Square Format

[Roger Cole]

Could it also be that it is more difficult to cut a perfect circle or make a circular stretched canvas?

But some make circular photos as a practice, Susan Patrice comes to mind: http://aeqai.com/main/2019/03/fotofolio-susan-patrice/

There was an article in the old View Camera magazine when I subscribed to it back in the 90s about round format images. I remember really liking the ones from the person whose work was highlighted. Not something to shoot as a rule but I've sometimes thought of trying to make a project out of shooting round images (or at least printing round images.)

 

[pbromaghin]

I find myself agnostic on this topic. It really depends on what camera I feel like using today and then I go looking for compositions that best fit that format, but will still crop as needed.

 

[Vaughn]

How does that apply to studio work? Or portraits? Abstracts? etc.

Not only does can one's millage differ, one can be on a different highway!
There is studio work that are nothing but light reflecting off surfaces -- where the surfaces are not the 'subject'. Some abstracts can be seen as images of light removed from the objects reflecting them.
Got me thinking about portraits, though!!

 

[Roger Cole]

The edges of a square or rectangular photo or painting are usually pretty straight and clean (unless rough or evenness is part of the intended presentation) and easy to achieve and exhibit. A rough, out-of round circle tends to look awkward and amateurish, once again unless that is the intended presentation. Circles, ovals, and arced shapes tend to look old-fashioned and affected.

We get it, you don't like them.

I think I might. Do what you like of course.

 

[Roger Cole]

This. We have to realize that camera formats are arbitrary, man-made decisions. 4:3 is no more "natural" than TV's 16:9, or 35mm's 3:2 which is really an old movie format. There are also Cinemascope formats of various widths. The cinematographers adjust the scene to fit the cameras' format. That's why movies work in any format. So it is with still pictures we take. The scene has to be composed to fit the camera's format.

The composition needs to fit the final IMAGE format. That's not necessarily the format of the film window in a film camera. Like I said - I happily crop all the time.

 

[Roger Cole]

Ha ha, because the story is HCB said so. If you look the topic up you will see how people argue on this.

One logic has it, if you there was a hand sticking out and caught within the frame, it ought to remain, otherwise it isn't true "decisive moment"

Am I the only one who doesn't even like the works of HCB? I actually saw an exhibition of his original work at the High Museum in Atlanta and it just left me, "meh" for the most part.

Of course this isn't saying it's "bad" - I know better than that. But "not to my personal tastes."

 

[Pieter12]

We get it, you don't like them.

I think I might. Do what you like of course.

It is not that I don’t like those shapes. But there seem to be far fewer because of the difficulty of making them well or the availability of ready-made. They also tend to harken to previous eras, previous aesthetics that I find less appealing in today’s world.

 

[Roger Cole]

And I especially like things that "harken to previous eras." So again - YMMV and all.

 

[alanrockwood]

Samples of circles. https://www.sfomuseum.org/exhibitions/geir-jordahl-circle-life/gallery#1

Hmmm, I kind of like those round photos in that link.

 

[warden]

More circular beauty here from Marianne Engberg: http://marianneengberg.dk/?page_id=400
She cuts the film into a circle (I wonder how) before using it in a quaker oats pinhole camera. Her whole portfolio and this interview are worth a look.
Super interesting lady to listen to:

Thanks Daniela, and three cheers for the Louisiana Channel, who share great interviews.

 

[Hassasin]

Am I the only one who doesn't even like the works of HCB? I actually saw an exhibition of his original work at the High Museum in Atlanta and it just left me, "meh" for the most part.

Of course this isn't saying it's "bad" - I know better than that. But "not to my personal tastes."

Looking in the mirror I don't believe you are the only one.

For one reason or another individuals come into spotlight and somehow become reference point for all else to be judged by. I have found HCB off-putting, based on some interviews and readings, and his images nothing out of ordinary. His keepers were on a low side too. So much for "decisive moment" attributed to him. Marketing at its best, but same can be said about a number of artists everybody hears about.

As for that no-crop reference to HCB, there is actually no truth to it, lots of his stuff was indeed cropped up.

 

[Ulrich Drolshagen]

AFAIK HCB didn't want publishers to crop his pictures thus altering the intended statement. To enforce this he released the pictures with the original borders. Had nothing to do with cropping in general.
HCB had the gift to be in place whenever something historical happened. It's all about taking pictures of historical relevance not about his pictures in general which are excellent but not superior to those of other famous photographers of the time.

Ulrich

 

[Hassasin]

AFAIK HCB didn't want publishers to crop his pictures thus altering the intended statement. To enforce this he released the pictures with the original borders. Had nothing to do with cropping in general.
HCB had the gift to be in place whenever something historical happened. It's all about taking pictures of historical relevance not about his pictures in general which are excellent but not superior to those of other famous photographers of the time.

