Compositionally Speaking; My Frame of Mind

I am a photographer that likes to compose my images full frame in the camera with as little cropping as possible. Often when I'm out photographing, I already have a pretty good idea of what the composition will look like even before I have my camera set up and have tripped the shutter to make the photo. However, it can be challenging at times before I find the right composition. Other times composition happens unexpectedly when what I thought was going to work as a great composition just doesn't work, take the example posted, I was photographing at Ellison provincial Park near Vernon BC and was struggling to find the right composition as nothing "felt" quite right, then the camera, on a tripod and on a ball head accidentally slipped over to one side due to the fact I had not tightened the ball head enough, I was looking at looked at the focusing screen when this happened and when it tilted over I thought that's it, perfect!

One can Methodically examine the composition of a print and look at what worked and what didn't, but it's actually when taking the photograph where everything comes into play and every situation is different. I know that when I'm looking through the viewfinder of my camera I have a feel for what it should look like, but I can't explain how I got to know what is right or doesn't feel right in terms of compositional balance, it's having the right balance of the various elements within the frame which is the key. I think that looking at the work of other photographers including painters has been a great help to me, and sometimes when I am really stuck I use a small plastic framing card with to "frame" things up. Often its the interpretation of the scene before me that works the best, I try not to put too many elements into the frame but keeping things simple, with photography it's not what you put in the camera frame lines but its what you leave out.

To crop or not to crop:

Sometimes the original compositional idea just doesn't work and it makes sense to crop the photo afterward.

I feel that cropping a photograph for stronger artistic composition is a personal preference, and it can make for a stronger image. However, many photographers believe in presenting a full frame image with no cropping. Personally, I have always admired the work of photographer, Henri Cartier Bresson, the originator of street photography who never liked to crop his images. I also love the work of photographer, Edward Weston using an 8 x 10 view camera and making contact sheets, where he had no choice but to present his photographs "full frame".

When I was working as a newspaper photographer for the Kelowna Daily Courier, my photos were cropped on a regular basis, sometimes by the editors or by myself when I am editing through my digital images, for instance from a sporting event like hockey , I often cropped an image for more impact so there is less "dead" space around the players, with other feature and news photos I left them full frame to convey all the elements to help tell a story in a pictorial way.

 Each photographer has their own unique style in terms of how they look at the world through with their cameras and lenses. I think cropping is a personal preference, each photographer has their own way of looking at things in terms of how they present their work, there is no right or wrong way. For my fine art black and white work I almost never crop my images as I always try to shoot full frame when I make the picture, even when I shoot with the square format Rolleiflex.

I think one of the keys to making a good photograph is to have some kind of idea when out in the field as to how the finished image might look, that way when working on the photo afterward either on the computer or in the darkroom you will have a sense of where you are going with your photograph instead of just guessing and hoping for the best.


Ellison Provincial Park (No.651) near Vernon, British Columbia, Canada, November 1992. Copyright © Gary Nylander. Scanned from 4 x 5 negative. Tachihara view camera, 120mm lens, Tri-X film. The camera accidentally tilted on the tripod so I made the photograph at a skewed angle.

www.garynylander.com, www.patreon.com/garynylander, www.etsy.com/ca/shop/NylanderPhotography

2016 Landscape Photography by G.R. Nylander

Here is a downloadable PDF of my landscape photography from 2016. It may take a few minutes to download.

This is why I shoot film

I use film for my fine art work because it inspires my imagination in ways that I don't get from shooting digital.

 I have been shooting film since I was 15 years of age, after more 40 years of film usage I still feel that film has value in today's digital world. Some back ground: I have been a newspaper photographer since I was 18 years of age, I started out shooting black and white film with my Nikon F2 camera. Today its all digital and I have to say that I love shooting digital for my newspaper work, back in November of 2001 the newspaper I currently work for, the Kelowna Daily Courier bought , Nikon D1H digital cameras for the photo staff.

 I would never want to go back to film for my day to day work assignments at the paper . Digital is a must in photojournalism, I wouldn't want to be with out it, as it's awfully convenient to use.

Shooting film on my time off is a whole different story, for one I have no deadlines to contend with, so it doesn't matter to me that I can see my pictures right away, I feel as an artist, I want to slow things down a bit so I'm okay with taking some time create my work. For more than twenty-five years I have been using a 4 x 5 view camera with black and white film, I have shot a number of different film types, Kodak Tri-X, Kodak T-Max and Ilford HP5. I totally love making images with my large format view cameras, using 4 x 5 inch film sometimes 8 x 10 inch film. Almost all the work you see on my website, my blog here and my Facebook page is done with view cameras.

