Man, since I watch this video I turn my photos to square format. Thank you for open my eyes. When I was a child I shoot with a Kodak Box (1950's) e it seens I back in time, to those beautiful days. Hugs!
Excellent video …. ! I’ve been doing ‘Square Format’ images since 1962 - at the age of 10! Now, I’m 72 but still enjoying Square Format imaging - and elements of the images are ‘minimalist’ in nature.
This was AWESOME, i recently got a HASSY 501cm and this video will help me TONS. This is my first venture into 6x6, i shoot with a LEICA M6 and need to change my way of viewing square shooting, Thank you.
Buy a Tlr. Everyone needs a kick up the aspect. Compare a Hasselblad with a Mamiya Rb67 in size, Go smaller and lighter. Have fun. Learn the rule of thirds, and then break the rule! Listen to this man, and learn
So, I already knew all those things (or at least most of them). After 50 years off and on taking pictures, I had better. Also consumed a book or two along the way. I THOROUGHLY ENJOYED THAT PRESENTATION!!! You covered general topics very well and showed how to tailor them to your specialty, the square image. I don't think you missed anything of a compositional nature from the toolbox. You spoke at a good pace, arranged the information well, kept it moving so that you could pack a lot in yet did not seem at all rushed, and gave GREAT examples for the points you were making. I have seen entire books that did not convey as much useful information! And, this was entertaining and inspirational as well as informative. You have a gift of image-making talent AND a gift of teaching talent. Just as an aside, that little thing you did to extend the rule of thirds into a 9 area matrix was a twist I do not recall seeing before. Same information, different take. Fascinating. This is a video to save to the Favorites folder, for sure! Oh, and your selling point about leveraging the nature of square images to instill a peaceful and calm feeling dovetails perfectly with your style and explains so much to anyone not already clued in from following you. BRAVO!
I fall in love with square format when tried Pentacon Six. This gives totally different view and perspective for photography. If you are looking great camera for square format and landscape photography try Pentax K1. This is an ultimate full frame digital DSLR, with one of the best tonal range sensor ever made. It has sealed body, it's extremely rugged and robust. You can switch with one dial between the square and 3:2 aspect ratios. When adjusted to square camera displays square view on the screen and two black lines in OVF which show you the square frame. Very interesting movie and great shots!
I nearly always shoot in 1:1 when shooting in digital, and love my Lumix LX7s with the ratio switch on the lens ... My phone is always on 1:1 as IG has now steered me that way.
New subscriber (photographic eye mentioned your channel) and your content is incredible and incredibly useful. Just thought I'd add that the image at 9:53 made me say some combination of "wow" and "whoa" three times in a row. Absolutely stunning. Thanks for all your work.
I have always liked the square format, without actually being a huge fan. However, I've been watching your videos for about a year, and you have certainly spiked my curiosity! 😊 Thanks for providing an abundance of inspiration!
Love the square! Miss my old Yashica Mat. The XT-3 thankfully has a 1:1 preview mode (and BW preview), but you’re right the raw file will usually be a full sized color image. I save both the raw and jpg images so I have something to refer to if I don’t remember exactly how I framed up a shot in the field. But having the extra data to the L and R has saved me a few times when I needed to adjust the original crop. I had to go back just now and look at my own IG feed after you mentioned not using “rule of thirds” much and found I do use thirds a lot, but there is also this wonderful aspect of 1:1 that lets you place subjects and features almost anywhere in the frame and without the extra tension of non square formats, it usually works! Excellent post Adrian. Thanks!
Really enjoyed this presentation and your great examples. Square format really challenging but very rewarding when getting it right. Well done. Many thanks.
