You know... this is REALLY interesting and thank you for making it. Clearly, Bresson deserves to be studied closely. But I have to say... if you draw enough lines on an image, things will intersect, parallel, line up, etc...
Point taken, but I disagree. Tavis is presenting a finite number of lines within a consistent structure, so the assertion that "through the addition of elements order is bound to present itself" doesn't really hold up.
Such an amazing analysis. Photography equals love in my life. Maybe I'm going to sound a little dramatic but you've literally given me back that spark of passion towards photography that I've lost because of lack of believing in myself. Thank you so much!
Soo many new concepts that "pro photographers / UA-camrs " never mention. They also title their videos " 3 secret composition techniques that no one tells you about" and they just tell you about rule of thirds and leading lines SMH . Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge!
Needed this so much! And i finally understood how he works. My limited knowledge led me to believe his works was always fixed to the grids and as i lay over some of the grids over his images, some of them points to nothing which puzzled me so much. I realise then, composition isnt quite always on the geometry of lines but in other aspects as well. I suppose thats why the correct term is dynamic symmetry. This was really helpful Travis. Thank you. For some reason after learning Of Bresson's genius, I can't quite get into the works of other photographers. Please do more analysis of other photographers works if you could. I feel that the spontaneity of a photograph allows me to appreciate the genius of photographers as compared to painterly works of artists. You can plan a work of art to perfection but a photograph in the words of Bresson really is 'The Decisive Moment' when for a split second, the geometry of the world simply clicks into place never to happen again.
i want to say thank you so much for learning me and others through this channel, because i have a terrible photography teacher who only learns us the goddamn Rule of Thirds the whole frickin' time and i was gettin' tired of that shit. so i wanna personally thank you so much for these all videos from you! movies mostly, but art in general is my huge passion and you have opened my eyes to the world photography in a even bigger way!. THANK YOU!
ACADIA thanks for the excited comment and for watching! I’m glad you’re enjoying the videos. Sorry for the late response, I’m just now seeing it. Take care!
just too much, if you can generate that many lines and then pretty vaguely relate them to what ever grid, diagonal etc you want, of course you can link things. I don't believe he thought about this at the time,it just looked right
Thank you. Was really useful for me. I have known HCB work for years but this helped me understand his compositions and way he was looking at the subjects.
Great video! I like the way the video was edited especially the pop-up notes and the soundtrack which makes the video very engaging. As an engineer, I appreciated how you dissected the photos even going a bit further by suggesting improvements and experimentation. Keep it up and thanks for sharing this.
This video does not convince me at all. Cartier-Bresson was one of the greatest photographers of the 20th century and he did not make conscious use of dynamic symmetry. I say 'conscious use' deliberately. The vast majority of his photographs were taken very quickly (most people will be familiar with the term 'decisive moment' - the moment when the elements of a photograph come together to make a strong composition). Are we seriously expected to believe that he spent ages working out a complicated arrangement of diagonals and rectangles to obtain a strong image? He worked entirely intuitively, having - like most artists - an innate sense of composition, and he took his photographs QUICKLY. The fact that he had an 'unconscious' grasp of composition (as I said, something that artists and designers instinctively possess) is the reason it is possible to superimpose dynamic symmetry grids onto his photographs. you can superimpose such grids on most works of art and design and they will fit reasonably well, especially if you put in enough geometric structures!
You’re forgetting Cartier-Bresson also cropped his photographs in the darkroom. He may not have been thinking with the geometry in the moment but he certainly was when he was making prints and cropping things down.
@@malman1080 As far as I know, Cartier Bresson is well known for nearly never crop photo in Darkroom...so I find your affirmation really surprising... (the only photo I heard of him being crop is the one in paris where a man jump over a puddle) And the point of the comment is not that "he dont think of geometry", the point is "that this model of dynamic symmetry is so complex that you can make it fit in a lot of photo whatever was the intention of the photograph, with all those line and point, you sure to find Something that fit and may let you think that it work".
Thank you for this video. Cartier-Bresson was one of the masters of the XX century. This video analyzing some of his compositions help us understand why there's still so much to learn from photographers like him.
This is brilliant! By the time I was done watching part 2 I was sold. To confirm I went back and looked at some of my own favourite photos and sure enough without even realizing it I had taken shots that used these compositional rules (just by chance). Introducing Gestalt and blending it with the sinister, baroque, etc... it's just brilliant!
Great video. However, I disagree with your point about balance. Perhaps you (as many would) dislike viewing an imbalanced composition or feel a sense of discomfort from doing so, but perhaps that's exactly what Bresson intended to elicit. Perhaps he felt similarly when viewing the scene in person and chose to capture a perspective that expressed this feeling. If so, to adjust it according to dynamic symmetry would be to strip it of its original meaning and value. Though I understand that you may have corrected it purely to further demonstrate dynamic symmetry, I just don't feel that it was made clear if it was indeed your core intention. Please let me know your thoughts.
