| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/16/2002 06:11:31 PM · #1 |
I'd be interested if I'm the only one who feels this way on the current submissions. I didn't feel I could do the topic justice, so I didn't submit this time. Let me preface, by saying there are some really good Negative Space shots that I loved... anyway....
In looking at the contestants, I'd say only a tenth or less of all the shots actually seemed to show "negative space." There are some really nice images being presented, but I just don't get it - the are obviously 80% filled with the subject matter. I get the impression that many of the images are trying to show "Negative Things" from a moral point of view... and some who just made the image a negative (color wise.)
Is Negative Space, not what I thought it was? To me a good "Negative Space" shot would show a element that would take no more then 15% of the image - the rest of the image would be clean of anything that attracts the eye. The eye should be drawn to the element that is less then 15% and then travels to the rest of the picture which doesn't draw attention to itself. Well at least that's what I thought Negative Space was.
There are in deed some great Negative Space shots presented. But unlike the last few competitions, I think only a small percentage actually fit what I thought was the competition description (but again, I could be wrong and perhaps they all qualify.) |
|
|
|
09/16/2002 06:28:08 PM · #2 |
In the most general terms possible, think of the foreground and main subject to be the positive space, then everything else, the background, to be the negative space.
There are hundreds of different ways that the negative space affects a photo's composition, and this challenge was to creatively use the negative space as the photo's main appeal. That doesn't necessarily mean it has to take up 85% of the frame, just be substantial in emotion or effect.
My approach is to try and figure out what each photographer was trying to do compositionally, then decide how well it was executed. It's hard because it changes so dramatically from photo to photo.
I love this challenge. For once, not everyone is fixated with the "rule of thirds" and many took some chances with abstract composition. The results are great, and I think we're all learning more about different artistic styles. |
|
|
|
09/16/2002 06:28:51 PM · #3 |
I do think that most people missed the boat trying to capture what negative space really is. I feel bad leaving comments to the tune of "Too much going on in the background, etc." and I know it can be disappointing to someone who would have otherwise had a really great shot. We're all here to learn, right?
|
|
|
|
09/16/2002 07:31:59 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
I do think that most people missed the boat trying to capture what negative space really is. I feel bad leaving comments to the tune of "Too much going on in the background, etc." and I know it can be disappointing to someone who would have otherwise had a really great shot. We're all here to learn, right?
But if that "going in the background" draws attention and defines the main subject does that not meet the challenge and bring "Wow" to the subject?
|
|
|
|
09/16/2002 08:41:48 PM · #5 |
| This is a tuturial that I think you all will find very interesting and probably answer some questions. YOu need to read all of it. negative space tuturial |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 03:44:07 AM EDT.