I've been centering my subjects more and more lately after starting to feel that rule of thirds was become too much of a compositional crutch. Love your observation on centering and square format, I'll have to give square a go
I also often prefer square format and fortunately, I have cameras that shoot in 1:1, 3:2, 4:3, and 16:9 (which I never use) and adjust the EVF accordingly. The camera I use the most is the Lumix G9, as it gives me incredible portability with a compact form and no compromise in IQ. I prefer its native MFT 4:3 format most of the time (I shot 3:2 film for decades and now find it to high an aspect ratio), but there are times when only 1:1 will do (especially B&W it seems). I also sometimes crop in post where I'll have more flexibility than cropping in camera (as that's all the camera does anyway when you change aspect ratio) but I prefer to compose in camera. Either way, the aspect ratio is certainly key to pre-visualizing the print, but there are certainly times when no "standard" ratio works for the image and I'll just go "free form" in order to get the balance (or lack thereof) I want.
Every format is within the square so you can crop it any way you want (or leave it square). After using a Hass. in film days I came to love the square, and have always wished there was a digital camera with a square sensor. 50mp or so would give you the ability to crop and still have plenty of pixels left. No more angle brackets!
Me ha parecido muy interesante este vídeo. Hasta Hace poco no había hecho más de dos o tres fotografías en formato cuadrado en toda mi vida, y todas ellas para solucionar problemas con unas capturas que iban destinadas al clásico 2:3, pero desde que empecé a seguirte me he aficionado a incluir algunas fotografías en formato cuadrado cada vez que salgo a fotografiar y me ha ayudado mucho, porque el 1:1 me da la oportunidad de lograr buenas composiciones que de otro modo hubiera rechazado porque me estorbase algo que hubiera tenido que incluir en el encuadre rectangular para poder abarcar todo mi sujeto. Además, mis fotografías siempre han sido supervariadas (color, byn, con grano, muy detalladas, con mucha profundidad de campo, con muy poca, paisajes, macros, retratos... todo en la misma jornada), así que siempre estoy preparado para añadir a mi repertorio una nueva técnica que funciona bien. 😁
Some years ago, I got into a "discussion" on a forum about which was better, 4:3 or 3:2. I postulated that 4:3 was better, because it used more of the lens circle (little did I know how little any sensor actually uses of the projected lens circle, but that's another discussion). At the time, I mentioned that it was a shame that nobody produced a square sensor, as cropping from square removed the fewest pixels from a digital image. The worst format for cropping is 3:2, esp. cropping to a square image. I recently started shooting film in 6x6, and have set up both my 4:3 cameras to also shoot that format. The raw files are interesting. Depending on my software's settings, the file is either already cropped, or shows the crop on the raw file in the "contact sheet". Maybe a tee shirt is in order, "I shoot square". ;-)
This is a really good video!! It helped a lot. I look forward to seeing more good lecture videos in the future. You are a big help in my photography life.
Thank you Adrian, really enjoy videos learning more about your thought process. I have just picked up your new ebook, exceptional value for the amount of content, looking forward to reading it properly later. I have no idea what Sony were thinking not allowing a 1:1 preview and not issuing a firmware update for it, I believe they only corrected it on the A7Riv. Fortunately my Fujifilm and Canon do provide a 1:1 and I think I would struggle with composing squares without it. I think you’re eyes might actually see in 1:1 from the amount you have shot over the years 😊.
Why isn't it possible to shoot square in Raw on a DSLR? Only JPEG format is possible to have the image automatically cropped. But the quality isn't the same for final manipultaion. Any help?
Great video Adrian, I still shoot my Bronica SQ-a, I think square is very elegant and it toes not give excessive foreground like rectangular format does when shot vertically with wide lenses, so much less distortion in general. I think I will give a digital square a chance also as my Nikon Z6 has that option.
I have my partner always shoot squate on her cell phone, as it is an option. I shoot square on Kowa, Pentacon, Norita, Mamiya twinlens, Yashika, Seagul , Kiev 60 and Ciroflex cameras!