Dan J. Armstrong that was a well thought out and nice response, thanks! I agree that Bresson knew what he was doing and captured it exactly as he felt best for what was in front of him. For all I know there could’ve been a large ugly building to the left just out of frame, so he could’ve cropped it out in-camera🤷🏻♂️😊I was just demonstrating my own opinion and could’ve explained it better so people didn’t misinterpret it like I was downplaying Bresson’s skills as a photographer. Live and learn, thanks again for the comment and for watching. Take care!
As a lifelong artist I have always look at my world with a geometric overlay. While I may not actively or physically draw it, it is always there in my mind's eye. For all those who dismiss this as rhetoric or b**lshit or feel HCB did not do the same just do not understand the mind of an artist.
Without thinking about it, scenes with geometry like were shown attract my attention, and I'm just glad I'm not the only one compelled to capture those
Wow.....no wonder we don't get any good photographer now a days :) I am sure he didn't think about all these techniques when he took all those beautiful pictures. Good job though.. Tavis Leaf Glover.
@@KenRepasi I agree :) That's why he keeps repeating that he's obsessed with geometry. Dynamic symmetry is the geometry he's referring to. Thanks for watching!
@@IPOXstudios Bresson's photos have been used again and again to explain so many of the elements of photography. The so called rule of threes. The golden median etc. Did he consciously think I am using this or that composional technique, probably not. He knew composition that well. I think it was second nature.
It seems coincidental. I feel there is an organizational dynamic to his thought process. If you placed items on a square table, how would you arrange them? For example, image a kitchen drawer filled with eating utensils, such as forks, knives, and spoons. It would be an interesting photo if they were all tossed in the drawer without any organization. It would tell a story. It has character. Who does that? I mean, I could imagine the rest of the house by looking inside one drawer. That would be a great image. If the silverware was in the drawer with each item together and in their respective spots, it would be boring, like the picture on the box on the store shelf.
So many important pieces of information! Thank you. Do directors/operators/photographers always use these grids or it's not important. They must be so professional to keep it always in front of the eyes during shooting?
Goodzone I have analyzed many movies and believe they are using a grid like the root 6 or root 3, which are very close to cinematic ratios. Sorry for the late response, I’m just seeing this. Take care!
La mayor habilidad de Cartier-Bresson fue su capacidad para realizar composiciones elegantes sin detenerse a hacer cálculos, sin pensar en reglas de composición alguna. No es difícil encontrar en UA-cam vídeos que muestran al 'Ojo del Siglo XX' tomando fotografías a toda velocidad, sin apenas dedicar más de uno o dos segundos a observar por el visor. En una entrevista para el Washington Post dijo: «Tu ojo debe ver una composición o una expresión que la vida misma te ofrece, y debes saber con intuición cuándo hacer clic en la cámara».
For a better understanding, could you please publish a glossary of the technical words you use, like: Figure granulation ship Aspected view ... thank you
Thanks for watching! I have detailed articles on my website for each technique. Also, there are other videos that will describe them like the "10 myths about the rule of thirds." Take care!
Nice video! Didn´t know about dynamic Symmetry. Opened up another level in my photography studies. I keep wondering if these guys, Bresson, Ansel, Arbus, had this sort of grid pasted in their "retina" all the time to make or see the compositions right in front of them, or if the photos were cropped afterwards?!
Thanks for watching and commenting! Using dynamic symmetry is very powerful and all of the masters knew that. I think the best way to embed it into memory is to analyze master work, apply it, then analyze again. Henri Cartier-Bresson was against cropping and only has one cropped photo that I know of (man jumping over a puddle). Most of his photos, as well as the other old school Magnum photogs have a black border around their photo, which is the outer edge of the negative. This is to show us that they didn't crop. With digital shooters it's much harder to determine the cropping. It is definitely a great challenge to quickly shoot and frame a nice composition with no intentions of cropping. So rewarding though! Take care!
I noticed some animation annotations on this video. This is awesome. Can you please suggest me how to do those and also the font used. Many thanks. Cheers.
Juliet if you go to motionvfx.com you’ll find a lot of great plugins for Final Cut Pro. The one I used in the video is called “mCallouts Tech 1.0” but I’m not sure what the font is. Hope that helps, thanks for watching.
how many grids do you think Henri internalised to help inform his compositions? Seems difficult enough to internalise one, especially back in the day when technology was severely limited? Would you say that he stuck to the main 1.5 grid?
Hi Jason, thanks for the comment! From what I've analyzed, I would say he tried to incorporate the 1.5 grid the most. My mentor has analyzed his photos with overlapping root 4's and I show this one in the video. The square is the key to both rectangles, meaning there are two squares side by side in the root 4, and the 1.5 has one and a half squares. To try to memorize the lines of the overlapping root 4 rectangles would be more difficult than the 1.5, but it could be done. After all, we are just repeating and paralleling everything across the image. We parallel and repeat diagonals with all of the root rectangles, but it boils down to just a couple of dominant lines...the major diagonals and reciprocals. I find it easier in my own photography to work always look for diagonals. I hope that helps you out, take care!
