Framing and composition problems

[joemikel1]

<p>Ok, I have to admit I usually have problems when I have to choose a framing and the overall composition offers different options. I would like to have your election and a little explanation on wich are the keys to it for these images:</p>

<div></div>

[joemikel1]

<p>Next</p><div></div>

[joemikel1]

<p>Last</p><div></div>

[joemikel1]

<p>Ok, I post processed a little number 3 (my personal chioce), but I think the framing and composition election is still fair....</p>

[timkeller]

<p>I like number 1 for the scale and sense of height. The hand is important, so number 3 is not as effective; 2 loses the sense of reaching upward to the animal. Number 1 accentuates the sense that both are reaching, and the picture is most attractive. I like it.</p>

[laurent-paul]

<p>I agree with Tim : Number 1 is the most effective. What you could do perhaps is crop a bit or a lot of the sky and see how you feel</p>

[mrossi]

<p>I like #1 as well. Another option could be to rotate the image a tad clockwise, which would allow the rockline to be above the 1/3 mark on the left while near the 2/3s mark on the right side. This would exaggerate the slope a little, and move a little away from the rockline being mostly across the middle. Good topic though, cropping/framing/composition has so many possibilities.</p>

[znabal]

<p>I do these type exercises with my own photos all the time. I like #2 best. Too much sky in #1 and the bottom part is too dark, nothing really leads my eye to the "bullseye" of the chipmunk....it just has too much space for me. On the other hand,. #2, the diagnal from the rock/sky in the upper left leads my eye to the chipmunk's face, in fact all four corners of the frame in #2 have lines that lead me into the picture. -jeffl</p>

[charlesheckel]

<p>Instead of worrying about framing and composition as such, you should first worry about telling the story. Then you should worry about telling the story clearly, and that's when framing and composition become significant. Your favorite, #3, shows the ground squirrel (if that's what it is) clearly, but not the approach/avoidance conflict that creates the slinking posture. Whether #1 or #2 is better has to do with how important the environment is to you. In both, the interaction between squirrel and tidbit is at a focal point--so far, so good. <br /> The problem of making it read well is partly a matter of separating the graphic into its elements--squirrel, hand, sky, rock--and subelements--rock at lower left, rock at middle right--working out the contours of each element, and seeing where they merge--the left horizon line with the squirrel's back--and create confusion. The left rock outcrop and the hand are of equal visual weight--similar area and tonal value--giving a confusing symmetry to an asymmetrical composition. Think of the picture this way and you've got a lot of options for making it read better, just by slight changes in tonality.</p><div></div>

[www.philwinterphotography.]

<p>I prefer number 2 as well for the reasons others have mentioned. My nit about the images is that the animal blends in too well with the rock background - not enough separation. Can you try it again with a different color chipmunk? Just joking. All in all, number 2 is a nice image.</p>

[joemikel1]

<p>Thanks for your answers. Good points stated here. Very hepful.......</p>