I don't have a very fast (large aperture) lens for my camera (MFT) but I do have a vintage Canon 24mm (48mm EFF) f/2.8 lens. Today I took an early morning walk in the local park with this lens. I set it to the widest aperture on aperture priority and set the camera preview to monochrome. The park is unremarkable, just an average urban park. Composing in square format, I managed to find three very pleasing monochrome images and had such satisfaction shooting them. Your videos have opened up a whole new chapter in my photography. I can't say if they are award winning images, only that I like them and tink they are some of my best images. Thank you.
Excellent presentation. I love square format as well finding 3:2 too wide/tall for most subjects. I noticed some images of St John’s bridge in Portland. How did you manage to position yourself underneath it? I checked it out the other day and it appears to be private businesses below the bridge, and darned few places to park. Thanks again for your insightful thoughts on this topic, time to load up the Rolleiflex for some fun...!
This is so interesting and I already thought of some scenes I want to re-photograph for a square image. And your lecture comes in the exactly right moment, as I recently found out Lr Cloud has got a new feature to increase image resolution! So then it doesn't matter if I just have a 24 mp sensor, as I can boost the resolution in post after cropping to a square:-) You didn't mention the use of Negative Space, I thought about it as I read an article about the use of Negative Space by Erez Marom at DP Review last evening, named "Landscape Composition - Part 3: Negative Space". I see Erez Marom just used two square images to illustrate the topic. Too I see he likes to edit his images to look so natural and close to the scene as possible.
Excellent video! If you shot more with the Bronica, you would not have to put tape on the viewfinder to compose the image :) More film photography videos please.
This is one of the main reasons I stick to Canon cameras. Not only do you get 3:2, you also get 4:3, 1:1 and 16:9 aspect ratios. It even changes your VF or LCD screen to fit whichever format you are shooting. I shoot most my work in 4:3 and 1:1 these days. I hated not having those aspect ratios the year or so I shot with Sony cameras. There is no reason they shouldn't have those options.
Dedo arriba y gracias por todo lo que enseñas y sobretodo, para mi, por poner subtítulos en español, nada seria igual, ni tendría sentido, si no puedo entender lo que dices. Un saludo
I feel like the gaffer tape idea would work if it was prepared with thin strips of tape applied to a screen protector before the protector was applied to the screen. Or someone should make such a screen protector with a square frame and allow me to throw my money at them.
Do you still dabble in film? If not, why not? I think film is more pleasing as a media of creation, the thrill of achieving that perfect photo when developing and going "wow". To me, digital does not have that same magic of film.
I don’t that often anymore. I understand what you are saying, I agree, shooting the Bronica really felt great. But it comes with many, many downsides. I can’t afford it at the pace I shoot, I get out every day and take many photos. It’s unreliable in the sense that I’ve ruined some rolls with pretty good shots in them while developing. It’s fragile, I’m on a road trip right now and I’d need a proper way to store film for 4 months, and the space to do so. But above all, I just love how my digital camera gets out of the way. It’s small, it’s light, I set it to aperture priority and I can focus 100% of my attention on what I’m seeing and trying to capture. With the Bronica, I spend most of the time setting everything up and making sure I’m getting the right exposure, I’m focusing on what I want to focus, by the time I’m done the scene might be gone. Plus I only get 12 shots at a time, not great if you are shooting in the rain or snow. Film is awesome and something I still enjoy doing every once in a while, but it doesn’t fit my needs anymore. My pleasure comes from the places I visit and things I photograph more than from using the camera. Hope this makes sense.