Ulrich

I suggest you look through Magnum's Contacts Sheets. Alll of that, multiple takes on so called "being there", "decisive moments" etc.

 

[faberryman]

There is a Decisive Moment. The skill is pressing the shutter right when it occurs. HCB got a lot of practice and developed the skill pretty well. There are not many Decisive Moment photographers around any more. When asked to explain why they are not Decisive Moment photographers, they just say that if you look at his contact sheets, HCB missed a lot. He did. I am not sure where the idea came from that every time he pressed the shutter HCB captured the Decisive Moment. I'd say capturing the Decisive Moment is an aspirational objective.

 

[Hassasin]

HCB and his purported connection to decisive moment = marketing gibberish. It implies single shutter click to catch the moment, it almost never happens, not only with HCB.

 

[bernard_L]

I suggest you look through Magnum's Contacts Sheets. Alll of that, multiple takes on so called "being there", "decisive moments" etc.

Just so that it's in plain sight inside this thread:

Famous picture. Decisive moment?

The contact sheet:

Sure, these must be several decisive moments.

 

[Hassasin]

Just so that it's in plain sight inside this thread:

Famous picture. Decisive moment?
View attachment 330588

The contact sheet:
View attachment 330589

Sure, these must be several decisive moments.

It made me wonder when I got copy of Magnum's Contact Sheets - did they really think this publication through? Too late now, we have it

 

[Hassasin]

Of course we must remember, this thread is about square, HCB was never square on pretty much anything.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

This may be a personal psychology thing. I'd say at least 2/3s of the images I print that I shot on 6x6 I end up cropping to rectangles. If it works better square I print it square, but I don't hesitate to crop if that's better too and the viewfinder doesn't seem to compel me to stay with its proportions.

But what are you framing for? Square or rectangle? The arrangement is different. Things go in different spaces for one than the other.

 

[Roger Cole]

But what are you framing for? Square or rectangle? The arrangement is different. Things go in different spaces for one than the other.

I have no idea what I'm "framing for" until I see what's in front of the camera. I have a specific crop in mind when I shoot the image, usually, but also reserve the right to change my mind when I see a proof print if it looks like something different will work better.

 

[Daniela]

Thanks Daniela, and three cheers for the Louisiana Channel, who share great interviews.

You're welcome!
The Louisiana Channel's content is fantastic for seeing artists' processes. If anyone knows of any other source that provides similar content, please share!

 

[warden]

You're welcome!
The Louisiana Channel's content is fantastic for seeing artists' processes. If anyone knows of any other source that provides similar content, please share!

If you are a podcast person you could search for Sasha Wolf’s podcast called Photo Work, where Sasha (an art dealer and photographic artist representative) interviews photographers and avoids gear talk. There is a book of the same name too which I have found enjoyable:

PhotoWork: Forty Photographers on Process and Practice | Aperture

PhotoWork is a collection of interviews by forty photographers about their approach to making photographs and, more importantly, a sustained body of work.

aperture.org

 

[Pieter12]

If you are a podcast person you could search for Sasha Wolf’s podcast called Photo Work, where Sasha (an art dealer and photographic artist representative) interviews photographers and avoids gear talk. There is a book of the same name too which I have found enjoyable:

PhotoWork: Forty Photographers on Process and Practice | Aperture

PhotoWork is a collection of interviews by forty photographers about their approach to making photographs and, more importantly, a sustained body of work.

aperture.org

I remember buying that book when it came out. Although it had been recommended by others, I was disappointed. First, the "format" of asking the same questions to all the photographers seemed like a bit of a cop-out on the part of the author, then some of the responses just seemed somewhat elusive and opaque, even glib. I guess I was hoping for more and better insight into the process and practice of those photographers, as promised by the title.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I have no idea what I'm "framing for" until I see what's in front of the camera. I have a specific crop in mind when I shoot the image, usually, but also reserve the right to change my mind when I see a proof print if it looks like something different will work better.

It appears you can frame the picture you want that is different than the framing in the viewfinder. If you can do that, that's great. I frame the picture to the framing of the viewfinder. Maybe that habit is leftover from my chrome days when I projected the shots and there was no chance for cropping afterwards.

 

[Arthurwg]

I started with a square Yashica Mat many moons ago and now shoot mostly Hasselblad. For years when I tried to shoot 6x7 I found myself cropping to square. Now, however, I've come to appreciate the 6x7 rectangle for landscape, which is my primary interest these days.

And by the way, I think the "static" aspect of the square can be avoided by the use of diagonal lines, with those lines sometimes extending out of the frame.