Mathieu Simard thanks for watching! I’ve written three books that cover the topic you’re interested in. They can be found in my shop or on amazon. Another great book that teaches theories on balance is “Pictorial Composition” by Henri Rankin Poore. Hope that helps! Take care, Tavis ipoxstudios.com/shop/
Hyper focal distance is usually a term used by landscape photographers. It is similar to zone focusing, which is usually used in street photography. It is just referring to depth of field. Depending on where your camera is focused will determine the range in which things are focused. This also depends on the lens you use. Wide vs prime etc. To get bokeh with a 20mm lens at f/2.8 you have to be really close to the subject, but a 50mm at f/2.8 you can be further away. Hope that helps!
Grabbing a photo of Henri Cartier Bresson and to say there is a composition error is an atrocity (min.3:16+). You have to be a really good Photographer (really, really good one), or to be a friend of his to say such thing (in my opinion). From what could be a good explanatory video for people that don't know what is composition, got bad with a sad observation. I have to say, I did not go any farther on the video. Good luck next time.
No. But is better photographer then me, most likely better then you and Tavis Leaf Glover. My point is. ex: Try to go to a friends house for a dinner and say to the cook that was a erro in the choise of ingredients, should be not broculies but cauliflower. But dont let the cook respond just keep eating.
I get your point, but that means we can´t make observations about work of deceased people? Seems highly unlikely. Anyway i think at this point we can agree to disagree. If you don´t like the video that´s fine and it´s your opinion.
I really like the video and is intention (and we can make observations about work of disease people). Though I would like it more if the video has gone as just exemplifying the power of composition! The point of view from the video author, destroying a beautify photo was ... not good for the video, for the author of the photo, for the viewer and most important for the photo. Yes we can disagree. Yes is just another insignificant opinion.
Sir, i request you to upload a VDO tutorial having more mystery of dynamic symmetry composition like LAW OF CONTINUITY with Bressons images.THANKS---------------
Hi awesome content as always!!im interested in the grids for the camera only i am currently using fuji x100 is there a tutorial included on how to print the grids for the size of the screen in my camera? Thanks!!
Thanks for the interest and support! What size is your LCD screen? I googled it and got 2.8 inches, but wasn't sure if I had the right model. I have samples you can download on my site, and videos showing how they look printed. I don't have any videos on the printing process though because I take mine to FedEx Office and they print them on the transparency for me. Hope that helps you. Check out the samples if you like, here is the link :) www.ipoxstudios.com/dynamic-symmetry-grids-for-photographers-and-painters/
Tavis Leaf Glover yes it is the right model first gen X100 ill check it out the sample im not good with math and calculation is it still worth it if i subscribe to your website i just want to improve my composition? thanks!!
danilo cruz you don’t need math to compose an image. I’m really bad at math too, but it’s interesting to me when it relates to visual art. My site is loaded with composition tips, so if you are wanting to improve, it will surely guide you down an excellent path. I strive to create the best content on the internet for composition and design. Thanks for your interest :)
Tavis Leaf Glover ill try it out for one year, and i will get the books too :)) is it step by step guide and also has assignments for the website that i will subscribe?
Thanks for the support! The blog is not step by step, but it starts from a logical point and continues until you understand all of the concepts. Some advanced techniques are discovered and explained later in the blog. Tons of amazing info! :) The Photography Composition & Design book is loaded with techniques, photos, and has assignments at the end. The Canon of Design book is an excellent source for the techniques. It's concise and in linear order describing the techniques, lighting, etc. The videos are eye-opening, instructional and show on location photography shots for making a better composition and tons of examples of masters using the composition techniques. Hope that helps! :D
Henri Cartier Bresson just had that, what Feininger called "photographic eye". All those lines are bullshit, just like reading the tea leaves. A good photo touches the heart, nothing more and nothing less.
Indeed the emotional approach of the artistic gait covers far more range than just these composition lines. The emitional process involved in art activity is a highly parallelised one: a lot of things are going on an at the end you end up with the complex but instant feeling and emotion of the painting. And this is essential to make good art. But just as training one single movement in martial art, to assimilate it, and then feel it, this kind of rational and "sequential" approach is essential for one who want to progress in composition. Because not everyone is a genius. If you train your intellect to that kind of exercices, at one point you'll be able to feel it more and to instinctively implement it to your work. So that's not bullshit to me. You can become more sensitive one part of Bresson sensitivity and that's a good point. (english is not my native langage, forgive the approximations)
You can't reverse engineer great photography. Or any art for that matter Creativity is not learned by imposing arbitrary grids on images. This is a contemporary phenomena where we spend more time talking about stuff than doing it. Look at a wide variety of art of whatever style, go out and shoot and your body and eyes will subconsciously know what works and what does not. If it does not then perhaps (visual) creativity is not your thing. But there will always be something you are awesome at.
