Can you teach someone how to be good at composing photographs?

[kennysarmy]

Following on from this thread;
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/th...oom-where-did-i-go-wrong.551712/#post-6379717

It occurred to me that whilst I am teaching my daughter how to technically handle a camera, should I be be alongside this be teaching her about composition?

Is this something that can be taught? or just improved?

Should you teach a beginner this before or after tackling how to correctly expose an image and use the camera controls? Or during?

 

[KIPAX]

If you havent got an eye for a picture then it really doesnt matter if you can expose or even work the camera

learning composure can be done.. I learnt how to play snooker.. its dead simple and I know all the rules... yet i still cant win a game... my point being.. yes you can show someone.. but they still need a feel for it to be any good..

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION!

 

[kennysarmy]

If you havent got an eye for a picture then it really doesnt matter if you can expose or even work the camera

learning composure can be done.. I learnt how to play snooker.. its dead simple and I know all the rules... yet i still cant win a game... my point being.. yes you can show someone.. but they still need a feel for it to be any good..

IN MY HUMBLE OPINION!

I agree.....whilst I can show her what angle I might use to photograph something - get down low or shift position this way or that rather than just stop and press the shutter - I can show her what I do - but does nt mean she will "get it"...or think about it when she is out taking her own images.....

 

[droj]

... yes you can show someone.. but they still need a feel for it to be any good..

I tend to agree with this. People talk about compositional 'rules' but real life picture-taking is more complex and fluid than that and 'rules' don't cover half of the options. Yes - it's about feel - or, it might be said, aptitude. It may be learnable to some extent, but some will never 'get it'.

 

[StephenM]

Yes it can be taught. But personally I'd assume a certain level of intelligence and teach "why" not "how you do it" or "what you do". Knowing why things work (and behind that, why you want to photograph the subject in the first place) should equip someone to do it for themselves in their way, rather than yours.

 

[kennysarmy]

As an example we went for a walk the other evening and came across this:

Greyfriars Graffiti I by kennysarmy, on Flickr

After we'd both taken a shot of this I got her to compare her version with mine....she had stood up and I had knelt down......

From her camera position she could still see the houses over the top of the fence panels.....so lesson was - don't just look at what you are photographing - look all around the scene and see what's being included!

 

[Ed Sutton]

Should you teach a beginner this before or after tackling how to correctly expose an image and use the camera controls? Or during?

Composition isn't just about viewpoint and framing shots, it involves using depth of field (to make subjects stand out, or to show things in the background) and exposure (sometimes you might want to 'underexpose' to create a silhouette, for example). You have to teach picture making - not camera use and composition as separate entities.

 

[dean messenger]

and to quote something Phil said in another thread.. its all about the light.

You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink it.
Photography is the same.. you can teach someone every aspect about ISO, Fstops, DOF etc etc etc, but without good composition, framing and the Key, getting the light.. they will only ever produce average shots.
anyone can learn the technical aspect but first and foremost is the creative one.

 

[PMN]

Yes of course you can. Not many people pick up a camera for the very first time and intrinsically know how to frame every single thing they shoot, they have to teach themselves what works. If you can teach yourself then you can teach someone else (I don't mean anyone can teach, I'm talking about the principle of it).

anyone can learn the technical aspect but first and foremost is the creative one.

Creativity can be nurtured though. I don't understand the black and white concept some people have of creativity that you either have it or don't, it's not that straightforward!

 

[Rich.]

No, i don't think you can. The mother bought a 450D a few years back, and her photo composition is still the same 2 years later, no matter how much i try and tell her. She is the typical home photographer, "Move to the left a bit so i can get some of that tree in", not considering the fact that shes now also bringing a block of flats into frame too. The majority of the photos that she's very proud of i wouldn't have even considered taking because the composition was so bad, and i think that's the problem, she doesn't think she needs to improve.