I'm sorry, but it seems totally unnatural to be a slave to any one format. In essence, you’re placing a completely artificial restriction on your photography as a primary goal rather than letting the actual subject matter determine the crop factor. You're putting the cart before the horse so to speak! The crop of a photograph should be determined by the subject matter and your interpretation of the subject. Personally, I determine the crop ratio of each and every photograph by the characteristics of the subject in that photograph. I think you are simply being lazy in deciding that every photograph is best served by any one format, square or otherwise. Why not choose the 16:9 ratio because that is the closest to the ratio of the field of perceived human vision? Actually, I think that format would logically make the most sense. Photography is as much about what you leave out of the photograph as it is about what you include within. Being wed to any single format, you have absolved yourself of an important aspect of one of your responsibilities. As the artist, it is you, not a camera, or a whimsical addiction to a specific ratio that should make that determination for a crop factor. It makes as much sense to determine that all photography should be in black and white rather than adding color to the equation as color would only complicate the photograph. You've pointer out that the square format lends itself to a more circular evaluation of the photograph; in that case, shouldn't you be using a circular or even an oval format? I can take any one of your examples and change the meaning, emphasis, or message of that photograph by simply altering the format; that's how powerful a format is. A number of your examples literally scream a "horizontal/landscape" format rather than the square one you present. The two aspects of capturing a photograph with a square format camera that I truly did appreciate with my Hasselblad was the fact that I didn’t need to decide on the final format until getting into the processing stage, and also that I didn't have the hassle of having to turn my camera 90 degrees for the portrait mode. It was only in the processing stage, after studying the subject and my intended interpretation of a specific photograph that I would make a final determination with respect to the format ratio; whether it was 1:1, 3:2, 2:3, 5:7, 7:5, etc. etc., or in my case, my favorite, 2:1. I mean, try shooting a group wedding portrait of 28 people in square format! Hey, it's been done, but does it work? Please don't mis-understand me. I do like the square format, but not because it's somehow special, but because it's one useful tool I can use in the presentation of my photographs.
I agree that letting the subject determine the aspect ratio is sensible. That is largely how I work. But you are perhaps not giving enough weight to the unique nature of the 1:1 aspect ratio. It is the only aspect ratio that is perfectly equal in all dimensions, every other ratio is a squashed or stretched ratio. This makes it the one ratio that stands alone. It's worth giving a lot of thought about what special compositional opportunities this brings. Combine this with the author's other compositional principle of the benefits of _constraints_ for generating picture ideas that would otherwise likely be lost in the multitude of possibilities, and you have a powerful psychological tool to encourage your own creativity. Less is more because it focuses your mind and makes you work hard for a picture you might otherwise have walked past. Square fits that philosophy perfectly. At first sight by going square you might think you are giving up opportunities, but for some people this may be more than compensated by the way it crashes through natural laziness and forces you to be more creative. I'm still going to let the subject decide for most photography, but for the last year or more I have also set aside trips for square only shooting. And I have found it works for me.
Yes! However, shooting square and cropping the top/bottom or side/side is EASY. I do it all the time in medium format. And you never have to turn the camera!
Just subscribed,no goofy antics,no awful music just great info given with clarity
Thank you
Man, since I watch this video I turn my photos to square format. Thank you for open my eyes. When I was a child I shoot with a Kodak Box (1950's) e it seens I back in time, to those beautiful days. Hugs!
Excellent video …. !
I’ve been doing ‘Square Format’ images since 1962 - at the age of 10! Now, I’m 72 but still enjoying Square Format imaging - and elements of the images are ‘minimalist’ in nature.
Yes, a digital square format would make sense!
Your photos, your simplicity and your philosophy is uniquely beautiful.
Very interesting point you made, that square feels quieter. Now that you said it I kinda agree with that!
This is the most useful sharing of photography philosophy I have watched for a long time - kudos. Helped nudge me from 645 to 6x6!
This was AWESOME, i recently got a HASSY 501cm and this video will help me TONS. This is my first venture into 6x6, i shoot with a LEICA M6 and need to change my way of viewing square shooting, Thank you.
Nice! That's a beautiful camera, never had the chance to try one. Hope you enjoy it!
You are my inspiration, thank You ! from Brugges Belgium, greetings.
Thank you, Guido!
Excellent discussion. Thank you!
Buy a Tlr. Everyone needs a kick up the aspect.
Compare a Hasselblad with a Mamiya Rb67 in size,
Go smaller and lighter. Have fun.
Learn the rule of thirds, and then break the rule!
Listen to this man, and learn
I like the quiet reference. Love that insight.
