Composition & 1/3 rule

[ctcook]

I'm still trying to learn how to compose a great shot. I tried to stick to a rule of thirds in this one(trees upper, focal point middle, path lower). I'm wondering however if it would have been better to include more/less of the path. What do you think: more trees & less path, more path & less trees, or fine as is?

Model: NIKON D40
ISO: 800
Exposure: 1/50 sec
Aperture: 4.5
Focal Length: 34mm
Flash Used: No

As is:


More Path:
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_XtLxi9UyohQ/Ss.../Path_Crop.jpg
More Leaves:
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_XtLxi9UyohQ/Ss...Path_Crop2.jpg

[kirbinster]

I would think the vanishing point of the path should be up at the two-thirds point, and more path showing.

[ctcook]

I think I like Kirbinster's advice, what do you guys think, is this one better?



Of course, I'm still not tossing the idea of more trees, man I'm really undecided on this one.

[Joyce Matthews]

Great pictures. I prefer the one with more trees and less path. That puts the path in the lower third of the picture.

[Nesh108]

I agree with Joyce.
More three put the end of the path in the lower third of the pic, and I think the trees are more good-looking and suggestive than the path itself

[coldphoenix]

I'd try to line up the "end of the path" on the left third. Because the path is curved to the right, its going to lead your eye to the right, but if you have it placed on the right third, its leading your eye right out the frame and the left side of the photo gets ignored.

[Mogen_david]

Originally Posted by coldphoenix

I'd try to line up the "end of the path" on the left third. Because the path is curved to the right, its going to lead your eye to the right, but if you have it placed on the right third, its leading your eye right out the frame and the left side of the photo gets ignored.

Adding to this effect is that the brightest part of the picture is the red patch and sunlight on the right.

A useful trick with this photo might be to sketch out the "masses" in very rough shapes and then think about how they relate to each other. By masses I mean the triangular path, the circular dark hole where the path ends, the blob of shrubs on either side, that bright patch to the right, etc. Then ask yourself if those masses are in a pleasing arrangement. If not shift them around until you like the abstract shapes look right.

One other point is to ask what story your telling with the image. A walk in the woods, A wind blown leaf along the path. Then ask if the perspective is helping to tell the story or is it a distraction. In your pair of photos. One feels like the observer is looking down at the path or their feet. The other is looking up the path. I prefer looking up the path. To me it's a more interesting story. Especially since nothing is going on with the path. If you wanted emphasis the path I would prefer that you had squatted or laid down on the path. That way the journey not the path is still the story. However, sitting low on the path is not a "natural" perspective for most folks. By placing your view point there the perspective becomes the story. Does that perspective connect with your desired story.

[denja]

I think everyone has made well thought out recomendations. So, why not one more perspective?

Jim

[Gonzo13]

With the way that the leaves are colored now I would say more path. However if it was in a late autumn I might say more trees but that would also depend on the coloring of the leaves. Another thought about the one with less trees in it is that it gives, to me at least, the impression that once you go down that path there is a canopy covering the path, kind of like walking into a cave created by the trees.

[ctcook]

Wow, these are all really good suggestions. I really like the crop that Denja did (thanks). I alos wish that I had thought of squatting or laying down like Mogen_david suggested (wish I'd have thought of that). Maybe I'll take another trip up there when the leaves have had more time to change and try a few more shots. Again, thanks everyone for your input.