Her main problem is lack of willingness to position herself for a shot. Everything is shot standing and from shoulder height. Maybe it can be taught and shes just stubborn and wont take advice, but in my opinion, as said above, you either have an eye for a shot or dont.

Rich

 

[KIPAX]

I don't understand the black and white concept some people have of creativity that you either have it or don't, it's not that straightforward!

Oh yes it is!

Or is it.. I don't think it's somehting tha tcan be proved either way... I personaly think you either have it or you don't.. you belive it can be taught... thats how life works .. if you taught someone creativbitiy then I would say they already had it.. you just brought it out

 

[Pookeyhead]

You can't teach someone "how to compose" because you're teaching them how to shoot as you would shoot. Instead, what you're aiming for is teaching them all the possibilities... about working the image to begin with. For example, the biggest mistake beginners make is to just point the camera and shoot. This means everything shot is from the same position and angle... No matter what they're shooting. Get them to slow down, and actually LOOK around the viewfinder and consider other ways to shot other than the first initial instinctive way.

Demonstrate the "rules" but make it quite clear that obeying them rigidly will produce rigidly boring images. Show examples of why sometimes it's best to break the rules. Above all though.... get them into a culture/mindset of not just pointing and shooting. Get them to spend some time walking around looking through the viewfinder from different angles, heights etc. Then make the choice about when to press the shutter. It will also embed a culture of NOT machine gunning and chimping.

Others have mention this too, but working in the above way is also a great way to evaluate other factors that change with position, such as light and tonality. If you just shoot what's in front of you without viewing through the viewfinder from all possible angles, you may well walk past a great opportunity and never realise.


Don't get too wrapped up in composition though... it's something that is part of someone's style. It grows and develops as they do, so try not to be too prescriptive at the early stages. Post examples of Alec Soth's documentary portraits in here, and most will say they're badly composed because they're bang in the middle of the frame, but that advise, in his case, would be utter [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER].

To recap: Get her to view the image (through the viewfinder) from every conceivable direction, height, and angle before allowing her to press the shutter. That's my advice. She will then develop her own style... and when she does, try to resist critiquing stuff negatively because it's not how YOU would have done it. She's not you [edit]... obviously, distracting backgrounds and cropping off hands/feet without good reason is something that needs addressing.

To answer your other question. I'd be tempted to teach this later when she can actually operate the camera well enough to get correct exposure and focus. You can make comments, but let get her head around metering and focusing first.

 

[Phil V]

There's lots of rules and tricks that it's easy to teach, but as with all things, that's only the beginning, it takes practice and a willingness to learn.

But the hardest lesson of all is learning what you should do when. We make the worst pictures when we just shoot stuff without considering the light. Most photographers get hung up on exposure early on in their learning and think that the only consideration regarding light is 'how much'.

Going out for a walk mid afternoon on an overcast day and wondering why our landscapes are 'dull', popping a flash on indoors and creating crap portraits. Thinking about the nature of light is what separates the good from the useless.

 

[Blank_Canvas]

Yes, you can tech someone all the classic rules of composition, rule of the thirds, tight crop, pattens, low viewpoints etc. But the recipient then has to take that on board, apply it use, know when to break the rules etc. This comes through self-motivation, practice and the ability to be self critical and the willingness to learn. Some people can do this and some people can't. Photography is all about self-motivation from getting up and getting out in the morning to how much patience you have to grab an image. Add the technical aspect to the mix the effect of focal lengths etc. With practice, commitment and a thirst for knowledge anything is achievable.

 

[PMN]

Oh yes it is!

Or is it.. I don't think it's somehting tha tcan be proved either way... I personaly think you either have it or you don't.. you belive it can be taught... thats how life works .. if you taught someone creativbitiy then I would say they already had it.. you just brought it out

That's what I meant by nurtured, and that's what I meant by it's not that straightforward.

