Composition (My Achilles Heel)

[MarkHarchar]

So, I have been tormenting for a while now on what makes me feel like I am failing at my art endeavors. I am going through training (school). I am practicing with the materials (oil paint, charcoal, graphite, conte) and techniques. I am doing color charts, study old masters, reading books and what I have found is that my problem seems to lie in my compositional capabilities. I have good ideas. I jot the notes down in notebooks. I start doing thumbnails and such and I can't seem to generate good compositions on the page like I think the amorphous ideas in my head should yield.

Is anyone having this issue and does anyone have any good ideas on methods for me to work through this, exercises or something? (keep in mind that I have gone through Seedling's concept art 101 thread.)

I'm floundering a bit here. Help?

:nohope:

[rpace]

I teach composition and I've yet to find one single source or text that I could use or recommend as a really good starting point. I can glance over at my reference shelf and reluctantly choose a one or two from the score or so books on the subject to suggest, since I've essentially scrounged my course from them and others: Henry Rankin Poore is probably a good place to start, but I have issues with some of his analysis and what he emphasises.

The best advice I could give would be for you to start copying the works you like in a greatly simplified manner -- breaking them down into positive negative space usage, simple shapes, lines of direction, mathematical reductions (thirds, fourths, fifths), apply the golden ratio, tonal patterns, etc.

My students keep a design journal, where this is what they do (with guidance and increasing complexity) for a whole semester.

~Richard

[Elwell]

The book I always recommend in these threads. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587170302)

[rpace]

Actually, I second Elwell's recommendation - dunno why my copy isn't on my composition shelf right now. . .

~Richard

[MarkHarchar]

Thank you Rpace and Elwell. Since I spend so much time anguishing over my compositions, I will definitely pick up this book. Also, I will start with the exercise you recommended Rpace. I have a number of Old Master books, art history and a few copies of the Society of Illustrators Annuals. I will go through them one by one and try to identify what makes the images work or not work (for me). I'll try journalling the process to keep as reference.

Any particular "image maker" (Rubens, Renoir, Dali, Elwell ;), Frazetta, etc...) recommendations that may be good to focus on?

[MarkHarchar]

Also, I just got on Ebay and they had the Molly Bang book for $3.50 plus shipping. It is on its way...

[dose]

Also, do composition studies. Small thumbnails of where elements are placed on a page and how they relate.

A lot of composition is culturally inherited. You need to learn to speak the language. Also learning some art history about the development of composition can be useful. Compare Eastern & Western ideas. Learn how they blended in the past couple hundred years.

Beware of formulas, but it's good to learn about them anyway.

The book Elwell recommended is great.

[Ian Mack]

To build on the studies exercise.

I used to simplify master paintings into about 4-5 different values(about 5 a week). You really get an idea of how they organize everything on the canvas when there are only 5 colours!

Agreed with the forumulas, learn with them and then forget 'em!

[dose]

to expand on what others have said about studying compositions by others:

Look for contrasts of opposites and how they are organized. The most obvious is the organization of the contrasts of light & dark, but really the opposites can be anything:

- Big vs small in 2D
- Big vs small in 3D
- Close to viewer vs. far from viewer
- Close to edge of paper vs centered
- Straight vs curved
- big negative space vs. small negative space (include edge of paper)
- narrative contrasts (male vs. female, old vs. young, man vs. nature, etc)
- High chroma vs. low chroma
- Hard edges vs. soft edges
- organic vs. mechanical
- orderly vs. disorderly
- texture vs. no texture
- detail vs. vague
- etc. etc. etc.

Compositions often involve some combination of a few of the elements above, sometimes with one dominant. It's also interesting to see how the formal elements connect to the narrative ones- i.e. if you're trying to convey isolation does it make sense to have the subject very large & centered on the page?

Some have corollaries with human vision & the physics of light which make them particularly useful as compositional tools, such as light vs. dark (atmospheric perspective, psychological focus), high vs. low chroma (atmospheric perspective), hard vs. soft edges (phsyical focus of eye, psychological focus), detail & texture vs. lack thereof (physical & psychological focus) and others.

Hope this is somewhat clear & helpful! It's a tough topic...

[Dizon]

http://www.animationarchive.org/2006/11/education-fundamentals-of-composition.html

http://www.animationarchive.org/2006/12/education-fundamentals-of-composition.html

From the Asifa Archive

[dose]

awesome links, patdzon. Thanks!

