Composition, the photographer's secret weapon

Photography is an interesting discipline in that it combines art and technology closely and inextricably. Now I'm a technology guy and in no way would ever be considered an artist of any sort. I'm always looking for tips and tricks to make up for my fundamental lack of artistic talent and I want to share one such technique in this post.

Composition is a crucial component of any shot. Beyond the technical considerations of good exposure etc, it is its composition that determines whether it's a run of the mill snap or a pleasing photographic image. Let's use this image of a tiny Damsel fly taken at some distance in order not to scare it away...


Technically, this shot isn't too bad. The exposure is good, the colour and contrast is strong and there is decent depth of field control. The trouble is this shot is pretty much instantly forgettable, it's subject, the Damsel fly, is small, smack bang in the centre of the frame and lacks impact. You've probably heard that placing the subject of any short in the centre of the frame generally leads to a boring snap. Wouldn't it be great of there was a rule or a formula that could help make that artistic difference? Well there is!

There are a number of tools at the photographers disposal when it comes to improving an image's composition. One most will have heard of is the "rule of thirds", simply stated, the rule of thirds places an imaginary grid over an image where the grid lines divide the scene horizontally and vertically into 9 sections as below.


It just so happens that if the subject of an image is placed on the point these lines cross, a more pleasing composition can be achieved. The rule of thirds is actually an approximation for a better tool based on the amazing "golden ratio", This video gives a great explanation of the ratio and its fascinating properties as does this post.

Now let's apply the golden ratio to this image instead of the rule of thirds, the grid would look something like this.


Now using this grid we can crop the image so the Damsel fly occupies more of the frame. In addition we position the key part of the subject on the intersection of the grid lines...


The result is a dramatic improvement in the feel and aesthetics of the shot. The eye is drawn naturally to the head of the insect, the image below seems somehow more natural, more alive, an intimate view of a living secret world.


The Golden ratio grid also works in portrait view as below...


Cropping in this way brings the same sense of life to the image but changes the feeling of scale...


In these examples I've applied this technique by cropping the image in post processing using Adobe Lightroom. Generally I try and get as close to this type of composition as possible when taking the image in the first place. I do this by trying to imagine where the intersection of the grid lines would be in my viewfinder and positioning the subject accordingly at the point I take the shot. Only small adjustments are then required in post processing preserving as much of the original as possible.

The Golden ratio is a powerful tool, try thinking about it next time you look through your viewfinder. If you find the Golden ratio tricky, try the rule of thirds, it's a good approximation, easier to imagine and usually produces good results. If you have a compact camera and use the screen at the back to compose your images, you could even place small marks on the screen marking the intersection points. If you use these techniques you will see a tremendous improvement in the quality of your shots and everyone will want to know how you do it...

The perfect replacement for Windows?

A few posts back I was trumpeting the arrival of Linux Mint 7 code named "Gloria". I said at the time I felt it was a very good desktop/notebook distro and a real contender for a Windows replacement. I did intend to write a post, for Linux newbies, dedicated to the installation and configuration of Mint such that a complete and fully operational system could be constructed. The good news for me is someone has already done just that so here it is...Linux Mint - constructing the perfect desktop

Summer hits London

You know when Summer's here, sunshine, warm sulty breezes and butterflies. I looked out of my window this morning and was greeted by hundreds of Painted Lady butterflies (Vanessa cardui) congregating on some flowering shubs. I grabbed my Canon 40D and my 100-400 mm f4.5-5.6L IS lens and went out to capture some shots in between conference calls!

I chose the 40D rather than the 5D as it as an APS-C sensor which applies a 1.6x crop factor. These butterflies are very skitish and the effective focal length of 640mm at full zoom enabled me to get in nice and tight without causing them to flee.

By the way, I wanted to use the right collective noun for butterflies and found there were a few choices. Flight, flutter and rabble were good, but my favourite was kaleidoscope !

