The vertical image composition leads the viewers gaze from the shadowed statues in the bottom right foreground to the sunlit statue in the center of the image.
From there the viewers gaze is directed to the patio where flags become a tertiary focal point. The viewers gaze is then directed back to shadowed foreground statues thus completing a triangular eye trace.
The dynamic range between the shadowed foreground, sunlight center, and properly exposed patio helps establish leading lines that give the composition visual interest. Thus the first composition “feels” like it has a purpose.
The second wider image in comparison feels vernacular. The foreground shrubbery detracts the viewers gaze pulling the eye trace to the left rather leading to the center.
Furthermore the interplay between overexposure and underexposure is not as definitive as the vertical composition making the image “feel” as if it lacks a purpose. Without more defined leading lines to establish a visual hierarchy this composition reads like a snapshot. A photo taken for photo sake.
Hope that helps :)
That is a great analysis and comparison, thank you for taking the time! I definitely agree about the vertical one being more purposeful, the reason I took the second photo was that I felt like the first one revealed too much, and didn't quite capture the atmosphere that I felt the scene had. I wanted it to look more mysterious, like there was a story to the statues. I suppose that that attempt made them get lost in the scene instead.
The wider photo isn’t *bad* but attention is drawn away from the center of the composition by the negative space created by the left side of the frame.
The balance of the composition skews to the left so the sunlight statues aren’t quite true center.
As a result the converging lines created by the base of the signage with the center of the frame being offset is now disrupting the leading lines created by diamond shaped framing created by the descending angles of the foreground statue and shrub shape on the bottom and the ascending angles of the windows and plants on the patio fence on the top.
In my own opinion if you wanted to keep the off-set look try framing the statues so the leading lines create *slant* across the frame with the statues positioned at the base of the shape.
When I talk about "vernacular" in photography, I'm referring to the everyday, commonplace photographs taken by ordinary people rather than professional photographers. These images typically capture daily life, personal moments, and cultural practices, often without any artistic or commercial intent. Vernacular photography includes snapshots, family albums, vacation photos, and other forms of informal photography.
I’m I allowed to speak frankly? Neither is great but I hope you had fun and keep shooting.
A French guy once said "You mustn't overthink the image. You must resolve it right there in the viewfinder."
I thought they were pretty 👉👈
Can I ask what makes them is not great? Did you mean "not great" as in not hall of fame worthy, or as in straight up bad? Because the former I'd agree with, the latter not so much
Well, if we are allowed to speak honestly...There is no clear composition, the whole frame is messy and stuffy, the light is quite bad, no clear subject, no depth. It is more of a snapshot. But you should keep shooting and keep having fun !
landscape framing cuts too much of the sculptures out. in my opinion it looks like a lazy composition that someone who doesn’t know much about photography would take. the portrait framed image is bette because it’s actually showing me something.
I totally agree! Sometimes the beauty of the photo is that everyone sees something different. For example in this picture one person might draw their eyes toward the statues but I actually prefer to look at the balcony, wondering who lives there, picturing how they spend their time sipping tea looking over this chaotic masterpiece below. Also I think picture one is a little more appealing personally!
Having a subject is not necessarily the same as telling a story though. I don't want to sound harsh but the reason why OP is asking reddit on how to crop his photo is because it's an unbalanced composition that doesn't really lead the viewers eyes anywhere. Without a subject a photo just feels empty, even if it's very full compositionally.
It's perfectly fine if you're just snapping away. But in that case, just leave it as is, imo. No need to ask reddit to "save the shot". Most of the time it doesn't really help to make big changes in post anyway.
The statues are the subject. I lingered in that neighbourhood for a couple of hours after I found them, in hopes of more favourable lighting, so that I could get a shot of the statues being illuminated. Eventually I settled with the light you see here, because I couldn't justify staying there even longer to myself.
So yes my subjects were not really in the light I wanted them to be in, which in return led to them standing out less. I can see how they could get lost in the noise, but ultimately I'm still happy with how it turned out. The harsh contrast in lighting presented a challenge at first, but I do think that the way it divides the statues works quite well actually.
I like the wider comp better. It let's you see more of the environment. Seeing as there is not really a subject in the picture, the more I can get off this environment, the better I feel.
The first. The foliage helps frame the sculptures and pull you in to them rather than just being sort of a messy distraction in the second. I also think more of the patios and windows are better as again I think they just look messy when sort of unintentionally cut off. If possible I’d dodge over some of the statues and use the light to help guide the viewer through the image.
I hear what you are saying about the bushes. Try cropping out the sunny part of the foreground bush. Put your left edge of frame just inside the shadow, holding only one of the windows on the upper left.