[Farvus]

Briggsy's website, Nox video and now these links. Wow. Before having internet I could find like... 3% of what's in here on CA. I love this forum :)

[mike yamada]

I find "Composition of Outdoor Painting" by Payne to be full of good information although he tends to become preachy at times. It is not always in print making it difficult to aquire at a good price. I believe there currently is a copy or two on ebay going for around $40.

[Dizon]

Thanks for the "thank yous", guys! Hmm...I wonder who groaned at me? :)

If you go to the "Temple of the Seven Camels" blog, you can find more scanned documents about composition plus other things as well. It's worth it going through its archives.

I also got this book: http://www.amazon.com/Pictorial-Composition-Henry-Rankin-Poore/dp/0486233588/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197459452&sr=8-2

It just serves as an introduction to basic compositional principles. Elwell's recommendation seems very interesting though.

[MarkHarchar]

Ok. I just wanted to toss in a follow-up to my initial post. I got the Molly Bang book in the mail on Friday and read it twice. I also reviewed the information in patdzon's post. I had an idea that I was working on in which I wanted to convey loneliness, desolation, and an uncomfortable feeling. I initially did an oil sketch which I think was a failure. I reworked the idea in simple terms in Photoshop just to get the basics after studying the info from this thread. I think I may be getting a better grasp here.

Initial oil sketch:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/hylandr2/alone-1.jpg

Reworked concept:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/hylandr2/Alone-2.gif

[Flake]

That's about 10x better than your first version.

[Kozak]

Ok. I just wanted to toss in a follow-up to my initial post. I got the Molly Bang book in the mail on Friday and read it twice. I also reviewed the information in patdzon's post. I had an idea that I was working on in which I wanted to convey loneliness, desolation, and an uncomfortable feeling. I initially did an oil sketch which I think was a failure. I reworked the idea in simple terms in Photoshop just to get the basics after studying the info from this thread. I think I may be getting a better grasp here.

Initial oil sketch:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/hylandr2/alone-1.jpg

Reworked concept:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/hylandr2/Alone-2.gif



I think your reworked concept is a lot more successful.
However, in my opinion, the horizon line appears to be directly half way through the canvas so I would suggest moving it slightly higher or lower (off-centre) for a more effective composition?

[Kozak]

Actually, looking back at it, it seems the bottom of the horizon (the whiteish area) is slightly larger than the top. So I guess the horizon line isn't perfectly in the middle. However, there is something about that area that keeps drawing my attention in a negative way.

(im sorry . .this post is probably of no help )

[Dizon]

That is one hell of an improvement! I want some Bang too hehe

[Legato]

im gonna subscribe to this thread, as compositions are half of what i am crippled with - thank you all so much for how much you give to these forums

[enrigo]

A little question Kev, say if you have to draw some rather dull moment in a dull scene (like 2 people asking about the weather or something). Would there be a need for the dramatic tension ?
I think these kind of scene appear sometimes in comic, and I am curious how you work on a scene with dull content to get it to be dramatic.

[enrigo]

Thank you very much ! composition is always some "mystery power" to me (Even didn't know it exist until lately). I need to look closely at movies and comics the next time for the visual element. :D

[Giuseppe]

Have a look at 'the golden section.'
It is about thirds and is a good general rule to follow.

[rpace]

It should be made clear that the Rule of Thirds is not to be confused with The Golden Mean (which often is more easily found by dividing the picture into a 5x5 grid and seeing if the primary focal point can be found in the region of the nexus 2 sections in from adjacent sides). A good composition course will address The Rules of Thirds, The Golden Ratio and much more when discussing traditional compositional structures.

[Giuseppe]

It should be made clear that the Rule of Thirds is not to be confused with The Golden Mean (which often is more easily found by dividing the picture into a 5x5 grid and seeing if the primary focal point can be found in the region of the nexus 2 sections in from adjacent sides). A good composition course will address The Rules of Thirds, The Golden Ratio and much more when discussing traditional compositional structures.

Ah thank you, sorry - got a bit confused but my point still stands.
and to the other poster: yes, however there are rules that have been proven to apeal to our 'hardwired' idea of visually pleasing.

[enrigo]

I think Vilppu's motto "there's no rules, just tools" probably apply to the rule of thirds too. It is not to be followed slavishly or dismissed totally, it is another tool despite its name. ;)

I'm a composition noob so I don't know if my view is legit or not, but I find the statement to be true for almost any art-related thing.

[Flake]

Whether you agree with them or not, the Dunn notes are essential reading.

