![photocopy textures photocopy textures](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0278/7289/files/IMG_9067-2.jpg)
Sometimes, such rules are intended to be helpful to novice photographers, more often than not such rules are patronizing and they rarely come from professionals. This ranges from the infamous and overused “rule of thirds” to “filling the frame” or “isolating the subject” or “using complimentary colors”.
#PHOTOCOPY TEXTURES HOW TO#
If somebody provides a rule or other advice on HOW to do something aesthetically correct in photography (a photographic rule), my warning sirens go off immediately.
![photocopy textures photocopy textures](https://mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/max_1200/21187829502861.55f6b97bc4289.jpg)
And while maybe there is some science to support or inform aesthetics, aesthetic rules are indeed different. So the rules that Leonardo was talking are indeed scientific / physical / technical / nature-based. All this feeds into the technical issues / aptitude of photography. I also do very much respect those books and find them to be extremely valuable for serious photographers. In this trilogy (the camera, the negative, the print) he discusses and explains in great detail many scientific, and other methodologies that are useful to learn when venturing seriously into photography. Learning about such nature based “rules” is very useful.Īnsel Adams has written a trilogy of wonderful photography textbooks. We are talking about things such as light diffraction, chromatic aberration (excuse the technical term), color theory, physics of lenses or sensors, sharpness/acuity, depth of field, perspective and much much more. I do accept this, as this belongs under the umbrella of technical mastery, and those types of “rules” are really just the realities of how nature, physics, and physiology works. And in that sense, I do very much respect such scientifically based rules (or guidelines) in the art of painting, or in the art of photography. “ He was an avid observer of nature, and his assertion is strongly based on his scientific approach to creating art based on observation (of light, color, shapes, textures etc.), and of science and not the aesthetic theory of art. “Truly this is science, the legitimate daughter of nature, because painting is born of (that) nature. The great Leonardo Da Vinci, Renaissance polymath, scientist, painter and much more thought that art should follow rules. Well, the problem with those rules is that they are myths. So then what’s the problem with aesthetic rules. Technical and artistic issues are integrally connected and intertwined. So, yes technical mastery of photography is important, but so is artistic mastery.
![photocopy textures photocopy textures](http://arsenal-s3.gomedia.us/wp-content/uploads/gma-texture-collection-05-photocopy-pack-01-hero-shot-rev-01.jpg)
Ansel Adams said that “there is nothing as useless as a sharp photograph of a fuzzy concept.”
![photocopy textures photocopy textures](https://s3.amazonaws.com/arsenal-s3.gomedia.us/wp-content/uploads/gma-texture-set-05-photocopy-prvs-02.jpg)
If it is only technical, then it is not art. Photography is an art because it is not just technical. Overall there seems to be significantly more concern about gear and tools than about mastering the art of photography. Many photographers seem to be way more concerned with sharpness of lenses, resolution of sensors and megapixels than of story or emotion of an image or composition or lighting or other artistic considerations. In particular, since us photographers more often than not focus significantly more on technical than on artistic issues. I actually think that there is a lot of merit of discussing some artistic considerations of photographs. Proposing aesthetic rules seems to be a way to provide, similar to technical rules, photographers with guidelines to master difficult aesthetic issues such as composition. Artistic versus technical aptitudeīefore discussing aesthetic rules (like the rule of thirds), it might be helpful to review the broader issue of artistic versus technical aptitude. I would like to bust some of these myths. And the myths continue to live on and perpetuate (also by mindless copying) as online content ranging from youtube to forums to blogs. This rule and others are some aesthetic rules in photography that are commonly encountered and taught. Especially the ones that don’t make a lot of sense like the “rule of thirds”.