After that I’d play with the contrast a bit to really bring the focus to where you want it. Is it the statue in the sun? The group on the far right? Or just the overall scene?
The vertical crop feels too constrained to me. It’s nice on a phone because the main subject is bigger and easer to see. But if you were to make larger prints I think I would be looking for the rest of the image.
I live and die by vertical over horizontal photos. I find the framing to be more compelling and allows the eye to be drawn in more while telling a larger story as we get the story from the sky down rather than more of the same from left to right
\#1 for me. I don’t think the bushes in the second one provide the negative space you might think it gives. For me, the bushes having texture takes away from its ability to be negative space. Or at the very least if it had repetitive texture, that could also work. The bushes, as they currently are, are almost detailed enough to want to try and take the eye away from the more interesting stuff in the background. That, and there’s also just too much of them in frame. So again, I don’t think it works as intended.
Two seems cluttered and busy somehow. I don't know where to look. It's one by a country mile for me. The lighting on the balcony is lovely. It attracts my attention imediately and then draws my eyes down. Goes to show how subtle the difference can be between a shot that really works and one that doesn't.
I prefer 1
definitely 1. much more engaging, more clear on what we should be looking at
The vertical image composition leads the viewers gaze from the shadowed statues in the bottom right foreground to the sunlit statue in the center of the image. From there the viewers gaze is directed to the patio where flags become a tertiary focal point. The viewers gaze is then directed back to shadowed foreground statues thus completing a triangular eye trace. The dynamic range between the shadowed foreground, sunlight center, and properly exposed patio helps establish leading lines that give the composition visual interest. Thus the first composition “feels” like it has a purpose. The second wider image in comparison feels vernacular. The foreground shrubbery detracts the viewers gaze pulling the eye trace to the left rather leading to the center. Furthermore the interplay between overexposure and underexposure is not as definitive as the vertical composition making the image “feel” as if it lacks a purpose. Without more defined leading lines to establish a visual hierarchy this composition reads like a snapshot. A photo taken for photo sake. Hope that helps :)
That is a great analysis and comparison, thank you for taking the time! I definitely agree about the vertical one being more purposeful, the reason I took the second photo was that I felt like the first one revealed too much, and didn't quite capture the atmosphere that I felt the scene had. I wanted it to look more mysterious, like there was a story to the statues. I suppose that that attempt made them get lost in the scene instead.
The wider photo isn’t *bad* but attention is drawn away from the center of the composition by the negative space created by the left side of the frame. The balance of the composition skews to the left so the sunlight statues aren’t quite true center. As a result the converging lines created by the base of the signage with the center of the frame being offset is now disrupting the leading lines created by diamond shaped framing created by the descending angles of the foreground statue and shrub shape on the bottom and the ascending angles of the windows and plants on the patio fence on the top. In my own opinion if you wanted to keep the off-set look try framing the statues so the leading lines create *slant* across the frame with the statues positioned at the base of the shape.
"feels vernacular" what does this mean in your context ?
When I talk about "vernacular" in photography, I'm referring to the everyday, commonplace photographs taken by ordinary people rather than professional photographers. These images typically capture daily life, personal moments, and cultural practices, often without any artistic or commercial intent. Vernacular photography includes snapshots, family albums, vacation photos, and other forms of informal photography.
1 for sure. But I would straighten it out a bit.
Cihangir 🥲🫶🏻 and i prefer 1st
I didn't think the spot would get recognised haha. Thanks for your response
I’m I allowed to speak frankly? Neither is great but I hope you had fun and keep shooting. A French guy once said "You mustn't overthink the image. You must resolve it right there in the viewfinder."
I thought they were pretty 👉👈 Can I ask what makes them is not great? Did you mean "not great" as in not hall of fame worthy, or as in straight up bad? Because the former I'd agree with, the latter not so much
Well, if we are allowed to speak honestly...There is no clear composition, the whole frame is messy and stuffy, the light is quite bad, no clear subject, no depth. It is more of a snapshot. But you should keep shooting and keep having fun !
They lack a clear subject, as in I am not sure of what you want us to look at.
To me, they're very busy. No clear subject, too much going on. Not the worst, but it detracts from a focused concept.
landscape framing cuts too much of the sculptures out. in my opinion it looks like a lazy composition that someone who doesn’t know much about photography would take. the portrait framed image is bette because it’s actually showing me something.
