Aspect Ratio (symbols)

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by Julie H, Jul 1, 2017.

  1. Alan, I recently did a book and it was great to have to crop certain photos in order to get them into the format I wanted. Mine is a landscape book and I did a combination of horizontal images, vertical images, and two-page spread images. I also included some square images. The two-page spread images bled off all sides of the page, so I had to crop them to the exact size of the book. Some pages were full bleeds of one image per page which meant cropping to a different ratio, of course. I wound up liking some of the crops better than the originals I had worked up. It forced me to take second looks at a lot of the photos and reorient my thinking about what they would feel like and how I could best trim them. You have many options. You can vary your sizes and shapes or keep them consistent. I was mostly consistent but there were several variations throughout, which help punctuate and energize the viewing experience. Be conscious of rhythm when you compose the book. People turn the pages and there is a definite rhythm that you can help create with your juxtapositions and with what happens on the turn of each page. I included just a couple of black and whites, but most of my photos were in color, for this book. Other books I might do would probably have a lot more black and white.
  2. Norman 202

    Norman 202 i am the light

    Fred, i'd like to see those images and how you laid them out. Maybe when the gallery is up and running again and bug free.

  3. I don't agree with that ... I think perfect balance is for seekers of Essence, where imbalance goes to the individual. To love imbalance is the opposite of indifference, to my mind. It's choosing to be attentive to, and to savor the meaning(s) of the particular:

    ... natural shapes are simplified toward elementary geometry when the more accurate shape is not known, left unobserved, or neglected as unimportant, or when it distracts from the essential. — Rudolph Arnheim
    A question from Arnheim:

    Why do the distortions of Joan Miró's figures look humorous while those of a Giacometti never do and those of Picasso only rarely do?​

    I'll withhold his answer. You can think about it for yourself.
  4. " To love imbalance is the opposite of indifference, to my mind. It's choosing to be attentive to, and to savor the meaning(s) of the particular:"

    That's not loving imbalance, that's choosing to find and see balance within imbalance.

  5. Can we call it 'tension' and agree?

    I realized after I posted my previous, that I should have specified that the 'balance' I was thinking of was 'symmetry.' Obviously balance isn't symmetry; Arnheim advocates relentlessly for balance — in total within the unified whole of a picture; contrived out of multiple imbalances — but not for symmetry. And I agree with him.
  6. NM
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2017

Share This Page