>>3010670>why don't you tell the humble truth about which things in a photograph you believe are more important?Aesthetically?
Light and tonality and contrast
Texture
Color (if you have it)
Detail
Depth of field
Overall?
Ethics, originality, subject matter, what you have to say about your subject matter, how you say it.
The same people who obsess over composition are the same dweebs who overlay golden spirals over their perfectly composed picture of literally fucking nothing and pretend that it's good because of that. They slavishly adhere to the rule of thirds and can't really explain why (hurr durr the eye is naturally drawn to it). It's the superior nerd who practices his major and minor scales for an hour a day but couldn't play a piece of music with any soul if his life depended on it.
You think composition is important because you haven't figured out how to make your photos actually say or mean something, so you try to give them value by slavish adherence to ad hoc rules invented by someone you don't even know.
Again, I do think composition is important in a photo (which is why i fucking gave a short guide to it), but you guys are way overblown in your estimation of it, and I feel bad for you. i also genuinely don't understand why you newfags are so reactive.
Here, have an amazing, world-changing photograph with only so-so composition.
