rules, rules rules ...

[Doc W]

not setting up any sort of straw man, or suggesting anyone is a slavish idiot ..

plenty of people have tunnel vision in life, they measure everything and do everything "by the book" ) the rule book (
yes unexpected and interesting things often times come from not using the rules, conventions ( thanks ben ! ) or "doing what one is told" ...

a lot of folks who have posted to this thread claim they break the rules often, and that is fine by me ...

Well, I don't want to get into a beef about it, but I guess I never read the rule book. As I said, if you want to use iffy film, knock yourself out.

 

[MattKing]

Nobody mentioned laws before I did so why bring traffic laws into the equation. They ain't rules, they are laws.

What are the legal consequences of breaking the rules of composition?

Interesting ...

I probably have a different take on the relationship between rules and their included subset, laws.

As well as a fairly pragmatic opinion about the efficacy of legal penalties.

Rules are there to assist us.

And for some laws, a breach is aesthetically displeasing.

 

[blansky]

In my opinion, rules, or whatever you wish to call them, are important to learn.

There are certain things in human beings which are universal. And surprisingly for example, we all, in virtually every culture, understand beauty. A beautiful woman for instance is beautiful in every culture. An ugly one is probably ugly in every culture as well. Obviously there are exceptions.

So we have a universal capacity for liking certain things. The golden mean seems to be another one. For some reason we like that proportion.

There are also universal truths that we all can agree on. The golden rule is perhaps a universal part of our humanity or cornerstone of civilization.

So for some reason we all are attracted to certain primal things. And artistically, "rules" of composition fall into this attraction as well. That's why they became rules.

So my opinion is we should learn them as a part of the language of our particular craft, then break them when it suits our vision of our work.

I believe not knowing something, isn't a style or a celebration of individuality, it's just an ignorance of our medium. A style is knowing the rules, and breaking the ones you don't agree with.

 

[removed account4]

I learnt the rules in painting/drawing and photography. I don't have much use for them. As for using equipment in unorthodox ways, I once had to fend off a would be thief with a tripod. It worked well.

definitely no functional fixity there

 

[pdeeh]

I think people should have to pass an examination in order to be able to purchase and use a camera.

The exam board could consist of the most anally retentive and reactionary members of APUG, which should ensure that no one would go around the place taking any pictures at anything other at box speed, developing them in D76 (or at least using anything other than box speed only after two years of intensive grey-card photography) and then printing them in a darkroom on Azo paper. Or have a beard that isn't bushy or wear a hat that isn't a Stetson, or own any form of mobile telephony device. Or be younger than at least the average age of the exam board.

That'd show the little fuckers what rules are for ...

 

[lxdude]

And after nearly a quarter century of practicing law,

So when do you stop practicing and do it for real?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I too have broken those "rules" because they are "non rules".

The problem I have is seeing a thread here about "I used 1" handheld with my camera and the picture is blurred. Why?"!

Well, as someone else said, know why they are rules but also non rules. They establish a guideline between blurred and non blurred, but also may be a line between art and non art!

Then the thread diverges into "well, could you have gotten blurring from development or fixation" when uninformed APUG members chime in, and then genetic drift takes us into la la land.

PE

 

[BrianShaw]

I think people should have to pass an examination in order to be able to purchase and use a camera.

The exam board could consist of the most anally retentive and reactionary members of APUG, which should ensure that no one would go around the place taking any pictures at anything other at box speed, developing them in D76 (or at least using anything other than box speed only after two years of intensive grey-card photography) and then printing them in a darkroom on Azo paper. Or have a beard that isn't bushy or wear a hat that isn't a Stetson, or own any form of mobile telephony device. Or be younger than at least the average age of the exam board.

That'd show the little fuckers what rules are for ...

Darn... now I need a new hobby.

 

[markbarendt]

I always obey the rules of physics. Not that we know them all.