[Dizon]

James Gurney also posted something I feel is related to what Kev Ferrara has been saying about composition : http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2007/12/invite-delight.html

[Legato]

james is a pimp and can father my children

[rpace]

I think composition is as fundamental as colour and anatomy -- none of these elements applied without interesting ideas and subject matter can make for an interesting, dramatic image.

A solid understanding of how pictures work just makes for better pictures. I do agree to an extent that good artists will inherently compose along traditional structures, but I don't believe advocating ignorance in favour of just having good subject matter is the way to go. It's like telling an art student who wants to get better at anatomy just to use photo reference; sure the anatomy might look more correct (at least to people who don't know anatomy), but the student really doesn't get a better understanding how the body is assembled and works.

Composition is the anatomy of pictures.

~Richard

[Elwell]

Although we both agreed Rockwell and Parrish had somehow used it to pleasant effect. But their exact understanding of the method doesn't seem to have been passed down to us in any intelligible form. It was more than simply geometrics, but also equalizing counter-thrusts in a mathematical way and quantifying negative space so it can be balanced, etc. (I think)

In My Life as an Illustrator, Rockwell says he did one picture consciously using Dynamic Symmetry (the one with the boy, dog, and fireman running), but abandoned it as artificial and more trouble than it was worth.

As for the golden section, I think most of the artistic examples given for it are after-the-fact analysis. I don't doubt that it's there if you look for it, but no more consciously than it is in a nautilus shell.

[southparx]

hi folks, i haven't read and analyze each and every posts cause it's kinda deep for me as i'm quite new to composition..

but i wanna learn so i'm subscribing the thread,

please keep the great discussion.

have a nice day,
Andrew.

[bhanu]

I think we should resort to composition only when the stuff isnt coming out on its own, naturally....
Dunno man, most of these compositional bullshit ....at the end its the expression that matters most.

What about intuition?
what role does it play?

[rpace]

An artist is composing from the very first mark they place on the canvas. Composition includes the initial and intuitive placement of objects in space; the very idea of what the image is going to be. An artist who knows what weakens a composition will be able to apply their "expression" but intelligently avoid elements that undermine it.

An artist working with just a 5-minute primer on the fundamentals of composition isn't going to be fully in control of their images. They won't know why cropping at joints, the right-to-left movement out of the picture plane or the tangents are weakening or wrecking their imagery (or how they were able to make it work one time, but not another).

I'm not saying that artists should start their drawings on top of a pre-drawn grid, but that knowing how the grids, shapes, colours and movement have been used to both good and bad effect in the past can only enable them to make better choices as they proceed to make their own works.

~Richard

[Elwell]

I think we should resort to composition only when the stuff isnt coming out on its own, naturally...

No no no no no no no no no no no no NO!!!!!!!!
Composition isn't something you resort to. Composition underlies EVERYTHING. Saying one shouldn't be overdependent on formulas is not the same thing as saying one should depend exclusively on intuition.
(Edit: Had the reply window open for a long time, rpace pretty much beat me to it.)

[rpace]

I'm dealing with students who've taken their "ïnitial fire" to art school to learn how to be better artists. They've had years of making images based purely on their unfettered imaginations with no understanding of why they succeed or fail compositionally. I would think that most of the artists finding their way here would be in similar situations. They already had their wild, carefree playtime with art materials -- if they want to be professional artists they have to learn what professional artists know.

The professional artist should know "the rules" (whether they are the rules of anatomy, colour theory, perspective or composition) well enough that they are absorbed into the subconcious and do not have to be at the surface of the artists' thoughts while they're working.

Your "one piece of paper" idea is really surprising considering your desire for unfettered creativity. A good education in composition doesn't just provide a laundry list of dos and don'ts, but provides explanations of why things do and do not typically work and how to break the established rules to good effect.

Knowledge liberates the imagination, it doesn't limit it.
~R

[rpace]

I try not to insult anyone to think that they might only aspire to be competent hacks. I would hope that everyone drawing or painting is still approaching it as a student, with a passionate desire to always improve to foster their creativity.

I don't understand how anyone could assume that learning the hows and whys of compositional structures can only be done via rote learning. Peerhaps you were taught it that way, I know it bordered on that when I went through college, but I do not teach it in that manner.

I encourage my students to become more visually aware, to see how other artists control the image or flow of images in comics or film. At about week 6 or 7 I have students telling me that they're happily seeing compositional elements and structures everywhere and beginning to understand how works they've always loved were put together and how they can take the same control themselves.

I'm not certain why you apparently think that one can't learn composition in an engaged and passionate manner, but I can understand that if you went through a dry rote composition class you'd push others to look elsewhere for emphasis.