Linux marches on

Earlier this month, Linux operating systems represented more than 1% of the global desktop computer installed base compared to the better known alternatives like Windows and Apple's OSX. While this number may not seem impressive on the face of it, the month to month growth of 0.12% is well above the average rate of 0.02%. Windows XP showed a 0.64% decline and, while Vista grew, its growth rate slowed to 0.48% from an average of 0.78%. I was surprised to note that OS X usage rates had declined to 9.73% from 9.77%. So what to make of these figures?

It's no surprise to see a decline in XP use albeit a relatively modest reduction. Most new Windows machines sold are Vista based and these sales will dilute the XP insalled base in favour of Vista. Netbook sales will, however account for some of XP's persistance. Vista just doesn't cut it on the Intel Atom based platforms with their modest 1G RAM allocation and low key graphics capability. The fact that XP's decline is modest and Vista's growth "dissapointing" (if you're a Redmond based product manager) really stems from the unwillingness of the large enterprise market to fully adopt Microsoft's resource hungry product. Better for them they stick with the Devil they know and (possibly) await Windows 7 or something else. Why? well there will be a number of considerations that lead to this conclusion, not least the cost of hardware upgrades that would likely accompany a Vista roll-out (more RAM at least) or it may be XP still provides most of the value and capability needed for office applications. XP has been in the market for a long time now so the much vaunted security "improvements" offered by Vista have already been addressed or worked around by Enterprise IT organsiastions used to XPs capabilities and architecture. No one should ever under estimate the cost to a company of moving to a new IT platform. Licenses, hardware, training and IT support effort are just a few of the costs that will peak with any new roll-out, perhaps these uncertain economic times do not suggest a good time to jump to something new. It's likely that Apple's numbers have declined in line with economic pressure. While A Mac Book or iMac are still highly desirable aspirational items, that desire may not not turn into wallet emptying behaviour while the spectre of unemployment hangs over the target market.

What of Linux? I'm not surprised to see growth in the Linux usage numbers. The Linux Distributions themselves seem to have placed a great deal of focus on mainstream desktop applications; Ubuntu's 9.04, Linux Mint 7 and the soon to arrive Fedora 11 have all placed a great deal of empasis on the needs of the desktop user. All the distributions have targetted boot time, graphics improvements, font management etc. etc. I referenced Netbook sales as a contributor to the stickiness of XP and the dilution of Vista's performance. Well let's not overlook the relevance of Linux on these little platforms. Dell package some of their Netbooks with Ubuntu 8.04 and the nature of the OS lends itself to this resource constrained environment. Even the Red Hat based Fedora, a weapons grade, server focussed Linux distro has added many desktop friendly features to it's forthcoming release. Fedora have added a specific feature relating to enhanced power management for Netbook applications, since when did server operating systems concern themselves with battery life?

The next few months will be very interesting. Microsoft are betting the farm on Windows 7 and Apple look to be planning an assault on the Netbook market with their very sexy tablet PC. Through all this it is likely Linux will continue to emerge as a viable alternative, If the growing trickle of Enterprise deployments turn into a flood, Linux will truly arrive on the desktop scene.

A quick snap

I awoke this morning and casually looked out of my kitchen window (I live in a first floor apartment, that's the second floor if you're reading this in North America!) and noticed this little fox cub playing in the gentle warmth of the early morning sun.

click here to see this image at my Flickr stream

It was one of those "bugger! where's the camera?" moments. I managed to grab my Canon 5D and attach one of my favourite lenses, the superb 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS L and fire off a few frames before the cub disappeared back into the undergrowth. I had to take the shot through a window pane as the noise from opening the frame would have scared the little guy away. Unlike most L series zooms it doesn't have constant aperture through the zoom range but, nonetheless it does possess the magic that is Canon L series optics. Now this isn't the finest shot ever taken by a long way but the reasons I like it are as follows :-

• It was taken through window glass (at an angle)
• It was taken from a distance of about 30 meters (100 feet)
• The image above results from a very aggressive crop of the original frame.