So, I already knew all those things (or at least most of them). After 50 years off and on taking pictures, I had better. Also consumed a book or two along the way. I THOROUGHLY ENJOYED THAT PRESENTATION!!! You covered general topics very well and showed how to tailor them to your specialty, the square image. I don't think you missed anything of a compositional nature from the toolbox. You spoke at a good pace, arranged the information well, kept it moving so that you could pack a lot in yet did not seem at all rushed, and gave GREAT examples for the points you were making. I have seen entire books that did not convey as much useful information! And, this was entertaining and inspirational as well as informative. You have a gift of image-making talent AND a gift of teaching talent.
Just as an aside, that little thing you did to extend the rule of thirds into a 9 area matrix was a twist I do not recall seeing before. Same information, different take. Fascinating.
This is a video to save to the Favorites folder, for sure!
Oh, and your selling point about leveraging the nature of square images to instill a peaceful and calm feeling dovetails perfectly with your style and explains so much to anyone not already clued in from following you.
BRAVO!
Best presentation of square format I've seen. Thank you. I have a square format group on Facebook.
The photograph at 7:12 is spectacular. Love your work.
I increasingly use the square crop option on my Pentax K-1 and absolutely love it
I thought I am totally weirdo about loving square format of images but I am sooo happy I'm not the only one 🟨💚
Hi, Kamila! No, you are not, I definitely love the square format. It makes for very peaceful and calm images.
I do as well.
It's so helpful, thank you very much!
Great video!
Thank you!
I fall in love with square format when tried Pentacon Six. This gives totally different view and perspective for photography. If you are looking great camera for square format and landscape photography try Pentax K1. This is an ultimate full frame digital DSLR, with one of the best tonal range sensor ever made. It has sealed body, it's extremely rugged and robust. You can switch with one dial between the square and 3:2 aspect ratios. When adjusted to square camera displays square view on the screen and two black lines in OVF which show you the square frame. Very interesting movie and great shots!
Thankyou. A very informative video. The concepts were absolutely on point . I haven’t seen anyone else present them so well.
I love your photos and videos, well done
Thank you so much, Ive watched twice and found it really helpful. again thank you!
Really enjoyed this. Thanks.
Thank you for watching, glad it was useful.
When I think about my editing, so many images, I crop in to a square(ish) format. A informative video, thank you.
You have put words to what I have known intuitively as long as I've been taking photographs, & re-ignited my passion for photography. Thank you!
Very nice video and thank you for highlighting the square 👍🏻
Very informative and inspirational!!
I nearly always shoot in 1:1 when shooting in digital, and love my Lumix LX7s with the ratio switch on the lens ... My phone is always on 1:1 as IG has now steered me that way.
Great video! I just purchased your e-book.
Glad you liked it, and thank you for your support! Hope it's useful.
Thank you so much!
Superb! Thanks so much!
Very useful video .. Thank you Adrian
New subscriber (photographic eye mentioned your channel) and your content is incredible and incredibly useful. Just thought I'd add that the image at 9:53 made me say some combination of "wow" and "whoa" three times in a row. Absolutely stunning. Thanks for all your work.
I have always liked the square format, without actually being a huge fan. However, I've been watching your videos for about a year, and you have certainly spiked my curiosity! 😊 Thanks for providing an abundance of inspiration!
Love the square! Miss my old Yashica Mat. The XT-3 thankfully has a 1:1 preview mode (and BW preview), but you’re right the raw file will usually be a full sized color image. I save both the raw and jpg images so I have something to refer to if I don’t remember exactly how I framed up a shot in the field. But having the extra data to the L and R has saved me a few times when I needed to adjust the original crop. I had to go back just now and look at my own IG feed after you mentioned not using “rule of thirds” much and found I do use thirds a lot, but there is also this wonderful aspect of 1:1 that lets you place subjects and features almost anywhere in the frame and without the extra tension of non square formats, it usually works! Excellent post Adrian. Thanks!
Really enjoyed this presentation and your great examples. Square format really challenging but very rewarding when getting it right. Well done. Many thanks.
