Eye dominance and ability to compose a photo

[snusmumriken]

Has anybody else suspected that their ability to compose a photo is related to which eye they use?

I am left-eye-dominant, so I naturally hold my 35mm camera (telescope, microscope, loupe, etc) to my left eye. This has never been convenient, because I have quite a long nose, and it has to be squashed up behind the camera body, and I have to take the camera away from my face to wind on. About 8 years ago I started to wear vari-focal glasses full time, which made it extra difficult to get my left eye close enough to the viewfinder to see the bright line frame. So it became physically easier to use my right eye for the purpose, and I made that a habit. I even practised raising my camera to that eye until it was automatic.

Over time, though, I started to think I had lost any sense of composition. Even if everything else in a photo was OK, the contents just didn't balance. None of my photos satisfied me. Then one day I noticed that if I used my left eye, the image in the viewfinder immediately seemed more lively, provoking me to move it around - even millimetres - to get a pleasing arrangement. It would perhaps only take a second or less, and I was barely aware of the process, but it felt like resolving a chord on the piano.

I have no doubts about the correlation with eye-dominance in my case. I just wondered if any other forum member has had a similar experience?

(FWIW, although I am strongly left-eye-dominant, I am strongly right-handed, so I think that means there is some weird cross-wiring going on in the centre of my brain!)

 

[Pieter12]

I’m not sure why you are right-handed, but the right side of the brain is associated with spatial abilities, imagination and visual awareness.

 

[Vaughn]

Interesting -- some could be due which eye works best with which side of the brain...and some due to the use of the equipment itself.

I am left eye and right hand dominate, also. I have not used 35mm much, but now I know why I get nose-grease on the view screen of my digital camera. I never thought about using 35mm and digi cameras with my right eye. All my film photography was been using ground glass for viewing. How fun!

But that means my basic composition is always done with both eyes, without the camera to my eye(s). Composition on the GG is just for fine-tuning, again, often with both eyes.

 

[Mike Lopez]

This is one reason why I use waist-level finders whenever possible. They allow me to compose the picture with both eyes open. Which is very convenient, because that’s how I look at the finished picture, as well: with both eyes.

Edit: this includes 35mm photography. I have waist-level finders for my Nikons and Canons. The Canon finder took quite awhile to find.

 

[MattKing]

I'm not sure there is any causative connection between eye dominance and hand dominance.
I am left eye dominant. I think the reason I prefer to view with that eye when composing is that I tend to view more of the world while relying on that eye. It may be habit, as much as anything.

 

[Vaughn]

I thought it was common advice for street photographers (35mm) to keep both eyes open while photographing. Learning to keep processing the entire scene along with what is in the viewfinder.

Also...perhaps it is in error to think of left/right dominance as a black and white situation, but on a sliding scale instead (middle of the scale would be the ambidextrous). And there is a cultural influence, also. I am right-handed, but learned to throw a frisbee left-handed. Working in the wilds with hand tools building trails for a decade, I found to have a strong side is to have a weak side, and one does not have time for that.

I'll also toss in that most GG view systems reverses the image (TLR), or turns the image upside down (LF). Would this 'counter' any advantage of using a dominate eye for composition?

Or does it all boil down to using what one is use to using...

 

[Pieter12]

This is one reason why I use waist-level finders whenever possible. They allow me to compose the picture with both eyes open. Which is very convenient, because that’s how I look at the finished picture, as well: with both eyes.

Edit: this includes 35mm photography. I have waist-level finders for my Nikons and Canons. The Canon finder took quite awhile to find.

I don't have that luxury, having a monovision prescription. However, the viewfinder image as well as the final print is 2-dimensional, looking at either with 2 eyes would not make any difference.

 

[Pieter12]

I'm not sure there is any causative connection between eye dominance and hand dominance.
I am left eye dominant. I think the reason I prefer to view with that eye when composing is that I tend to view more of the world while relying on that eye. It may be habit, as much as anything.

There is a simple test for eye dominance, and it usually does correspond to hand dominance, although more left-handers can be right-eye dominant rather than the other way around. Make a small hole (like a hole punch) in a piece of paper. Hold it at about arm's length, centered and look at a spot or object about 6 feet away, using both eyes. Then close one eye, left or right. The one that sees the spot is the dominant one.