You can't give someone who's profoundly uncreative creativity; of course you can't but that goes for anything artistic (you have no idea how many bands have proved that for me in my 20 year music career). The thing is whenever this question arises it's often assumed that the person being 'taught' is indeed profoundly uncreative and I'm not convinced that's representative of how things are most of the time. Most people (or certainly many people) learning photography will have some degree of creativity and that's probably what drew them to photography in the first place, if they want to learn then their creativity can be helped along the way. Hell, even explaining the rule of thirds to someone can make them immediately produce 'better' compositions, they might not be creative but the question wasn't actually about being creative, it was about composing which can essentially be a technical thing (fair to say many landscape compositions are technical rather than artistic).

Something that adds to making the question all the more murky is the fact there are so many different opinions on what constitutes good composition. Some people think Martin Parr's compositions are clumsy and unbalanced, others think they're sublime. Who's to say which is right?

 

[Ed Sutton]

Thinking about the nature of light is what separates the good from the useless.

I think this stress on 'light' is as restrictive as stressing the 'rules of composition'.

It's daft to compartmentalise all the different aspects of picture making because they all work together, and can't be considered in isolation.

 

[kennysarmy]

Really interesting replies and advice - thanks for everyone's input so far - appreciated.

 

[dean messenger]

one of the best teaching aids i saw for shooting ( composition that is ) and something the OP can very easily do.. a rectangle of cardboard cut out to form a frame ( ideal is a 6 x 4 photo mount ).
hold it up when shooting portait or landscape ( or pretty much anything ) and you get a perfect tool for finding the composition you want thats easy to explain to someone.
its very hard to see what someone else is seeing through the viewfinder at the same time.. or even on the LCD screen.. but a bit of card held up you can stand behind them and get an almost identical view and help them with framing.

 

[PMN]

I think this stress on 'light' is as restrictive as stressing the 'rules of composition'.

It's daft to compartmentalise all the different aspects of picture making because they all work together, and can't be considered in isolation.

Absolutely 100% agree. A photo can still move people to tears or make them feel elated even if the light isn't technically perfect, the idea photography is only ever about light is a very odd one to me! Then again to me photography is largely a means of communication, you don't always need to speak to someone in perfect English to get your point across.

 

[GeeJay57]

I think it's only possible to teach/advise on composition to those that are genuinely interested in learning how to improve their photography. Some people seem to just get it and welcome the additional input, others just don't.

 

[Caitlin]

As the daughter of Kennysarmy, thank you for your advice and feedback will take all into consideration next time I'm composing a shot

 

[Blank_Canvas]

As the daughter of Kennysarmy, thank you for your advice and feedback will take all into consideration next time I'm composing a shot

Welcome to the forum and I'm sure that with your Dad's support and your willingless to learn you will achieve some great images. Look forward to seeing your results in due course. Good luck with your endeavours.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Oh yes it is!

Or is it.. I don't think it's somehting tha tcan be proved either way...

Dunno... I've got a pretty impressive track record at this. I for one certainly think it can be taught... assuming the pupil is willing to unlearn some stuff and be open to creative thinking: Lack of creativity is nearly always a self-imposed barrier rather than a genuine lack of creativity.

 

[Phil V]

I think this stress on 'light' is as restrictive as stressing the 'rules of composition'.

It's daft to compartmentalise all the different aspects of picture making because they all work together, and can't be considered in isolation.

But the 'stress' on light happened when you took my final sentence and quoted it as if it was all I'd said

Just saying

 

[Ed Sutton]

the 'stress' on light was all I'd said

 

[droj]

I for one certainly think it can be taught... assuming the pupil is willing to unlearn some stuff and be open to creative thinking: Lack of creativity is nearly always a self-imposed barrier rather than a genuine lack of creativity.

I suspect that's not the whole story though - fear of experiment (or lack of confidence) may be one thing, but another is that we are born with varying brain structures - thus have different aptitudes. Somebody's good at maths, another isn't. Makes life interesting!