Taking the points above into account, it shows just how important good optics are for any shot. I really did crop this very hard (it's less than 20% off the original frame) yet it still retains considerable detail and contrast even though it was taken through a rather grubby pane of glass at a good distance. This really highlights the incredible resolving power of these lenses and ensures the full potential of modern digital sensors can be exploited. These lenses are pricey and the link I've used above takes you to the canon site where the full recommended retail price is quoted; there are, however, numerous sites that offer this lens at a more affordable level. If you're really lucky you may even find a used one but it's unlikely, photogs would give up a limb before giving up an L series lens!

Depth of Field Update

Following on from my recent post describing photographic Depth Of Field I wanted to post a link to David Ziser's Blogg where he discusses the composition of family portraits and the use of DOF in the construction of those shots. David's blog is one of my personal favourites as he shares many pro tips and techniques including some great video tutorials.  Check it out...

What is Depth of Field?

Composition is probably the most important component of a pleasing image. It is composition that sets a piece of photographic art apart from a simple snap. Interestingly enough, composition is defined as much by that which isn't obvious in a shot as those elements that are clearly defined. Depth of field is the term that describes which elements of an image are visible in acceptably sharp focus and which elements are blurred out. Depth of field defines that area of an image that extends in front of and behind the focal point of a particular subject. Typically landscape photography requires very large depth of field, everything from a few inches in front of the camera to infinity has to be in acceptable focus. Look at any examples of the best and there is always something in the foreground, something close, often refered to as foreground interest. Being a landscape shot not only should there be foreground interest but there should be clear focus all the way to the horizon. Candid shots of people and some portrait techniques often call for much narrower depth of field, in some cases only a couple of inches front to back are in sharp focus. I have examples of great candid shots where the subject's eyes are in focus but the tip of their nose and their ears aren't!

Depth of field is a crucially important tool in photographic composition and its skilled control really can add to one's photographic repertoire. It allows the photographer to clearly define the central subject of any image, isolating it from confusing and distracting backgrounds. Consider this first shot; it's quite a nice summery scene and the subject, the brick built bird tower, is visible and obvious. Even though it is the most dominant structure in the picture it blends into the overall scene and doesn't "pop" from the surroundings (by intention in this case).

(Click image to enlarge)

Now consider this second image. Just a single glance reveals the subject clearly, even though it's nothing more than a small group of tiny pink flowers. The reason these tiny little blooms "pop" so evidently is the eye's urge to examine items in sharp focus and ignore less defined components of the scene.

(Click image to enlarge)

The process of using focus in this way relies on appropriate management of Depth Of Field (DOF). Until recently, useful DOF control was only really available on higher end SLR cameras. SLRs, specifically their lenses, enjoy large apertures and long focal lengths and it is the combination of these parameters that provide the narrow DOF effect. This is much more of a challenge on smaller compact cameras due to the physical size limitations enforced by the compact format. More recent compacts do offer the attributes necessary to achieve these desirable results and the Canon Powershot G10 is a good example. The combination of a very short focal length and small maximum aperture explains why most compact cameras defer to providing extensive depth of field ensuring as much of an image is in focus as possible.

OK so far so good, DOF is a great thing, so how do you control it? It's actually pretty simple if your camera has the capabilities. DOF varies depending on the focal length of a lens, its aperture setting and the distance between the camera and the desired subject. if you want to close down the depth of field so only a narrow sliver of the image is in sharp focus, use a lens of 50m focal length or greater and open the aperture as far as you can (f5.6 or wider) while getting relatively close to your subject. If you want to open up the DOF ensuring as much of the field of view is in focus as possible, close down the aperture to say f11 or smaller. If you have the capability, set your camera to AV (aperture value) mode where the camera will adjust the shutter speed automatically. This way all you have to think about is the composition and the desired DOF by varying the aperture. (most pros shoot with manually set values. If they are going to use an automatic mode, it will typically be AV as it gives them creative freedom to adjust DOF). There is a complex equation that enables the calculation of DOF but it is more complicated to explain than the scope of this post permits. Fortunately there are a number of on-line calculators that can help and DOF Master is one of the best. The link offers access to the on-line calculator and its downloadable forms. This site also provides a nicely illustrated description of Depth of field and the various components and considerations that enable its mastery.