Thank you so very much ❤👍🏻👍🏻learned a lot ‼️
I've been centering my subjects more and more lately after starting to feel that rule of thirds was become too much of a compositional crutch. Love your observation on centering and square format, I'll have to give square a go
This is so useful and you've explained your approach very clearly, beautiful images and examples as always
I also often prefer square format and fortunately, I have cameras that shoot in 1:1, 3:2, 4:3, and 16:9 (which I never use) and adjust the EVF accordingly. The camera I use the most is the Lumix G9, as it gives me incredible portability with a compact form and no compromise in IQ. I prefer its native MFT 4:3 format most of the time (I shot 3:2 film for decades and now find it to high an aspect ratio), but there are times when only 1:1 will do (especially B&W it seems). I also sometimes crop in post where I'll have more flexibility than cropping in camera (as that's all the camera does anyway when you change aspect ratio) but I prefer to compose in camera. Either way, the aspect ratio is certainly key to pre-visualizing the print, but there are certainly times when no "standard" ratio works for the image and I'll just go "free form" in order to get the balance (or lack thereof) I want.
Very helpful, thank you.
Really helpful video touching on what I am trying to achieve in square format black and white photography. Now how do I find your ebook Adrian?
Great tips. I'm on roll 4 of a new square format film camera and this is a great reinforcement of important fundamentals. thank you!
Amazing video.
Every format is within the square so you can crop it any way you want (or leave it square). After using a Hass. in film days I came to love the square, and have always wished there was a digital camera with a square sensor. 50mp or so would give you the ability to crop and still have plenty of pixels left. No more angle brackets!
Got it. Thank you.
Me ha parecido muy interesante este vídeo. Hasta Hace poco no había hecho más de dos o tres fotografías en formato cuadrado en toda mi vida, y todas ellas para solucionar problemas con unas capturas que iban destinadas al clásico 2:3, pero desde que empecé a seguirte me he aficionado a incluir algunas fotografías en formato cuadrado cada vez que salgo a fotografiar y me ha ayudado mucho, porque el 1:1 me da la oportunidad de lograr buenas composiciones que de otro modo hubiera rechazado porque me estorbase algo que hubiera tenido que incluir en el encuadre rectangular para poder abarcar todo mi sujeto. Además, mis fotografías siempre han sido supervariadas (color, byn, con grano, muy detalladas, con mucha profundidad de campo, con muy poca, paisajes, macros, retratos... todo en la misma jornada), así que siempre estoy preparado para añadir a mi repertorio una nueva técnica que funciona bien. 😁
Some years ago, I got into a "discussion" on a forum about which was better, 4:3 or 3:2. I postulated that 4:3 was better, because it used more of the lens circle (little did I know how little any sensor actually uses of the projected lens circle, but that's another discussion). At the time, I mentioned that it was a shame that nobody produced a square sensor, as cropping from square removed the fewest pixels from a digital image. The worst format for cropping is 3:2, esp. cropping to a square image. I recently started shooting film in 6x6, and have set up both my 4:3 cameras to also shoot that format. The raw files are interesting. Depending on my software's settings, the file is either already cropped, or shows the crop on the raw file in the "contact sheet".
Maybe a tee shirt is in order, "I shoot square". ;-)
As always great video, you should have at least 10 times more follower....
This is a really good video!! It helped a lot. I look forward to seeing more good lecture videos in the future. You are a big help in my photography life.
Thank you Adrian, really enjoy videos learning more about your thought process. I have just picked up your new ebook, exceptional value for the amount of content, looking forward to reading it properly later.
I have no idea what Sony were thinking not allowing a 1:1 preview and not issuing a firmware update for it, I believe they only corrected it on the A7Riv. Fortunately my Fujifilm and Canon do provide a 1:1 and I think I would struggle with composing squares without it. I think you’re eyes might actually see in 1:1 from the amount you have shot over the years 😊.