 

[Mike Lopez]

I don't have that luxury, having a monovision prescription. However, the viewfinder image as well as the final print is 2-dimensional, looking at either with 2 eyes would not make any difference.

Not true, in my experience. An added benefit of using a WLF with both eyes open is that it allows one to look at the composition, rather than through it. Visual relationships can change, even if ever so slightly, by using the single eye composition technique. (Which eye?) I believe the OP alluded to this effect in the third paragraph of the initial post.

Lest anyone think I’m drunk or stoned in posting this, I’m not the first one to make this observation. This was a topic of conversation in a workshop I attended years and years ago.

 

[Anon Ymous]

I'm also right handed and left eyed. I used to play billiards a bit and it made a serious difference. IIRC, only a 5% of the population has this sort of cross dominance, but I might be wrong. Anyway, it also seems to make a difference when taking photos, but somehow I usually forget about it.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I'm left eye dominant and modify my small cameras with big rubber eye cups to keep light from streaming into the viewfinder from the left edge. Tried using my right eye, but it just didn't click.

Write and play baseball right handed, but play lacrosse and hockey left handed.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Also...anybody else have a warm eye and a somewhat cooler eye as far as colour temperature goes?

My theory is that in addition to stereo vision, it might give a subtle boost to 'seeing' the sculptural three dimensionality of things.

 

[Vaughn]

It seems logical to assume that the balance (type, abundance, and placement) of specific rods and cones in ones eyes can be slightly different. Toss in a brain and anything can happen. I always have found that my brain's auto white balance is not dependable.

My eyes will place blue at a different distance than red. The blue lines painted on asphalt look sunken into the pavement to such an extent that I have to run my fingers over the line if I had to swear if they were sunken or not. Printed adverts with blue writing on a red background freak my eyes/brain connection out...the writing is below the paper surface.

We rarely see or experience reality the same way as another.

 

[Pieter12]

Not true, in my experience. An added benefit of using a WLF with both eyes open is that it allows one to look at the composition, rather than through it. Visual relationships can change, even if ever so slightly, by using the single eye composition technique. (Which eye?) I believe the OP alluded to this effect in the third paragraph of the initial post.

The viewfinder image is still 2-dimensional and does not change when viewed with two eyes. It is you dominant eye that is doing all the work. However, by using a waist-level finder at a distance of 12-18", you can be more aware of you surroundings and also be able to look directly at your subject, especial when photographing people, and have better involvement.

lso...anybody else have a warm eye and a somewhat cooler eye as far as colour temperature goes?

A good part of my work during my professional career as an Art Director was evaluating color. I definitely see a slight tendency to see cooler in one eye.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Being also left-eye dominant I had difficulties using some right-handed things that were designed for right-eye dominance. Notable among these were shotguns and bows. Switching to using a bow left-handed increased my accuracy tremendously. With the shotgun, I simply didn't open both eyes, aiming with just the right eye as one would with a rifle. I never got that good at shooting skeet, though. SLRs got used with the left eye and the accompanying nose smashing

With LF, I often close my right eye when viewing a scene through the viewing filter. With the loupe, it's definitely left eye. FWIW, I find closing one eye and eliminating 3D vision to be helpful when composing an image.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Mike Lopez]

The viewfinder image is still 2-dimensional and does not change when viewed with two eyes. It is you dominant eye that is doing all the work. However, by using a waist-level finder at a distance of 12-18", you can be more aware of you surroundings and also be able to look directly at your subject, especial when photographing people, and have better involvement.



A good part of my work during my professional career as an Art Director was evaluating color. I definitely see a slight tendency to see cooler in one eye.

I think we’re talking about two separate things, and maybe you’re making a different point. I know that I can demonstrate the effect I’m talking about to myself as I sit here in my living room, but obviously that does no good for an Internet conversation.

 

[Pieter12]

FWIW, I find closing one eye and eliminating 3D vision to be helpful when composing an image.

I also often close one eye to see how a scene will look flattened to 2-D, as in a photograph, eliminating depth and seeing how things line up or overlap from a certain point of view.

 

[Vaughn]

... FWIW, I find closing one eye and eliminating 3D vision to be helpful when composing an image...