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts! To think that the lines are arbitrary is a common misconception. I wrote an article explaining it further which might help. Take care! ipoxstudios.com/dynamic-symmetry-top-7-misconceptions-you-should-know/
Talk about over complicating. It's rule of thirds but an over-complicated version. You won't fail at photography if you failed at geometry. It all about balance. You don't need to think about all these diagonal lines when taking shots. It comes natural with practice. You just need to train your eye to see a scene and quickly identify if the scene is balanced and it has a focal point that the viewers eyes is drawn to. People in the art scene like to get technical about these things so they have something to talk about. Think of it as some double pan scales. When you put something on the left side, something needs to go on the right side to balance the weight. The same applies to a photo. Picking out experienced photographers from the rookies is easy. Experienced photographers are able to capture more elements into a composition at the right place than a rookie would. That is why HCB was so amazing. His eye and patience for all of those elements to fall into the right place at that moment, and be there to capture it is something very special, especially the street photography where one has no control over what others are doing.
Seriously just stop it. Don’t think you can improve on his work. He’s an artist who’s looked and at studies painting so his instincts were on another level
Leica Jockey thanks for watching! I usually don’t comment back on seemingly aggressive comments, but I wanted to ask you a question. Do you ever feel like your photography is not good enough or that you’ll never be as good as some of the masters? The only reason I ask is because your comment might be projecting limitations you might be feeling inside. Just remember that you are capable of being great and with enough practice you could be even better than Bresson. He’s a great photographer and very inspiring, but not a God. Any photographers out there can put in the effort and be a master too. I just didn’t want you to feel discouraged with your own photography. Take care!
Szilvia Virag oh I see, thanks for clarifying. No disrespect meant to HCB, he is a huge inspiration to me which is why I analyze his work so much. I can see how it would come across that way though. Aside from that, I hope you find some value in the video. Take care and best of luck with your photography :)
Your re editing Cartier Bresson's images to fit your idea of what is correct, why is everyone so intent on changing the past.? Pathetic when we shoot a shot we dont imagine all that crap. Go back to school.
I think the ROT is boring, routine and simple. I believe in the philosophy of composition you speak and promote, but I also see an absurd way to fit photos into a system of composition that does not fit in any way. Some of them fall into the ROT perfectly. If I draw random lines on elements in the photo, it is obvious that they will fall into a certain style that will make it look elitist or classic.
Peter Vari thanks for watching! I’m glad you’re seeing the limitations of rot. Dynamic symmetry is a system of design that promotes unity, movement, rhythm, and strength. Composition includes more than just dynamic symmetry though, but it’s a great foundation. Even if you use the grid and know nothing else, you may automatically be applying those four techniques, which will add to the overall composition. Placing the subject on a particular point as with rot is not composition. It’s literally just placing the subject on a point. That’s it. Rot promotes imbalance, excessive negative space, generic repeating placements of the subject, and bad figure-ground relationship. The lines are not satanic or related to the Illuminati; they’re just lines that correspond to the surrounding frame. It’s geometry, which makes a structure for an image just like the framework of a house. Hope that helps, please check out some other videos because you seem open minded enough to learn further. Take care!
![Garry Winogrand and his Crooked Horizon Lines [Street Photography Tips] (2018)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wX3PCBS-tIg/mqdefault.jpg)
![Dynamic Symmetry: How filmmakers can compose shots mathematically [INTRO] (2019)](/img/n.gif)
You know... this is REALLY interesting and thank you for making it. Clearly, Bresson deserves to be studied closely. But I have to say... if you draw enough lines on an image, things will intersect, parallel, line up, etc...
Eric Stewart thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts!
Point taken, but I disagree. Tavis is presenting a finite number of lines within a consistent structure, so the assertion that "through the addition of elements order is bound to present itself" doesn't really hold up.
Such an amazing analysis. Photography equals love in my life. Maybe I'm going to sound a little dramatic but you've literally given me back that spark of passion towards photography that I've lost because of lack of believing in myself. Thank you so much!
Kristian Barta that’s great to hear! Thanks for watching, best of luck with your photography!
Soo many new concepts that "pro photographers / UA-camrs " never mention. They also title their videos " 3 secret composition techniques that no one tells you about" and they just tell you about rule of thirds and leading lines SMH .
Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge!
Lol, you make a great point! Thanks for checking out the video, I'm happy to share the knowledge!
Needed this so much! And i finally understood how he works. My limited knowledge led me to believe his works was always fixed to the grids and as i lay over some of the grids over his images, some of them points to nothing which puzzled me so much. I realise then, composition isnt quite always on the geometry of lines but in other aspects as well. I suppose thats why the correct term is dynamic symmetry. This was really helpful Travis. Thank you. For some reason after learning Of Bresson's genius, I can't quite get into the works of other photographers. Please do more analysis of other photographers works if you could. I feel that the spontaneity of a photograph allows me to appreciate the genius of photographers as compared to painterly works of artists. You can plan a work of art to perfection but a photograph in the words of Bresson really is 'The Decisive Moment' when for a split second, the geometry of the world simply clicks into place never to happen again.