 

[dpurdy]

Since no one is going to come to this thread and say they only follow rules, never think outside the box, never do anything experimentally, avoid creative thought and own several books to tell them how to do everything correctly, I think perhaps a more interesting question is what general rules do you regularly break and why and what for.
Dennis

 

[Vaughn]

I point my cameras towards the sun occasionally...because that is where some great images can hide.
I occasionally use Dektol as a film developer.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I always obey the rules of physics. Not that we know them all.

Good thing you're not a neutrino.

 

[removed account4]

Since no one is going to come to this thread and say they only follow rules, never think outside the box, never do anything experimentally, avoid creative thought and own several books to tell them how to do everything correctly, I think perhaps a more interesting question is what general rules do you regularly break and why and what for.
Dennis

i was kind of hoping that was the direction the thread was going to take
people saying what they did, and why and posting an example ... but
i didn't really want to be too much of a puppet master ...

 

[bsdunek]

I point my cameras towards the sun occasionally...because that is where some great images can hide.
I occasionally use Dektol as a film developer.

My brother burned a hole in Dad's Leica M3 doing that. Dad was not pleased.

I just printed some pictures using HP5 in my Minox. MMmmm Grain!

 

[Vaughn]

My brother burned a hole in Dad's Leica M3 doing that. Dad was not pleased.

I just printed some pictures using HP5 in my Minox. MMmmm Grain!

Towards the sun, not at the sun. I was not clear. Here in the Pacific NW we may not see that yellow disk in the sky very often, but not looking at the sun (with or without unfiltered optics), is a rule I tend to pay attention to.

Dang -- was hoping to put up an example, but must not have scanned that one in.

 

[Photo Engineer]

That pointing towards the sun can be very rewarding. I have one of them in my gallery here.

Doing shots with the subject out of focus, or using a bad DOF is another trick that can be useful.

PE

 

[frobozz]

I've been making 20x24 full-frame prints from 35mm negatives recently, and they look impossibly good. HP-5 and Tri-X from years ago, and Double-X shot recently. You'd think it would just be a grain horror-fest, but no! So don't let anyone tell you any rules about maximum enlargements from various film sizes.

Duncan

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I don't break any rules;I make them

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Rules are for morons and other people who can't think for themselves.

Is that a rule?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

engineers and scientists make rules; artists break them(and get better images)

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Nobody mentioned laws before I did so why bring traffic laws into the equation. They ain't rules, they are laws.

What are the legal consequences of breaking the rules of composition?

You get nailed to a cross, looking like the Vitruvian man

 

[BrianShaw]

I thought that poor Vitruvian got nailed to a circle... or is it really an orb?

 

[Paul Verizzo]

With the coming of electronic "capture" I see many technically excellent photos. Repetitive and boring as a Sunday morning sermon but sharp,properly exposed,composed and great if taking a nap is your goal.

How well said! What was once so valuable, an image, hard to share, fragile has become a pollutant. Too many, everywhere, cluttering our lives.

Only one reason this early adapter of digital is now back at film for his fun. There is something proper and holy in not attaining perfection. One of my best friends, a graduate of Brooks, and I are having an ongoing discussion about the return of so many people to vinyl, film, and tube audio, his current passion. It's as if the quest to have no grain, or eliminate pops and clicks is more important than having them eliminated.

Maybe, just like our bodies, minds, and souls perfection is only something we think we want.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

engineers and scientists make rules; artists break them(and get better images)

Amen!

Maybe not better, but more interesting.

I'm of the opinion - blasphemy here - that the photo god known as Ansel Adams was a second rate photographer. Oh, sure, beautiful images, but mostly so because they are technically perfect. Less so the composition, and never the "decisive moment." And that's where he excelled, anal retentive record keeping and processing. And once you get away from his best known images, they are rather pedestrian.

The truth is we, the world at large, need both the rule makers like our beloved PE, and the rule breakers like Patrick Gainer. Boy, have they had head butting "discussions!"

 

[Rick A]

Rule of thumb: when pounding a nail, look only at the nail. If you worry about your thumb, and look at it, you will hit it.