Definitely with me. Not with every image, but some images we explore can require the spacial seperation we see in 3-D in order for the composition to 'work'...and it might refuse to be well translated into a 2-D image. Something that whacks me on the head all the time working in a dense forest.

When translating the scene into 2-D, one can lose the sense of volume that fore and mid-ground forms have and the sense of the space they occupy. Which in turn can reduce the over-all feeling of space within an image.

New Years Day, 2008. 8x10 carbon print

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm right-handed, right-legged, and right-eye dominant and do everything right-sided except I play cards left-handed. Go figure. My maternal grandmother did everything right-handed except sewing.

I started shooting 4x5 large format and really don't compose well upside down. I bought an eye-level viewfinder but it gets dark at times. When I shoot medium format waist level, I hate everything because it is reversed from left to right. So I quickly bought an eye-level viewfinder for it and never looked back.

So I commiserate with left-eyed photographers.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I also often close one eye to see how a scene will look flattened to 2-D, as in a photograph, eliminating depth and seeing how things line up or overlap from a certain point of view.

Me too.

When using the 4x5 I carry a 5x7 card with a 4x5 hole cut out of it (one side white, one side black) and peer through that with one eye closed when drilling down on compositions. Find it helps to tighten up compositions and camera position to see if it's worthwhile pulling the camera out of the packsack...especially helpful in forests where any slight difference in position can introduce big changes with distant trees, branches, etc.

 

[Ballinderry-Michael]

In my case there's a very simple coincidence (though I'd hesitate about calling it a correlation). I am strongly left-eye dominant and equally strongly right-handed - not as strongly left-footed, as I could kick a rugby ball well with either foot back in the day. I feel awkward and stupid using my left hand for most one-handed manoeuvres; and I feel just as awkward trying to rely on my right eye.

That said, I'm sure there's a gamut and we're all somewhere different on it. It's fortunate that we can manage photography.

 

[snusmumriken]

I started shooting 4x5 large format and really don't compose well upside down. I bought an eye-level viewfinder but it gets dark at times. When I shoot medium format waist level, I hate everything because it is reversed from left to right.

IIRC, Cartier-Bresson among others advocated studying one’s compositions upside down and back to front. Supposedly they should hold up if robust.

I don’t find this to be true. For me, compositions (including his) only work one way. Hardened LF users will probably have a different view (in both senses, sorry).

 

[cliveh]

IIRC, Cartier-Bresson among others advocated studying one’s compositions upside down and back to front. Supposedly they should hold up if robust.

I don’t find this to be true. For me, compositions (including his) only work one way. Hardened LF users will probably have a different view (in both senses, sorry).

I don't agree, as if you look at any print upside down and it still works, it usually has good composition. Most LF users see the image upside down which is an aid to composition. Also the left right and right left is also an aid for composition. HCB was a past master at this, helped by a Vidom finder.

 

[Vaughn]

I print from in-camera negatives in platinum and in carbon transfer. The carbon prints, since it is a transfer process, reverses the image. So while I will often be considering one process over the other when composing, I do find that both versions of an image can equally work as well, just perhaps not in the same exact way.

Under the darkcloth, for a platinum print, I just mentally spin the image on the GG 180 degrees on the same plane. Since carbon printing reverses the image, for those I just mentally spin the GG image on the horizontal axis along its center. Anyway, the end result is that I end up composing an image that is mentally orientated the same as print will be.

I still remember the first time, after a long session under the darkcloth, that when I took the darkcloth off and looked around, the world looked upside down for an instant, then returned to 'normal'.

I don't agree, as if you look at any print upside down and it still works, it usually has good composition.

Something my prof mentioned often -- while turning student's photos upside down on the critique board.

 

[Mike Lopez]

…I started shooting 4x5 large format and really don't compose well upside down. I bought an eye-level viewfinder but it gets dark at times. When I shoot medium format waist level, I hate everything because it is reversed from left to right. So I quickly bought an eye-level viewfinder for it and never looked back.

It takes some doing, but what you describe (upside down/laterally reversed) is one of the allures of the larger formats for me. If you can learn to let go of your conceptions of what the picture is of, but instead study how the image looks on the ground glass, you will eventually fail to even recognize what your brain is telling you is “correct.” There have been plenty of times when I’ve come out from under the dark cloth, looked at what the camera was pointed at, and thought “Huh. How about that. I had no idea.”