Thanks for the nice comment! I will continue to do more videos like this :) Take care!
i want to say thank you so much for learning me and others through this channel, because i have a terrible photography teacher who only learns us the goddamn Rule of Thirds the whole frickin' time and i was gettin' tired of that shit. so i wanna personally thank you so much for these all videos from you! movies mostly, but art in general is my huge passion and you have opened my eyes to the world photography in a even bigger way!. THANK YOU!
ACADIA thanks for the excited comment and for watching! I’m glad you’re enjoying the videos. Sorry for the late response, I’m just now seeing it. Take care!
@@IPOXstudios it's fine. i've learned so much in the past 8 months, i can't even describe it. take care of yourself too 😁
just too much, if you can generate that many lines and then pretty vaguely relate them to what ever grid, diagonal etc you want, of course you can link things. I don't believe he thought about this at the time,it just looked right
Thank you. Was really useful for me. I have known HCB work for years but this helped me understand his compositions and way he was looking at the subjects.
Maros Matousek you’re welcome, glad you liked the video. Good luck with your photography!
Great video! I like the way the video was edited especially the pop-up notes and the soundtrack which makes the video very engaging. As an engineer, I appreciated how you dissected the photos even going a bit further by suggesting improvements and experimentation. Keep it up and thanks for sharing this.
Thanks for the nice comment, I appreciate that! Take care!
Travis you're incredible for this!
Thank you!
Man I can feel ur intense hate for the rule of thirds method 😂😂
valley d haha thanks!
This video does not convince me at all. Cartier-Bresson was one of the greatest photographers of the 20th century and he did not make conscious use of dynamic symmetry. I say 'conscious use' deliberately. The vast majority of his photographs were taken very quickly (most people will be familiar with the term 'decisive moment' - the moment when the elements of a photograph come together to make a strong composition). Are we seriously expected to believe that he spent ages working out a complicated arrangement of diagonals and rectangles to obtain a strong image? He worked entirely intuitively, having - like most artists - an innate sense of composition, and he took his photographs QUICKLY. The fact that he had an 'unconscious' grasp of composition (as I said, something that artists and designers instinctively possess) is the reason it is possible to superimpose dynamic symmetry grids onto his photographs. you can superimpose such grids on most works of art and design and they will fit reasonably well, especially if you put in enough geometric structures!
I agree and thought the same.
You’re forgetting Cartier-Bresson also cropped his photographs in the darkroom. He may not have been thinking with the geometry in the moment but he certainly was when he was making prints and cropping things down.
@@malman1080 As far as I know, Cartier Bresson is well known for nearly never crop photo in Darkroom...so I find your affirmation really surprising...
(the only photo I heard of him being crop is the one in paris where a man jump over a puddle)
And the point of the comment is not that "he dont think of geometry", the point is "that this model of dynamic symmetry is so complex that you can make it fit in a lot of photo whatever was the intention of the photograph, with all those line and point, you sure to find Something that fit and may let you think that it work".
Cartier-Bresson was first a trained painter. I suspect his compositions, while intentional, were almost instinctual.
Thank you for this video. Cartier-Bresson was one of the masters of the XX century. This video analyzing some of his compositions help us understand why there's still so much to learn from photographers like him.
Herman Lugo very true, thanks for the comment!
This is brilliant!
By the time I was done watching part 2 I was sold. To confirm I went back and looked at some of my own favourite photos and sure enough without even realizing it I had taken shots that used these compositional rules (just by chance). Introducing Gestalt and blending it with the sinister, baroque, etc... it's just brilliant!
Thanks for the nice comment! Great to hear, and now that you are familiar with the terms you can apply them even more :D Take care!
Great video. However, I disagree with your point about balance. Perhaps you (as many would) dislike viewing an imbalanced composition or feel a sense of discomfort from doing so, but perhaps that's exactly what Bresson intended to elicit. Perhaps he felt similarly when viewing the scene in person and chose to capture a perspective that expressed this feeling.
If so, to adjust it according to dynamic symmetry would be to strip it of its original meaning and value. Though I understand that you may have corrected it purely to further demonstrate dynamic symmetry, I just don't feel that it was made clear if it was indeed your core intention.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Dan J. Armstrong that was a well thought out and nice response, thanks! I agree that Bresson knew what he was doing and captured it exactly as he felt best for what was in front of him. For all I know there could’ve been a large ugly building to the left just out of frame, so he could’ve cropped it out in-camera🤷🏻♂️😊I was just demonstrating my own opinion and could’ve explained it better so people didn’t misinterpret it like I was downplaying Bresson’s skills as a photographer. Live and learn, thanks again for the comment and for watching. Take care!
Thanks for the response! It’s a great video either way and I look forward to watching more of yours when I next get some free time.
Thank you so much
You're welcome!
All those lines could be included in most photos in some way or another but not all photos have that certain something as in Bresson's.
As a lifelong artist I have always look at my world with a geometric overlay. While I may not actively or physically draw it, it is always there in my mind's eye. For all those who dismiss this as rhetoric or b**lshit or feel HCB did not do the same just do not understand the mind of an artist.
Without thinking about it, scenes with geometry like were shown attract my attention, and I'm just glad I'm not the only one compelled to capture those
very good i will share this for my photo friends
Awesome, thanks for the support!
