Originally Posted by
WIlliam Maroldo
Hi Gloria. I am not an expert on the subject, but I do not think that there is much difference between phothraphy and art per se'. One uses brushes, the other light. I wrote the following a while back that seems relavant to this discussion;
There is a line of thought that compositional rules are not necessary, and that a photographer just instictively knows what looks good. I content that he is creating snapshots that may serve his vanity but are not great photographs. Photography is a visual language, and much like a verbal language, has rules of syntax which make ideas more understandable. Visual language has rules as well. These are not strictly compositional, and also include simplicity, subject clarity, and contextual relevance. How effective the writer or photographer is using this "language", determines how effective he is in conveying an idea. Great writers do this very well. So do great photographers. Rules of composition have a rich historical base, as does language, and the understanding of both is inherant in culture, though not immediately recognizable. We have all seen countless photographs, and other images, and we have unconsciously learned the language and appreciate compositional balance, and the other factors that make up a great image. Since composition has so impressed our psyche, we reject random and un-thought out images just as we would fail to understand someone speaking gibberish. regards~Bill