to disagree, but I think the original layout is just fine ....... this looks - lopsided ?



s2woas.jpg


I would have done it slightly lighter; lovely pooch !
 
Thanks for your feedback. On reflection I wish I'd made it more of a landscape shot, but agree it might look a bit off given the dominance of her size in the frame. Can't decide about the exposure--I like her face a bit lighter, but the sky is better with a darker exposure. Hmmmm...
 
And the eyes and nose are about 1/3 down from the top.

I like this shot but on my monitor it looks like it could do with a bit more punch. the whites and greys look OK but it seems to be a bit lacking in the blacks. Maybe because of the large white front legs and underside.

All IMHO of course.
 
Halflap said:
And the eyes and nose are about 1/3 down from the top.

I like this shot but on my monitor it looks like it could do with a bit more punch. the whites and greys look OK but it seems to be a bit lacking in the blacks. Maybe because of the large white front legs and underside.

All IMHO of course.
Click to expand...

Good point about the blacks--this any better?


_MG_6724 by Dramy33, on Flickr
 
I really like it. The position of the dog doesn't bother me. I've been playing with using the thirds in the same way myself... not having the obvious main subject in the expected point.
 
The rule of thirds is just one rule...there are loads. I was at camera club on Wednesday and an older member gave a presentation on pictorialism. Many things were about the framing of a shot, and the way it "leads the eye" uisng props, or perspective lines, etc.

In this doggy shot I can see a great big set of leading lines leading straight up to the dog's face. I am drawn up to his face from the right hindquarters, and then I am drawn down to the ground by his front legs...this roots him firmly in place. And he looks a big fella, so that's a good thing.

So, I like it, compositionwise, whether it is "right" or "wrong".

I like it as an image, too...only issue (and it may be my laptop at work) is a slight loss of detail in the white fur on the legs. It might look fine at home on the calibrated screen.

Cheers
 
Bend The Light said:
The rule of thirds is just one rule...there are loads. I was at camera club on Wednesday and an older member gave a presentation on pictorialism. Many things were about the framing of a shot, and the way it "leads the eye" uisng props, or perspective lines, etc.

In this doggy shot I can see a great big set of leading lines leading straight up to the dog's face. I am drawn up to his face from the right hindquarters, and then I am drawn down to the ground by his front legs...this roots him firmly in place. And he looks a big fella, so that's a good thing.

So, I like it, compositionwise, whether it is "right" or "wrong".

I like it as an image, too...only issue (and it may be my laptop at work) is a slight loss of detail in the white fur on the legs. It might look fine at home on the calibrated screen.

Cheers
Click to expand...


Yes, you are quite right about the white on the legs. I've darkened as much as I can, but some detail is definitely lost. Thanks for your comments--much appreciated and helpful!
 
Stunning dog with a superb pose for him, thirds as said works top to bottom and far better than with the dog on the left as shown.

Think the final darker edit is definately best of the bunch although saying that I would be too busy playing with him to take photos, he looks like a big noble softy :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top