Always been convinced it was about the composition;unfortunately i'm crap at it lol.Very interesting video,thank you.
Haha, thanks for watching!
Absolutely fascinating ❤️
Thanks for watching!
Excellent explanation on a subject I just can’t see with my eye , hence my bad pics but thank you for sharing really enjoyed it
Henry Joeseph great to hear! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Nice video. I like these type of things (and your channel).. 👍
Keep it like that.
Wow.....no wonder we don't get any good photographer now a days :) I am sure he didn't think about all these techniques when he took all those beautiful pictures. Good job though.. Tavis Leaf Glover.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@IPOXstudios In my opinion there is much evidence that Bresson knew exactly what he was doing, as far as composition.
@@KenRepasi I agree :) That's why he keeps repeating that he's obsessed with geometry. Dynamic symmetry is the geometry he's referring to. Thanks for watching!
@@IPOXstudios Bresson's photos have been used again and again to explain so many of the elements of photography. The so called rule of threes. The golden median etc. Did he consciously think I am using this or that composional technique, probably not. He knew composition that well. I think it was second nature.
It seems coincidental. I feel there is an organizational dynamic to his thought process. If you placed items on a square table, how would you arrange them? For example, image a kitchen drawer filled with eating utensils, such as forks, knives, and spoons. It would be an interesting photo if they were all tossed in the drawer without any organization. It would tell a story. It has character. Who does that? I mean, I could imagine the rest of the house by looking inside one drawer. That would be a great image. If the silverware was in the drawer with each item together and in their respective spots, it would be boring, like the picture on the box on the store shelf.
How did this science infect a photographer whose shots were made in seconds?
Nice video, keep them coming
MrLord94 thanks for watching, I will! :D
So many important pieces of information! Thank you.
Do directors/operators/photographers always use these grids or it's not important. They must be so professional to keep it always in front of the eyes during shooting?
Goodzone I have analyzed many movies and believe they are using a grid like the root 6 or root 3, which are very close to cinematic ratios. Sorry for the late response, I’m just seeing this. Take care!
thx so much! starting to make my own overlays now (autodidact photographer)
Awesome, thanks for watching!
Really nice video, good job!
La mayor habilidad de Cartier-Bresson fue su capacidad para realizar composiciones elegantes sin detenerse a hacer cálculos, sin pensar en reglas de composición alguna. No es difícil encontrar en UA-cam vídeos que muestran al 'Ojo del Siglo XX' tomando fotografías a toda velocidad, sin apenas dedicar más de uno o dos segundos a observar por el visor. En una entrevista para el Washington Post dijo: «Tu ojo debe ver una composición o una expresión que la vida misma te ofrece, y debes saber con intuición cuándo hacer clic en la cámara».
Thanks for watching!
wonderful, already subscribed .. thanks a million !
Thanks for the support!
For a better understanding, could you please publish a glossary of the technical words you use, like:
Figure granulation ship
Aspected view
...
thank you
Thanks for watching! I have detailed articles on my website for each technique. Also, there are other videos that will describe them like the "10 myths about the rule of thirds." Take care!
Nice video! Didn´t know about dynamic Symmetry. Opened up another level in my photography studies. I keep wondering if these guys, Bresson, Ansel, Arbus, had this sort of grid pasted in their "retina" all the time to make or see the compositions right in front of them, or if the photos were cropped afterwards?!
Thanks for watching and commenting! Using dynamic symmetry is very powerful and all of the masters knew that. I think the best way to embed it into memory is to analyze master work, apply it, then analyze again.
Henri Cartier-Bresson was against cropping and only has one cropped photo that I know of (man jumping over a puddle). Most of his photos, as well as the other old school Magnum photogs have a black border around their photo, which is the outer edge of the negative. This is to show us that they didn't crop. With digital shooters it's much harder to determine the cropping.
It is definitely a great challenge to quickly shoot and frame a nice composition with no intentions of cropping. So rewarding though! Take care!
No cropping for HBC.
I noticed some animation annotations on this video. This is awesome. Can you please suggest me how to do those and also the font used. Many thanks. Cheers.
Juliet if you go to motionvfx.com you’ll find a lot of great plugins for Final Cut Pro. The one I used in the video is called “mCallouts Tech 1.0” but I’m not sure what the font is. Hope that helps, thanks for watching.
how many grids do you think Henri internalised to help inform his compositions? Seems difficult enough to internalise one, especially back in the day when technology was severely limited? Would you say that he stuck to the main 1.5 grid?
Hi Jason, thanks for the comment! From what I've analyzed, I would say he tried to incorporate the 1.5 grid the most. My mentor has analyzed his photos with overlapping root 4's and I show this one in the video. The square is the key to both rectangles, meaning there are two squares side by side in the root 4, and the 1.5 has one and a half squares. To try to memorize the lines of the overlapping root 4 rectangles would be more difficult than the 1.5, but it could be done. After all, we are just repeating and paralleling everything across the image. We parallel and repeat diagonals with all of the root rectangles, but it boils down to just a couple of dominant lines...the major diagonals and reciprocals. I find it easier in my own photography to work always look for diagonals. I hope that helps you out, take care!
