Who are the masters of square composition?

[Pieter12]

I once wrote an essay on square composition. Unlike a horizontal or vertical image, the square is neutral and composing is sometimes more challenging since the format doesn't;t lead you to see the image in a predetermined way.

 

[warden]

I just started the Rolleiflexers Collective. We have several good square shooters, though not famous (yet)!

https://Rolleiflexers.com

Sometimes not famous can be even more inspiring.

Outstanding work on that site Kenneth. Thanks for sharing it here!

 

[baachitraka]

I agree.
So, Larry Fink

From http://www.larryfinkphotography.com/

Is it with a wide-angle lens and proper lighting?

 

[kennethwajda]

I agree, it is more easier for me than other format. Most difficult is 6x7 - it is like almost square, but not really.

Me, too, I have a much harder time with 6x7.

 

[kennethwajda]

Outstanding work on that site Kenneth. Thanks for sharing it here!

Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it! Cheers!

 

[tomkatf]

Fritz Henle...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Henle
https://henlegallery.com/fritzhenle/

..although a number of his images on his gallery site seem to have been cropped to non-square proportions... ???

 

[Pieter12]

There is the online magazine. "Square" https://www.squaremag.org

 

[eddie]

Unlike a horizontal or vertical image, the square is neutral and composing is sometimes more challenging since the format doesn't;t lead you to see the image in a predetermined way.

I agree. The viewer isn't "directed" in a way they are with rectangular images.

 

[Maris]

I'd like to get better at composing images in square format. Whose images should I be studying? Or put more precisely: what photographers in your opinion took the best advantage (regardless of school/movement) of the unique visual properties of the square aspect ratio?

I'm not sure that studying other people's square photographs is the way to go. Camera-work is better.
In practice if you use a camera that shoots square and has an accurate view-finder then pointing it subject matter tells you everything you need to know. If the arrangement looks good in the viewfinder then an exposure will automatically deliver a well composed picture. If not, don't shoot, move on and try elsewhere.
Remember, in the arts, your personal judgement, if fully thought through, cannot in principle be wrong.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It is easy to answer who ain't. Just dump it in the middle and you'll get your master badge.

 

[Pieter12]

It is easy to answer who ain't. Just dump it in the middle and you'll get your master badge.

Knda like this:

This works because the subject is dead center, enhancing the overall quietness of the photo. An off-center or tilted composition would be at odds with the sense of the subject's state.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Knda like this:

View attachment 272448

This works because the subject is dead center, enhancing the overall quietness of the photo. An off-center or tilted composition would be at odds with the sense of the subject's state.

You could dump boobs and pretty face anywhere and it will works. If it would be ugly Betty you won't even notice this photo.

 

[Vaughn]

I'm not sure that studying other people's square photographs is the way to go. ...

A good point, and I would say it would depend on how one best learns. For some it could provide fodder for the imagination...'points of departure' was how one of my favorite professors put it. For others it might just clog up their process.

I learned with a Rolleiflex with a waist-level finder. I never used a 35mm much at all. Then onwards to large format. I have never liked the viewing frames and learned without them, but they are a good way to learn and to work for many many people. I like the input of what will surround the selected portion of the scene for the entire time I am considering if and where I'll be setting up the camera. Not so much as looking for a piece of the scene to isolate, but how to gather the whole scene into the small area selected.

An interesting way to work with the square is to lead the eye in a more circular manner, but it also lends itself to very quiet contemplative compositions (Kenna). But squares can work all sorts of ways. Two platinum contact prints from the Yolla Bollys. One that has a surprising amount up upward thrust for a square, and the other a little more quiet...an early evening-light portrait. I suggest looking at them life-size. I compose for contact prints, so enlarging them on the screen will give a different 'look' to them.

 

[radiant]

I agree. The viewer isn't "directed" in a way they are with rectangular images.

Yes it depends on your photography style. I think square is many times better for me because I don't want to "direct" or "off-balance" the photo, usually it feels a bit cliché to do so. That is just my taste. Square is honest

 

[awty]

Knda like this:

View attachment 272448

This works because the subject is dead center, enhancing the overall quietness of the photo. An off-center or tilted composition would be at odds with the sense of the subject's state.

The space around her has made her more vulnerable than just the pose alone. Very clever. Pretty girl she should be in movies.

 

[Wayne]

Knda like this:

View attachment 272448

This works because the subject is dead center, enhancing the overall quietness of the photo. An off-center or tilted composition would be at odds with the sense of the subject's state.

She is off center.

 

[Vaughn]

She is off center.

And just enough that it is not a quiet calm image without being obvious about it..

 

[Nokton48]

Avedon, Penn, Fritz Henle

 

[jvo]

I just started the Rolleiflexers Collective. We have several good square shooters, though not famous (yet)!

https://Rolleiflexers.com

Sometimes not famous can be even more inspiring.

thank you! - i concur...

 

[Merg Ross]

From the past, I would suggest Eugene Meatyard. I visited him at his home in Kentucky in 1960 and was treated to a collection of powerful and well-crafted 8x8 photographs. A talented man, Gene died too young.

http://www.artnet.com/artists/ralph-eugene-meatyard/

 

[Merg Ross]

Sorry; missed the earlier Eugene Meatyard post.

 

[brancaleone]

I like the work of this swedish guy, Gerry Johansson. It seems he doesn't have a personal website so, unless you buy one of his books, you need to search his pictures on the web....
https://www.spaziolabo.it/mostre/gerry-johansson/
https://www.google.com/search?q=Ger...g_0HHRqCC0s4ChD8BSgBegQIARAD&biw=1280&bih=881

 

[logan2z]

I like the work of this swedish guy, Gerry Johansson. It seems he doesn't have a personal website so, unless you buy one of his books, you need to search his pictures on the web....
https://www.spaziolabo.it/mostre/gerry-johansson/
https://www.google.com/search?q=Ger...g_0HHRqCC0s4ChD8BSgBegQIARAD&biw=1280&bih=881

I like his work has well.

He does have a personal website at

http://www.gerryjohansson.com/

 

[brancaleone]

I like his work has well.

He does have a personal website at

http://www.gerryjohansson.com/

Thank you @logan2z!

 

[Wayne]

I like the work of this swedish guy, Gerry Johansson. It seems he doesn't have a personal website so, unless you buy one of his books, you need to search his pictures on the web....
https://www.spaziolabo.it/mostre/gerry-johansson/
https://www.google.com/search?q=Ger...g_0HHRqCC0s4ChD8BSgBegQIARAD&biw=1280&bih=881

That is good composition.