Why isn't it possible to shoot square in Raw on a DSLR? Only JPEG format is possible to have the image automatically cropped. But the quality isn't the same for final manipultaion. Any help?
I like the square format, especially for close-ups. Two of my favorite UA-camrs use the square format frequently -- you and Craig @ e6 Vlogs.
Agreed. Found Carig first last year and subscribed. Just found this channel and immediately subscribed.
Great video Adrian, I still shoot my Bronica SQ-a, I think square is very elegant and it toes not give excessive foreground like rectangular format does when shot vertically with wide lenses, so much less distortion in general. I think I will give a digital square a chance also as my Nikon Z6 has that option.
I have my partner always shoot squate on her cell phone, as it is an option. I shoot square on Kowa, Pentacon, Norita, Mamiya twinlens, Yashika, Seagul , Kiev 60 and Ciroflex cameras!
What tye paper do you use?
I don't have a very fast (large aperture) lens for my camera (MFT) but I do have a vintage Canon 24mm (48mm EFF) f/2.8 lens. Today I took an early morning walk in the local park with this lens. I set it to the widest aperture on aperture priority and set the camera preview to monochrome. The park is unremarkable, just an average urban park. Composing in square format, I managed to find three very pleasing monochrome images and had such satisfaction shooting them.
Your videos have opened up a whole new chapter in my photography. I can't say if they are award winning images, only that I like them and tink they are some of my best images. Thank you.
Excellent presentation. I love square format as well finding 3:2 too wide/tall for most subjects. I noticed some images of St John’s bridge in Portland. How did you manage to position yourself underneath it? I checked it out the other day and it appears to be private businesses below the bridge, and darned few places to park. Thanks again for your insightful thoughts on this topic, time to load up the Rolleiflex for some fun...!
This is so interesting and I already thought of some scenes I want to re-photograph for a square image. And your lecture comes in the exactly right moment, as I recently found out Lr Cloud has got a new feature to increase image resolution! So then it doesn't matter if I just have a 24 mp sensor, as I can boost the resolution in post after cropping to a square:-)
You didn't mention the use of Negative Space, I thought about it as I read an article about the use of Negative Space by Erez Marom at DP Review last evening, named "Landscape Composition - Part 3: Negative Space".
I see Erez Marom just used two square images to illustrate the topic. Too I see he likes to edit his images to look so natural and close to the scene as possible.
How can I buy you book?
Excellent video! If you shot more with the Bronica, you would not have to put tape on the viewfinder to compose the image :) More film photography videos please.
This is one of the main reasons I stick to Canon cameras. Not only do you get 3:2, you also get 4:3, 1:1 and 16:9 aspect ratios. It even changes your VF or LCD screen to fit whichever format you are shooting. I shoot most my work in 4:3 and 1:1 these days. I hated not having those aspect ratios the year or so I shot with Sony cameras. There is no reason they shouldn't have those options.
Dedo arriba y gracias por todo lo que enseñas y sobretodo, para mi, por poner subtítulos en español, nada seria igual, ni tendría sentido, si no puedo entender lo que dices. Un saludo
At least the Sony a6400 has the 1:1 ratio as a menu option to compose and shoot in camera.
My Fuji viewfinder camera is such a joy to use, especially with a square format and a black and white simulation.
Thanks for the composition tips.
Cut my professional photographic teeth on Hassleblad 500cm. Love the squeare format.
Square images were my favorite aspect ratio until I tried 6x7
I feel like the gaffer tape idea would work if it was prepared with thin strips of tape applied to a screen protector before the protector was applied to the screen. Or someone should make such a screen protector with a square frame and allow me to throw my money at them.
Do you still dabble in film? If not, why not? I think film is more pleasing as a media of creation, the thrill of achieving that perfect photo when developing and going "wow". To me, digital does not have that same magic of film.
