The exercise “Object in Different Positions in the Frame” requires us to take a series of photographs placing the subject in different positions within the frame.
At this stage I declare that I have taken a short-cut with this exercise. I had decided that an ideal subject for this exercise would be to find a farmer working a large, single coloured field. I had this picture in my mind’s eye and as I travelled about over last weekend I surveyed each field I passed. We live in a rural location so there are plenty of fields.
However, it was obviously not a weekend for undertaking any kind of field work as not a single tractor did I find.
I suspect that the mistake was to head out with a specific subject in mind but I want to keep moving forward quickly with these initial exercises and have decided to openly cheat for the time being but to continue to look for an appropriate subject over the coming weekends and to replace or expand this report at a later date.
I have selected a photograph taken in the early summer of 2013 on my grandson exploring the paths made by a tractor in a field of rape seed flowers. I have conducted the exercise in Photoshop as I only captured one image.
Fig. 2 above is the original photograph, it meets the requirement of the exercise in the sense that it was a snap shot, taken without any thought as the subject was running bent over and jumping up to surprise me with his new position. He is very slightly off centre but this was not a composed shot.
Out of the four crops I completed this is my favourite. I was using a 300mm lens so even at f/8.0 there is a satisfying blur to the front and back of the subject. His position in the frame with less flowers to his right and front and more behind and to his left creates a good balance to the photograph. His arms create some extra shape and generally point towards the corners of the frame. I find that the difference between sizes of the front and back and the two sides helps create a greater sense of depth to the field and creates a balanced end product.
Fig. 4, where the subject is just off centre, would be my second choice but the nearly equal foreground and background make this a less interesting, more static and more predictable crop. The field still has scale and I like the relationship of the size of the subject and the size of the background.
Fig. 5 is acceptable, uninteresting and predictable but it is at least a pleasant photograph of the boy. His Grandmothers would probably be quite happy with a print of this one. As suggested in the course notes by placing the subject dead centre the scale of the background is somehow reduced. It seems a small field with a large boy which is the opposite of both my original intent and the crop in fig. 2.
Fig. 6 is last in terms of my preferences. It is not a successful image. It might have worked if the subject had been much smaller within the overall frame but I do not respond to this crop in any way.