Great video as always!
Thanks for the support!
👌👌👌
very nice video
Thank you!
Hi Tavis is thank you for this.. Do you have a video on explaining the basics of Dynamic Symmetry?
alonzo2k I cover it in my books and blog, but I have yet to cover it in a video. Search Myron Barnstone and he covers some of the basics in his video.
Tavis Leaf Glover Great thanks I'll do that
Thanks!
You're welcome! Thanks for watching.
hey i love your video, what book can you recommend for advance composition, or photograph analysis, or other helpful things to analyse a picture
Mathieu Simard thanks for watching! I’ve written three books that cover the topic you’re interested in. They can be found in my shop or on amazon. Another great book that teaches theories on balance is “Pictorial Composition” by Henri Rankin Poore. Hope that helps! Take care, Tavis
ipoxstudios.com/shop/
Insane!!!
Sir, one thing i want to know that ''is hyper focal distance is important for street photography?''Thanks
Hyper focal distance is usually a term used by landscape photographers. It is similar to zone focusing, which is usually used in street photography. It is just referring to depth of field. Depending on where your camera is focused will determine the range in which things are focused. This also depends on the lens you use. Wide vs prime etc. To get bokeh with a 20mm lens at f/2.8 you have to be really close to the subject, but a 50mm at f/2.8 you can be further away. Hope that helps!
Grabbing a photo of Henri Cartier Bresson and to say there is a composition error is an atrocity (min.3:16+).
You have to be a really good Photographer (really, really good one), or to be a friend of his to say such thing (in my opinion).
From what could be a good explanatory video for people that don't know what is composition, got bad with a sad observation. I have to say, I did not go any farther on the video.
Good luck next time.
So Cartier Bresson is infallible according to you?
No.
But is better photographer then me, most likely better then you and Tavis Leaf Glover.
My point is.
ex: Try to go to a friends house for a dinner and say to the cook that was a erro in the choise of ingredients, should be not broculies but cauliflower. But dont let the cook respond just keep eating.
I get your point, but that means we can´t make observations about work of deceased people? Seems highly unlikely. Anyway i think at this point we can agree to disagree. If you don´t like the video that´s fine and it´s your opinion.
I really like the video and is intention (and we can make observations about work of disease people). Though I would like it more if the video has gone as just exemplifying the power of composition! The point of view from the video author, destroying a beautify photo was ... not good for the video, for the author of the photo, for the viewer and most important for the photo. Yes we can disagree. Yes is just another insignificant opinion.
excellant--------------------------------- tkank you
Thank you!!
Sir, i request you to upload a VDO tutorial having more mystery of dynamic symmetry composition like LAW OF CONTINUITY with Bressons images.THANKS---------------
Hi awesome content as always!!im interested in the grids for the camera only i am currently using fuji x100 is there a tutorial included on how to print the grids for the size of the screen in my camera?
Thanks!!
Thanks for the interest and support! What size is your LCD screen? I googled it and got 2.8 inches, but wasn't sure if I had the right model.
I have samples you can download on my site, and videos showing how they look printed. I don't have any videos on the printing process though because I take mine to FedEx Office and they print them on the transparency for me. Hope that helps you. Check out the samples if you like, here is the link :)
www.ipoxstudios.com/dynamic-symmetry-grids-for-photographers-and-painters/
Tavis Leaf Glover yes it is the right model first gen X100 ill check it out the sample im not good with math and calculation is it still worth it if i subscribe to your website i just want to improve my composition?
thanks!!
danilo cruz you don’t need math to compose an image. I’m really bad at math too, but it’s interesting to me when it relates to visual art. My site is loaded with composition tips, so if you are wanting to improve, it will surely guide you down an excellent path. I strive to create the best content on the internet for composition and design. Thanks for your interest :)
Tavis Leaf Glover ill try it out for one year, and i will get the books too :)) is it step by step guide and also has assignments for the website that i will subscribe?
Thanks for the support! The blog is not step by step, but it starts from a logical point and continues until you understand all of the concepts. Some advanced techniques are discovered and explained later in the blog. Tons of amazing info! :) The Photography Composition & Design book is loaded with techniques, photos, and has assignments at the end. The Canon of Design book is an excellent source for the techniques. It's concise and in linear order describing the techniques, lighting, etc. The videos are eye-opening, instructional and show on location photography shots for making a better composition and tons of examples of masters using the composition techniques. Hope that helps! :D
If you draw more lines and intersections, any object will surely fall on one of them. if any real photographer took photos this way...
Just a convoluted, unnecessary, and impractical way to show the rule of third.
He want to fix the photos in the composition style. Soon he start liquified and transform and skew to achieve it.
Barnack Leicas ftw 🤘🏻
who made this video Alex Jones?
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts! :D
Henri Cartier Bresson just had that, what Feininger called "photographic eye". All those lines are bullshit, just like reading the tea leaves. A good photo touches the heart, nothing more and nothing less.