 I am frequently asked, why film and why a view camera? some think its bulky, time consuming not easy to use which is probably true. One of the things that I have found that with shooting film is not so much that it makes me a better photographer but that it clearly makes me look at my subjects in a far different way than using digital, its hard to explain, I am much more selective in terms of how I photograph my chosen subject when shooting with film.

 I have not found a digital equivalent to the view camera, but to me there is nothing more beautiful than looking at my composed image even though it is upside down and backwards on the ground glass screen of my view camera.  It's really that beautiful and inspiring to look at, a direct 'pure' image coming through the lens, in some ways a truly 'raw' image.

These days I work with a hybrid system or a digital scan-workflow, I shoot sheet film and then scan the negatives with a flatbed scanner a Microtek F2 ( read my review here ). I also hope to do more contact sheet printing in the wet darkroom from my 8 x 10 negatives, I have always been inspired by the work of Edward Weston, what I love about Edward's work was the simplicity of his craft in making his wonderful images, his darkroom consisted of just a few trays, printing frame and darkroom lights, he was able to set up almost anywhere.

 I would say that shooting film may be a little crazy in this digital age, and may seem like the hard way to produce an end product when the easier route is to shoot digitally, but then so is running a marathon, there are a lot easier ways to cover the 26.2 miles by pounding the ground with your feet. Also I feel that there is a sense of accomplishment in that some film cameras are not easy to use, but then neither is playing a violin, it takes years to get good at playing such an instrument, but the effort is well worth it, in terms of one's personal satisfaction and knowing that you have worked hard for something and earned it.

Another analogy to music , some musicians might use a whole range of instruments to create their music,  for example Yo-Yo Ma plays with a 300 year old cello, or some musicians play with the latest electronic instruments while others might use a mixture older non-electric and electronic instruments. I think that that great photographs can be taken with a variety of cameras either film or digital with no camera or work flow better than the other, it comes down to what is best on a personal level for each and every artist.

The Automation of Creativity

My Uncle Clarence's tools, Three Hills, Alberta, September 2015, Image #414. 

If someone can build an app to automate creativity, I'm sure people will buy it and it will sell well. For myself real creativity is fun, it's thought provoking, it engages my mind, creativity should encourage people to think outside the box. Its easy to push buttons on something like smart phone or make a few clicks on the computer and think that's all there is to it, until that becomes the same old same old.

I have seen advertisements pitching the latest and greatest in terms of how to take better pictures, through the use of some kind of computer imaging software, and there are often dozens of comments and hundreds of likes from people who have bought the said products. This is what people want to hear, you can leap to the top of the photographic pyramid with a few clicks of the mouse on your computer. Bad lighting? no problem, just add some light, bad composition? delete this or add this to your photo. No need to learn how to see, just click on the latest 'filter' and post the final picture
 A photographer who's work that I admire, says it doesn't matter whether a photographer uses digital or traditional film methods that they are just tools, what really counts is a photographer's vision, rather than relying on Photoshop or other imaging software in place of poorly seem photographs.

 I was once giving a presentation of my work to a group of photography enthusiasts, I was showing my black and white landscape images, and one person asked how I came to create some of my photographs and what methods I used. I replied that I had learned to "see" in black and white in my mind's eye, I employ visual methods and tools to help me achieve that goal, I studied the zone system, including the 11 steps that go from total white to total black ( 0 - 10 ) I also mentioned I use a 1 degree spot meter to help me visualize how things in the natural colored world will look as a gray tones and those tones will relate to one another in a print. With practice one can get pretty good at spotting potential images that will make a good black and white photograph with one's eyes and mind alone.

After I gave my answer I was told by another audience member, that my method was irrelevant and that all one needs to do was set your digital camera to "black and white mode" and point it at something of interest, click the shutter then check the camera's rear viewing screen to see if the picture looks any good, if not delete and try again. I diplomatically pointed out that might work, but it may be difficult to judge the tonal scale of a potential black and white photograph on a 3 inch camera screen in bright light.

 Many photographers of course have different methods techniques for creating their work, some use nothing but digital cameras to produce their work, others will use a combination of traditional film and digital , others will use nothing but traditional film methods. I myself use a combination of shooting film and scanning my negatives. All are valid methods of seeing creating photographic work through thoughtful vision. Real creativity is a part of the human spirit and with out creativity we are nothing.