And Now For Something Completely Different

Well, different from what I've been lately writing about. I think an update that speaks to the art and craft of pretty girl shooting is overdue. You know, some words that might help a few of you improve your game or consider stuff you haven't thought much about before or are unsure about. An update that speaks to the craft, rather than talking about what Jimmy has been doing or what he hopes to accomplish. (I just love writing about myself in the third person. Makes me feel so muy importante... not.)

Composition.

One of the first and most basic choices a photographer makes, just before clicking the shutter and as it applies to composition, is about aspect ratio, i.e., whether to snap an image with the camera oriented to capture the subject with, what's commonly called, a portrait aspect ratio or a landscape aspect ratio. Simple choice, right?

As I look at many pretty girl photos, it's obvious that the majority are captured utilizing a portrait aspect ratio. Makes sense. People--and pretty girls are people--are generally longer than wider. That makes filling a frame often seem appropriate with the frame being vertically longer than horizontally wider, especially since we so often have the models standing or kneeling or in positions that remain more vertical than horizontal. Many print applications also suggest using the portrait aspect ratio: magazines, posters, DVD packaging inserts and more are mostly printed on paper stock that, when properly oriented for viewing, reading, whatever, are vertically longer than wider

Sometimes we have the models lying down or in other positions where the orientation of their bodies is more horizontal rather than vertical. Using a landscape aspect ratio often seems to make sense with these sorts of poses.

But it's not always so simple. Sometimes, choosing an aspect ratio that is in opposition to the orientation of the model's pose makes sense. It can add interest to an image. It can come off more creative and lesser-seen. Especially when framed using other compositional techniques, you know, like the Rule of Thirds, or when the model is in an interesting environment and, when capturing the model in that environment, it would be more effective using an aspect ratio that opposes the orientation of her pose and makes the environment, and her place in it, a more interesting photograph. Sure, you can crop in such a way that changes the aspect ratio in post but, often, we don't allow enough space in our framing to effectively accomplish that.

So here's a really super-simple bit of advice that might help you improve your game: If you're not sure whether to shoot using portrait or landscape aspect ratios, shoot it both ways! After all, most of you are shooting digital, right? What is capturing an image both ways going to cost you? A few seconds? Whoop-dee-doo. Even if you're shooting film, it isn't going to cost much to snap a few extra frames, re-orienting and re-composing your image to a different aspect ratio.

Speaking of film, and to get back to Jimmy (Oh no!), I received my Canon rangefinder yesterday or the day before. I bought a few rolls of Kodak Pro BW400CN at Walmart. (That's B&W print film that gets processed with C-41, i.e., color processing chemicals.) Right now, I only want to insure the camera is functioning properly. Plus, since that's all I'm doing with it for these first few rolls, using this particular film allows me to get the processing done, cheaply and quickly, pretty much anywhere... you know, like at the same Walmart where I purchased the film stock.

I'm a bit embarrassed to say I can't remember the name of the pretty girl at the top, captured with my camera oriented to produce a landscape aspect ratio image.