That's the point all this photography education industry is missing . These days.. they teaching more physics than art.
Indeed the emotional approach of the artistic gait covers far more range than just these composition lines. The emitional process involved in art activity is a highly parallelised one: a lot of things are going on an at the end you end up with the complex but instant feeling and emotion of the painting. And this is essential to make good art. But just as training one single movement in martial art, to assimilate it, and then feel it, this kind of rational and "sequential" approach is essential for one who want to progress in composition. Because not everyone is a genius. If you train your intellect to that kind of exercices, at one point you'll be able to feel it more and to instinctively implement it to your work. So that's not bullshit to me. You can become more sensitive one part of Bresson sensitivity and that's a good point. (english is not my native langage, forgive the approximations)
Hahaha Fools! It's all about visual language, if you don't have the grammar you're just digressing
You can't reverse engineer great photography. Or any art for that matter Creativity is not learned by imposing arbitrary grids on images. This is a contemporary phenomena where we spend more time talking about stuff than doing it. Look at a wide variety of art of whatever style, go out and shoot and your body and eyes will subconsciously know what works and what does not. If it does not then perhaps (visual) creativity is not your thing. But there will always be something you are awesome at.
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts! To think that the lines are arbitrary is a common misconception. I wrote an article explaining it further which might help. Take care!
ipoxstudios.com/dynamic-symmetry-top-7-misconceptions-you-should-know/
Talk about over complicating. It's rule of thirds but an over-complicated version. You won't fail at photography if you failed at geometry. It all about balance. You don't need to think about all these diagonal lines when taking shots. It comes natural with practice. You just need to train your eye to see a scene and quickly identify if the scene is balanced and it has a focal point that the viewers eyes is drawn to. People in the art scene like to get technical about these things so they have something to talk about. Think of it as some double pan scales. When you put something on the left side, something needs to go on the right side to balance the weight. The same applies to a photo. Picking out experienced photographers from the rookies is easy. Experienced photographers are able to capture more elements into a composition at the right place than a rookie would. That is why HCB was so amazing. His eye and patience for all of those elements to fall into the right place at that moment, and be there to capture it is something very special, especially the street photography where one has no control over what others are doing.
I failed geometry. Maybe it's why I struggle with the camera. Seriously, very helpful video.
Haha, me too! Glad you like the video! :D
Is this supposed to be an analysis?
You made a Cartier-Bresson better???
Raul Ruggia thanks for watching!
no he defiled it
Seriously just stop it. Don’t think you can improve on his work. He’s an artist who’s looked and at studies painting so his instincts were on another level
Leica Jockey thanks for watching! I usually don’t comment back on seemingly aggressive comments, but I wanted to ask you a question. Do you ever feel like your photography is not good enough or that you’ll never be as good as some of the masters? The only reason I ask is because your comment might be projecting limitations you might be feeling inside. Just remember that you are capable of being great and with enough practice you could be even better than Bresson. He’s a great photographer and very inspiring, but not a God. Any photographers out there can put in the effort and be a master too. I just didn’t want you to feel discouraged with your own photography. Take care!
Szilvia Virag oh I see, thanks for clarifying. No disrespect meant to HCB, he is a huge inspiration to me which is why I analyze his work so much. I can see how it would come across that way though. Aside from that, I hope you find some value in the video. Take care and best of luck with your photography :)
3:12 i think the ROT are way better than you are in this photo
thanx good education .. although its a hard shape and cant apply everywhere ... the woman on the bench it was unfitting imo 5:50
Great to hear your insight, thanks for watching!
Your re editing Cartier Bresson's images to fit your idea of what is correct, why is everyone so intent on changing the past.? Pathetic when we shoot a shot we dont imagine all that crap. Go back to school.
* * * * * discovering 2D
you are just making things up
Unfortunately, this turned out to be the most far-fetched. this is apothenia
I think the ROT is boring, routine and simple. I believe in the philosophy of composition you speak and promote, but I also see an absurd way to fit photos into a system of composition that does not fit in any way. Some of them fall into the ROT perfectly. If I draw random lines on elements in the photo, it is obvious that they will fall into a certain style that will make it look elitist or classic.
Peter Vari thanks for watching! I’m glad you’re seeing the limitations of rot. Dynamic symmetry is a system of design that promotes unity, movement, rhythm, and strength. Composition includes more than just dynamic symmetry though, but it’s a great foundation. Even if you use the grid and know nothing else, you may automatically be applying those four techniques, which will add to the overall composition. Placing the subject on a particular point as with rot is not composition. It’s literally just placing the subject on a point. That’s it. Rot promotes imbalance, excessive negative space, generic repeating placements of the subject, and bad figure-ground relationship. The lines are not satanic or related to the Illuminati; they’re just lines that correspond to the surrounding frame. It’s geometry, which makes a structure for an image just like the framework of a house. Hope that helps, please check out some other videos because you seem open minded enough to learn further. Take care!
I have a better idea. Just take the damn picture.
Such bullshit lol, stop over complicating things.