sure. anyone can choose whatever they want

looks like you already did. it’s a good image so the results speak for themselves.

i was waiting for the picture to upload it didn’t work to well with my picture from my blog…

Hiya Theodore,

Rules aren’t meant to be broken, rules are there so when you have to break them you can justify why you did so. Its a common misunderstanding.

So… yes you can break the “rule” about not sticking something dead centre. But now you have to justify why you did it, photographically speaking, because technique, lighting and skill can’t make up for a dull photo.

So lets look at why you don’t put things dead centre in a photo: Because it can make for a very uninteresting image. It splits the image in two, which effectively gives you two of the same thing to look at (the left side and the right side are essentially the same), which is why you don’t put horizons in the centre of a photo.

So why can doing this be boring? Well if you have two halves of an image that look the same, after I have seen the left side, why would I want to look at the right side? And when I do… yawn, seen it before, bored now (as Buffy would say).

So how do you justify it (breaking the rules) photographically?

Knowing that doing what you have done here can lead to an uninteresting image, you have to create some interest. Yep, that’s it. Now since we now know that both sides of the image are the same, how do you create that interest?... You make each side different.

A simple rule (I prefer the word “technique”) especially for landscapes, is to have multiple “points of interest” (POI) or “elements” to the image. Three POI’s is a good number for landscapes.

---

Look at this photograph by BENSOUND. He has placed the red bridge dead centre of the photograph, but it is 1/3rd down from the top. It feels balanced, proportionally, within the photograph. Now how do you think this image would make you feel if there was only flat water in the foreground instead of the three rocks which just beg for your attention? Ben has used proportion, balance, and multiple points of interest (along with stunning technique) to create an image that really maintains the viewer’s interest.

---

Obviously, in your image, the tree is the main POI / element / subject. But I have seen trees before, so what are you going to do as a photographer to keep me interested in your photo?

- Add something else, a secondary POI.

One good trick is to give a sense of scale. By adding something recognisable, typically a person, you would create a sense of scale and give us a secondary POI to look at.

A person walking out of shot (on the 1/3rd line) approx half way between the tree and the photographer would turn this into a completely different image!

---

Look at this photograph by PETER KURDULIJA. I chose example because it has probably the most central theme you will find. If it had been just a single archway and beyond it just paving, then it would be quite ordinary. However Peter has included multiple points of interest in the form of a repeating pattern of archways
which draws your eye down the image to the very end of the path.

---

So, if you are going to “break a rule” that is fine, its great, but artistically you have to justify it to your viewer. Simply breaking a rule for the sake of doing so wont win you any Brownie Points unless you can say “yes I broke that rule, but see how I made it really work for this image!.”

All that aside… Watch your horizon line, its not level and proportion-wise the foreground is too small in the image (think thirds again). The sky is too dark, the snow is over exposed and lacks detail, and there is very little detail in the tree.

ah photographys a wonderful thing so many points of view everyone sees things differently. I dont mind the tree dead center all though not knowing what was to the left or right of the tree makes it hard to know if framing the tree more left or right would have been better,however would like to see less foreground and more sky, thats my two bobs worth and thats proberly all its worth

Hiya Theodore,

Don’t ever be reluctant to take this type of photo. Don’t ever think “i wont take this because it wont work.”

Take the shot.

It is always worth taking a photo like this, because it may well work.

What Dana has said is spot-on the money!

Shoot heaps and heaps of your subject, which especially now with digital technology is a viable option economics-wise. Move around, try different angles, formats, compositions…

I have always maintained that you need to learn the “rules” and then unlearn them and shoot instinctively, otherwise they get in the way of being creative. My worst photos (and there are heaps of those!) are the ones where I have tried too hard!

i am a little scared to speak having read all this
but none the less here i go.
first byron i don’t know how u can type so much that would take me about 1 week but you do such a great job with what u say i learn heaps same with u dana.
now to the pic i think it works. the tree is enough to get my attention enough to make me want to comment. A couple of things i personally would look at like byron i think that the sky is too dark so i would lighten that up and i would also try to darken the tree for a stronger silhouette that would create more contrast bringing the to rest on the tree a little eaiser. then i personally would loose the dark tree line in the background to me it dosnt add anything to the pic.
i think that your thought process and your consideration of the guidelines of photography show that you are growing amd are developing in photography.
i also like the curve on the snow

Hiya SparrowDK,

Thanx dude. I type for a living. And I’m a computer geek, but still, each critique I do takes about an hour.

But, I am a governement employee, so I have plenty of time…

You’re right about the curve of the snow, and if the horizon had been level as well, it would have looked awesome.

I think you should take each subject from a range of vantage points and positing it in different areas of the frame. Then you can choose the most visually pleasing one when you are done. If we all followed the rules we would all take the same types of images, so break them to your hearts content i say!

Personally i use DOF to emphasise parts of my pics, usually a shallow DOF to show sharo eyes and blurred foreground and background. Some critiquers would call these images ‘soft”. What the heck even is that?Haha! To me its a technique, and shouldnt be a judgement – its a ‘style’!! I also cut off bits of creatures in my shots, but i cut deliberately – so if you are going to do that do it with conviction so it looks intentional and not accidental!

I’d say keep the tree out of dead center.

ok, but why?

Some rules are meant to be broken, then there are those objects and scenes that work very well in the middle.