 

[Pookeyhead]

I suspect that's not the whole story though - fear of experiment (or lack of confidence) may be one thing, but another is that we are born with varying brain structures - thus have different aptitudes. Somebody's good at maths, another isn't. Makes life interesting!

It's not black and white, no... some people are more creative than others - or to be more accurate, different creativity from each other, but to say it can't be taught is to suggest that there are people out there with absolutely no creativity whatsoever. If there are, I've not come across any of them yet.

 

[scottduffy]

I think anyone can learn and be good at anything. We all learned to read and write and despite being at different levels we all learned. I think if someone is taught about photography from an early age or has enough time to delve into it a bit later in life they could easily become good enough to make a career out of it. We can't all be the "best" but as long as that person's clients like their work then who cares?

We watch football and some players are genuine stars where as others are more workman like but get the job done. I don't believe you need an eye for it at all. I think people just say that to make themselves feel special. Time and effort is all thats needed. I have neither just now unfortunately.

 

[StephenM]

I don't believe you need an eye for it at all. I think people just say that to make themselves feel special. Time and effort is all thats needed. I have neither just now unfortunately.

Interesting. I'd always taken it the other way - that people said that they didn't have an eye for it because they wanted an excuse for their laziness in not wanting to put any effort in to improve. On the other hand, that may just be a case of natural selection on a forum population. I will never forget on another forum someone posting that if they wanted to learn, they'd go to college (they didn't, so I suppose they didn't); they came to a forum for fun. Not anything mentally demanding. At least this forum doesn't seem to suffer from this.

 

[pk42]

Perhaps the title of this thread should be "Can someone teach me how to be good at composing photographs?" or possibly "Can someone teach me how to teach someone how to be good at composing photographs?" because the shot above doesn't stand out as a shining example.

Personally, I'm not sure that it can be taught but I do think it can be learnt. There's a difference.

 

[kennysarmy]

Perhaps the title of this thread should be "Can someone teach me how to be good at composing photographs?" or possibly "Can someone teach me how to teach someone how to be good at composing photographs?" because the shot above doesn't stand out as a shining example.

Personally, I'm not sure that it can be taught but I do think it can be learnt. There's a difference.

The photo was to illustrate a point I was making, it was nt meant to be a shining example!

 

[Phil V]

I think anyone can learn and be good at anything. We all learned to read and write and despite being at different levels we all learned. I think if someone is taught about photography from an early age or has enough time to delve into it a bit later in life they could easily become good enough to make a career out of it. We can't all be the "best" but as long as that person's clients like their work then who cares?

We watch football and some players are genuine stars where as others are more workman like but get the job done. I don't believe you need an eye for it at all. I think people just say that to make themselves feel special. Time and effort is all thats needed. I have neither just now unfortunately.

Really? Anyone?

I do often bring up the fact that most towns can employ about 20 fulltime footballers and probably as many again part time, but there's not enough work for 20 full time photographers. Yet most people think professional football is a pipe dream available to only the gifted, but anyone could become a professional photographer, you just need to buy a decent camera.

 

[Nod]

one of the best teaching aids i saw for shooting ( composition that is ) and something the OP can very easily do.. a rectangle of cardboard cut out to form a frame ( ideal is a 6 x 4 photo mount ).
hold it up when shooting portait or landscape ( or pretty much anything ) and you get a perfect tool for finding the composition you want thats easy to explain to someone.
its very hard to see what someone else is seeing through the viewfinder at the same time.. or even on the LCD screen.. but a bit of card held up you can stand behind them and get an almost identical view and help them with framing.

Many years ago, Dad made me a gadget that was basically a slide mount (35mm) on a stick. I could slide the mount along the stick to see what composition worked and the stick was marked to show which focal length gave me that angle of view.

In answer to the OP, I'm not sure you can teach someone to be GOOD at composing photographs but am sure that you can at least teach them the basic rules/guidelines such as the rule of thirds/golden ratio and hope it sticks.