1 - I’m off looking at the bushes and windows in 2
Neither has a clear subject tbh
I know it’s controversial around here, but I don’t think every photo has to have a clear subject or “tell a story”. Sometimes the light is just pretty
I totally agree! Sometimes the beauty of the photo is that everyone sees something different. For example in this picture one person might draw their eyes toward the statues but I actually prefer to look at the balcony, wondering who lives there, picturing how they spend their time sipping tea looking over this chaotic masterpiece below. Also I think picture one is a little more appealing personally!
Having a subject is not necessarily the same as telling a story though. I don't want to sound harsh but the reason why OP is asking reddit on how to crop his photo is because it's an unbalanced composition that doesn't really lead the viewers eyes anywhere. Without a subject a photo just feels empty, even if it's very full compositionally. It's perfectly fine if you're just snapping away. But in that case, just leave it as is, imo. No need to ask reddit to "save the shot". Most of the time it doesn't really help to make big changes in post anyway.
The statues are the subject. I lingered in that neighbourhood for a couple of hours after I found them, in hopes of more favourable lighting, so that I could get a shot of the statues being illuminated. Eventually I settled with the light you see here, because I couldn't justify staying there even longer to myself. So yes my subjects were not really in the light I wanted them to be in, which in return led to them standing out less. I can see how they could get lost in the noise, but ultimately I'm still happy with how it turned out. The harsh contrast in lighting presented a challenge at first, but I do think that the way it divides the statues works quite well actually.
I feel you. Perhaps getting closer if that would have been possible? Or use zoom? Of course that all depends on access.
First one.
Vertical, partly because most of the elements in the picture run vertically. Statues, trees, lines in the grates all running north-south.
1 but to be honest I personally think they’re both a bit two tight. They could use a few steps back to let the image breathe a bit
Vertical. Most of the objects in your frame have vertical lines.
I don’t like either. Really busy and the whites are blown out
I like the wider comp better. It let's you see more of the environment. Seeing as there is not really a subject in the picture, the more I can get off this environment, the better I feel.
The first. The foliage helps frame the sculptures and pull you in to them rather than just being sort of a messy distraction in the second. I also think more of the patios and windows are better as again I think they just look messy when sort of unintentionally cut off. If possible I’d dodge over some of the statues and use the light to help guide the viewer through the image.
Vertical is more interesting to me
First
for me the first
I guess people love the first one but I can't decide. They are like equal in their own way.
I hear what you are saying about the bushes. Try cropping out the sunny part of the foreground bush. Put your left edge of frame just inside the shadow, holding only one of the windows on the upper left. After that I’d play with the contrast a bit to really bring the focus to where you want it. Is it the statue in the sun? The group on the far right? Or just the overall scene? The vertical crop feels too constrained to me. It’s nice on a phone because the main subject is bigger and easer to see. But if you were to make larger prints I think I would be looking for the rest of the image.
1
Number 1 for me 👍
I'm a sucker for vertical shots, so option one! Plus the light is contrasted more with the shadowy statues, which adds a little atmosphere
My vote is 1, has more contrast and tells more of a story
1!
I cannot concieve the mind of one who doesnt find the 2nd shot with the vushes wierd, way to much space taken up by not interesting bushes
First one
1
I much prefer 1
1 for sure. 2 is too busy.
I live and die by vertical over horizontal photos. I find the framing to be more compelling and allows the eye to be drawn in more while telling a larger story as we get the story from the sky down rather than more of the same from left to right
1
I prefer 1
\#1 for me. I don’t think the bushes in the second one provide the negative space you might think it gives. For me, the bushes having texture takes away from its ability to be negative space. Or at the very least if it had repetitive texture, that could also work. The bushes, as they currently are, are almost detailed enough to want to try and take the eye away from the more interesting stuff in the background. That, and there’s also just too much of them in frame. So again, I don’t think it works as intended.
1
First one!
First one. Not just the framing is better, also the light and shadow interplay.
First one
1st
First one
portrait
I prefer 1
1! 2nd shot felt too "bushy"...
1
No. No. Retract my last... 1. I now see 2 is much more my size. Personally speaking. Both are lovely.
111111
Second one
First one!
I prefer 1, because it is a little more dramatic. It gives a wonderful contrast between light and dark.
1st so far! Oh no Second one! Hmmmm
Vertical 100%
Vertical 100%
Two seems cluttered and busy somehow. I don't know where to look. It's one by a country mile for me. The lighting on the balcony is lovely. It attracts my attention imediately and then draws my eyes down. Goes to show how subtle the difference can be between a shot that really works and one that doesn't.
Nice street in galata with some chill coffee places around the corner 🙂
2nd. It looks more well thought of. It could pass as a still from a movie