Landscape composition advice

[tenohfive]

I'm within touching distance of getting the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 I've been pining after for months but I'm a little concerned that I won't be able to put it to good use. Composition is definitely my weak point.

I'm planning a trip to the Lake District in a couple of months and I'm determined to come home with at least a few shots that I can be proud of. The trip will be mostly spent high up in the hills in areas of rocky crags and steep drops, occasionally passing the odd tarn but rarely going as far down as the actual lakes. I'll also be carrying all my camping kit so I can't take my Manfrotto tripod - it's just too heavy, so I'm planning on making do as best I can with a Gorillapod.

It goes without saying that I scour the Random photos thread for shot ideas that I can borrow but I'm not entirely sure I'll recognise that stunning shot when I see it. There seems to be a fairly common formula on here of foreground rock + still water = stunning shot but a) given the height this isn't likely to work, and b) at risk of insulting some gifted photographers on the whole that style of image doesn't do much for me. So can anyone offer some pointers as to how can I come back with some stunning images rather than some pleasant photo's of hills?

[markmullen]

Over on Talk Photography someone asked what do people look for when taking a landscape photograph, what I wrote over there might help;

"Most important for me is the light. Next I look for a background, mountains, the sea, whatever. Finally I look for a foreground element to balance the shot.

Once I've got those elements together I work on a composition that feels balanced, often this will contain the usual rules of composition, thirds, leading lines etc."

[tenohfive]

I hadn't really thought of the foreground as balancing the background but that does make sense. Any suggestions for when there isn't a foreground interest? Ways of getting the most out of the background etc?

[Gemm]

tenohfive said:

Any suggestions for when there isn't a foreground interest?

Then it's your job to find something interesting or to make it interesting. This is definitely the area where your skill really comes in. I don't think there's a general answer to it as it would depend on lots of different aspects.

[paul911]

Foreground interest could be anything from your mates eating lunch or admiring the view, to a discarded water bottle, your rucksack, flower, plant, unusually shaped rock or make one with a pile of stones. You will find something I’m sure.

Some images work without a foreground object too, reflections or panoramic are the most common that work well without.

It’s how you arrange the elements of distant hills with mid and foreground, leading lines that are important. Just give the rule of thirds a try, if that doesn’t look good try a different composition until your happy.

Don’t forget just because your taking a landscape pic, the camera doesn’t have to be in landscape orientation, try a portrait too.

Hope you have a good time and look forward to seeing your pics.

[tenohfive]

paul911 said:

Foreground interest could be anything from your mates eating lunch or admiring the view, to a discarded water bottle, your rucksack, flower, plant, unusually shaped rock or make one with a pile of stones. You will find something I’m sure.

I'm not articulating myself particularly well, probably because I'm thinking in terms of my last trip. Flicking back through some photo's I took from the sides of hills the nature of trying to include the towering peaks in the background meant that the camera needed to be pointed horizontally or higher to capture the background. Given the area anything taller than a couple of feet was fairly rare and often on a slope so I struggled to include it in the shot. I suspect you've answered that question in a way though, with this:

paul911 said:

Don’t forget just because your taking a landscape pic, the camera doesn’t have to be in landscape orientation, try a portrait too.

I didn't think to do this last time, and with an UWA in the toolkit (and possibly the Gorillapod) my ability to include more and get lower respectively are increased. Will definitely keep this in mind.

paul911 said:

Some images work without a foreground object too, reflections or panoramic are the most common that work well without.

I've yet to take any panoramas. I think I need to get some practice before I go away.

Thanks everyone for the tips and for reminding me of some of the options I have. And probably much more importantly for getting me thinking.

[markmullen]

Also as you'll be carrying a gorillapod you'll get down lower which is often a good thing, I rarely use any of my tripods up high unless I'm trying to clear a fence or something.

[binliner]

To add to the advice given already, I'd say just because you have a UWA lens and beautiful landscapes in front of you don't feel tempted to always try and capture the whole view... try and find the picture within that view (if that makes sense)

[RobDickinson]

Good advice here so far.

An UWA is an excellent landscape option, but it does have to be used with restraint. it needs foreground or interesting sky or close subjects or something to make the image. IMO 15-25mm is often more appropriate than super wide. That or stitched shots.