 

[dean messenger]

i think anyone can learn the technical aspects of photography. to the point you could know pretty much all there is to know about settings on a camera from iso to f stop, to exp compensation , shutter speed etc etc ...BUT.. you could learn all the above from books , videos, etc without actually picking up a camera.
Knowing something and putting that knowledge into practice are two entirely different beasts.
A bit like driving, anyone can sit and learn the highway code and know stopping distances, every road sign and marking etc etc.. but put them behind the wheel with all that knowledge does not and will never make them a driver.
If you cant "see" the shot, understand light and composition when out in the field with camera in hand. if you dont have that eye for detail that others might miss, then all the technical theory in the world isnt going to help you take a good photograph.

The two go hand in hand, but i think creativity comes first and foremost because with that a great photo can be obtained without all the technical knowledge. Knowing the ins and outs just enhances that.

 

[simonkit]

In answer to the OP, I'm not sure you can teach someone to be GOOD at composing photographs but am sure that you can at least teach them the basic rules/guidelines such as the rule of thirds/golden ratio and hope it sticks.

Have to agree with this. I run landscape workshops and cover the "rules" but try to avoid telling people how to compose individual shots, the aim for me is to get people thinking about the different elements than can produce a good shot (light, framing, foreground interest etc.) and then take their own images as they see them. In fact if I was to tell them exactly which shots to take then I might well be doing them a disservice as they could well have a better "eye" for it than I have!!

Simon

 

[scottduffy]

Really? Anyone?

Yep unless you have a physical/mental disability which makes shooting impossible. It's not a physical job like playing football and i as we all know there are many untalented footballers who take home a wage from their repective clubs/leagues so i don't see why this would be different to photographers. I'm not saying everyone can earn the big bucks but we could all earn something if we wanted to.

Practice makes perfect as the saying goes.

 

[dean messenger]

i'd rather amble around a pitch "ala wayne useless rooney" for 90 minutes pretending to be useful than spend a day hiking a ton of heavy equipment round , dealing with a whole bunch of people who dislike eachother, screaming brats and squabbling bridesmaids and relatives at a wedding shoot.
Photography can be far more physcially and mentally challenging than kicking a cow bladder around for 90 minutes and pays far less

 

[Phil V]

Yep unless you have a physical/mental disability which makes shooting impossible. It's not a physical job like playing football and i as we all know there are many untalented footballers who take home a wage from their repective clubs/leagues so i don't see why this would be different to photographers. I'm not saying everyone can earn the big bucks but we could all earn something if we wanted to.

Practice makes perfect as the saying goes.

But for every full time pro footballer there are a dozen or more that we're signed up as apprentices or put on youth teams. The lower leagues might be full of lesser skilled players, but they're still putting the hours in on the training pitch, and they're all the guys who were picked first on the school field, and there's still more chance of achieving that than becoming a full time pro photographer.

You're right about the skill level (photographically) of the local pro, but you underestimate massively what it takes to make a success of running a social photography business.

It's easy for anyone to 'earn something if they wanted to' particularly when (as people often do) you ignore the massive prior investment in kit and training.

The reality is that actually turning a profit only comes after a massive amount of work. But this is way off topic now, we're not discussing 'professional photography standards' just whether it's possible to learn composition.

 

[PMN]

I think anyone can learn and be good at anything.

Have to say I disagree quite strongly with this concept. With the best will in the world I'll never be good at maths or writing computer code, however hard I try my brain just isn't wired that way and trying to be good at it just doesn't help. Conversely I can do things in music absolutely perfectly naturally without even thinking about it that some other people have been trying to do for 20 years and still can't. I guess it's more a case of anything can be taught but it doesn't necessarily guarantee the person learning will be amazing at whatever they're doing.

 

[Ed Sutton]

We all learned to read and write and despite being at different levels we all learned.

Dyslexics struggle with what is effortless to others no matter how much or how hard they try. Some people are tone deaf. Perhaps there's a visual equivalent?