I don’t that often anymore. I understand what you are saying, I agree, shooting the Bronica really felt great. But it comes with many, many downsides. I can’t afford it at the pace I shoot, I get out every day and take many photos. It’s unreliable in the sense that I’ve ruined some rolls with pretty good shots in them while developing. It’s fragile, I’m on a road trip right now and I’d need a proper way to store film for 4 months, and the space to do so. But above all, I just love how my digital camera gets out of the way. It’s small, it’s light, I set it to aperture priority and I can focus 100% of my attention on what I’m seeing and trying to capture. With the Bronica, I spend most of the time setting everything up and making sure I’m getting the right exposure, I’m focusing on what I want to focus, by the time I’m done the scene might be gone. Plus I only get 12 shots at a time, not great if you are shooting in the rain or snow. Film is awesome and something I still enjoy doing every once in a while, but it doesn’t fit my needs anymore. My pleasure comes from the places I visit and things I photograph more than from using the camera. Hope this makes sense.
I'm sorry, but it seems totally unnatural to be a slave to any one format. In essence, you’re placing a completely artificial restriction on your photography as a primary goal rather than letting the actual subject matter determine the crop factor. You're putting the cart before the horse so to speak! The crop of a photograph should be determined by the subject matter and your interpretation of the subject.
Personally, I determine the crop ratio of each and every photograph by the characteristics of the subject in that photograph. I think you are simply being lazy in deciding that every photograph is best served by any one format, square or otherwise. Why not choose the 16:9 ratio because that is the closest to the ratio of the field of perceived human vision? Actually, I think that format would logically make the most sense.
Photography is as much about what you leave out of the photograph as it is about what you include within. Being wed to any single format, you have absolved yourself of an important aspect of one of your responsibilities. As the artist, it is you, not a camera, or a whimsical addiction to a specific ratio that should make that determination for a crop factor. It makes as much sense to determine that all photography should be in black and white rather than adding color to the equation as color would only complicate the photograph. You've pointer out that the square format lends itself to a more circular evaluation of the photograph; in that case, shouldn't you be using a circular or even an oval format?
I can take any one of your examples and change the meaning, emphasis, or message of that photograph by simply altering the format; that's how powerful a format is. A number of your examples literally scream a "horizontal/landscape" format rather than the square one you present. The two aspects of capturing a photograph with a square format camera that I truly did appreciate with my Hasselblad was the fact that I didn’t need to decide on the final format until getting into the processing stage, and also that I didn't have the hassle of having to turn my camera 90 degrees for the portrait mode. It was only in the processing stage, after studying the subject and my intended interpretation of a specific photograph that I would make a final determination with respect to the format ratio; whether it was 1:1, 3:2, 2:3, 5:7, 7:5, etc. etc., or in my case, my favorite, 2:1. I mean, try shooting a group wedding portrait of 28 people in square format! Hey, it's been done, but does it work?
Please don't mis-understand me. I do like the square format, but not because it's somehow special, but because it's one useful tool I can use in the presentation of my photographs.
I agree that letting the subject determine the aspect ratio is sensible. That is largely how I work. But you are perhaps not giving enough weight to the unique nature of the 1:1 aspect ratio. It is the only aspect ratio that is perfectly equal in all dimensions, every other ratio is a squashed or stretched ratio. This makes it the one ratio that stands alone. It's worth giving a lot of thought about what special compositional opportunities this brings.
Combine this with the author's other compositional principle of the benefits of _constraints_ for generating picture ideas that would otherwise likely be lost in the multitude of possibilities, and you have a powerful psychological tool to encourage your own creativity. Less is more because it focuses your mind and makes you work hard for a picture you might otherwise have walked past. Square fits that philosophy perfectly. At first sight by going square you might think you are giving up opportunities, but for some people this may be more than compensated by the way it crashes through natural laziness and forces you to be more creative.
I'm still going to let the subject decide for most photography, but for the last year or more I have also set aside trips for square only shooting. And I have found it works for me.
Yes! However, shooting square and cropping the top/bottom or side/side is EASY. I do it all the time in medium format. And you never have to turn the camera!
I love your images and videos. Well done