[tenohfive]

Thanks for the replies.

My Tokina 11-16mm turned up today and I'm itching for a chance to give it an outing but I suspect that'll have to wait a few days. A quick question for Gorillapod users - is a ball head an essential, and if so is the Joby one the best option?

[RobDickinson]

If you want some great info on composition watch this.

Its 2hrs long and starts slowly but well worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

[tenohfive]

RobDickinson said:

If you want some great info on composition watch this.

Its 2hrs long and starts slowly but well worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

Cheers Rob. I'll have a look at that later in the week.
I'm dying to go out and have a play with the new lens at some point but the weather (continual drizzle) isn't the greatest for making the most of it right now. I can't stop picking up the camera though - the lens itself feels like it's made from granite and girders (in a good way.)

[andy-xr]

tenohfive said:

I'm not articulating myself particularly well, probably because I'm thinking in terms of my last trip.

I know exactly what you mean. Landscapes really aren't my thing at all, but what you're seeing and noticing is balance, contrast and foreground interest, and leading lines and things that draw you around the photos. If you see some of Mr Carters work in particular, he often lands things on a fibonnaci point and plays with contrasting colours. with the nature of landscapes and foreground interest, it tends to lean more towards putting something on either the lower left or lower right point for foreground interest, then having a great massive wash of 'stuff' as the frame.

It's a tried and tested formula, it works when you're down at ground level, but doesn't always translate when you've got a view of the peaks in front of you and you're trying to get the lake in the shot as well. Sometimes though, you can just have that without any foreground eye candy, it can be elsewhere in the shot

This is Ansel Adams



I think the modern day photographer critiqued might be tempted to tell him to crop half a third from the top and it'd look better, but whadda we know...

[Gemm]

Theories and rules can guide you to the right direction but they don't really matter after all as long as the images look good and pleasing to your eyes.

[tenohfive]

andy-xr said:

lands things on a fibonnaci point and plays with contrasting colours

I've just started reading up on this but haven't quite got my head around it. I'll have another look in the morning as it seems an interesting method.

Gemm said:

Theories and rules can guide you to the right direction but they don't really matter after all as long as the images look good and pleasing to your eyes.

True, but I'd rather have an understanding of the theories and rules and selectively (and potentially regularly) break them than just carry on without that knowledge.

tenohfive said:

A quick question for Gorillapod users - is a ball head an essential, and if so is the Joby one the best option?

Anyone?

[tenohfive]

RobDickinson said:

If you want some great info on composition watch this.

Its 2hrs long and starts slowly but well worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

I'm glad I watched that - it was well worth the time taken. The points around positive and negative space in the composition were a bit of a lightbulb coming on moment, and there was a few other points that I hope I can introduce to my photography.

On top of my Gorillapod question, one more: filters. I'd like at least a polariser for reducing reflections of lakes and tarns. Is it worth looking at a Cokin style holder? If so, which one?

Edited by tenohfive on Monday 16th July 18:44

[paul911]

tenohfive said:

On top of my Gorillapod question, one more: filters. I'd like at least a polariser for reducing reflections of lakes and tarns. Is it worth looking at a Cokin style holder? If so, which one?

For a polariser you need a screw in type. You would use a holder for grads and ND grads.

[markmullen]

paul911 said:

For a polariser you need a screw in type. You would use a holder for grads and ND grads.

Depends on what size, if you go for P series you can get a drop in CPL which fits in the extra slim slot nearest the lens.

[paul911]

markmullen said:

paul911 said:

For a polariser you need a screw in type. You would use a holder for grads and ND grads.

Depends on what size, if you go for P series you can get a drop in CPL which fits in the extra slim slot nearest the lens.

I didn't know that. Presume you couldn't use a grad with that system though, unless you can turn them both independantly?

Edit: Also just a thought, but a polariser and a wide angle lens is a bit hit and miss. You can get banding, as the field of view is so wide you are only polarising part of the image.

Edited by paul911 on Monday 16th July 20:30

[markmullen]

paul911 said:

I didn't know that. Presume you couldn't use a grad with that system though, unless you can turn them both independantly?

Yes, when I first started (before I bought a sackful of Lee gear!) I used P series briefly, the CPL is round and toothed so you can grip it to rotate it independently of a grad.