[Texahol]

rpace and kev thanks a lot for your discussion here. I've learned a ton, as i'm sure others have as well.

I also have that book elwell linked, and it's a really great and simple starting point of composition. I still don't really "get" a lot of stuff about composition...[mostly from lack of experience] but that book as simple as it is, explains loads.

...and you two are crazy! You're almost saying the same things, but with an emphasis on the two very important aspects of creating anything. the 'rules' are important to learn, so you know how to break them to your advantage. and the creativity/imagination is important so that you're never limiting yourself to the 'rules'

[bhanu]

can we sorta make archive of discussions like these....In the wiki section maybe... I bet the things will be helpful.

[rpace]

Again, I am not advocating for ignorance of compositional strategies. That is part and parcel of the craft. I am merely saying that cultivation of image previsualization and an understanding of gestalt effect and dramatic tension are far and away the best things you can do for an artist's compositional skills. And most often, these "imaginative" skills will coincidentally improve the artist's abilities in all the other skill sets you discuss, because they will become meaningful in the context of the expression.

Like many discussions of these sorts, the more we talk the more we learn we're thinking many of the same things, but have our personal emphasis or bias skewing what would otherwise be agreement.

The interesting thing in the above quote is that I consider previsualization an inherent part of the compositional process.

When my students are doing their daily studies of other artists'works in their design journals they are expected to consider the conceptual process the artist went through when creating the image, which includes the story or narrative intent and discuss how effectively they applied the compositional elements to support it.

~Richard

[Maxine Schacker]

This reminds me of other threads that ended up being very confusing for real beginners. I hesitate to enter the fray....

Here goes:

What we call "instinct" is often the result of enough experience and information getting into the subconscious so that we can "feel" what's right with out conscious effort.

In educating people with little background or experience, we should be teaching basic principles with the caveat that all rules can be broken, if you are able break them successfully. However, everyone needs a starting point. We need to make students aware of the dynamics of the page, of the fact (as Richard states) that when you make one mark on the page you're composing.

I find the generation we're now teaching, and this is a generality, more culture bound, and less aware of great art of the past, than students were, say 20 years ago. They need a frame of reference. They need to see what's been achieved in the past, and they need the knowledge to be able to see "the bones," how the page was organized.

Its amazing how many beginners don't think about the tension between what they are drawing and the dimensions and surface of the page they are working on. They aren't aware of the abstract basis of art.

Of course we need to think about what we are drawing, why we are drawing it, and how best to express it, otherwise we aren't making very good art, are we? How does it make us feel to be at a distance, to be close up , etc. etc. etc. How does one line speak to another? As Hale used to say to us, being an artist is making one choice after another: he who makes the better choices is the better artist.

Students need to be made aware of the page, of the journey the eye takes through the page, and they need to learn to consider whether the page as a whole is holding together. Most of them need to learn to "see."

The normal untrained eye focuses on one thing at a time rather than on the relationships between all the things within a certain frame of reference. What we are doing is as abnormal as "turnout" is for a ballet dancer.We get better at it once we are conscious of it, and we get even better when we understand the choices we have and start using them. Even the failures teach us something. How can you possibly be against teaching beginners the language of art? Part of that language is finding the means to express our vision. Obviously the intent of the piece and the composition, as well as everything else involved, must fit like a hand in a glove.

Of course, we must think about what we are trying to do and how it can best be done. For some people just starting to do thumbnails is the answer. It starts the juices going. For you, Kev, seeing it all in your mind's eye seems to be the way to go. The point is that there isn't one way. When we teach composition we are providing awareness of choices and strategies to try out (especially when stuck).

We are also, hopefully, giving them enough awareness to judge their own work and know when its working and when it isn't...and when it isn't, have the resources to figure out another strategy that will work.

Education comes from the Latin, to lead forth.

[archipelago]

storytelling > composition in my opinion...

although they both blend here and there

[Elwell]

storytelling > composition in my opinion...

although they both blend here and there
No. Storytelling=composition.

[archipelago]

No. Storytelling=composition.
To me at least, composition is more about arranging shapes/values/whatever to make it pleasing for the eye, while storytelling is about what those actual shapes are, and what reaction that gives the viewer.

Edit: although, now that I think about it, sure, storytelling could be called composition yeah :P, then let me then rephrase my original statement to, in composition, storytelling is the most important part.

[Elwell]

Kev, you old Romantic you.

[Texahol]

kev, I think you're putting too much emphasis on the word, rather than the underlying concepts that the word represents.

[Earendil]

And the idea that one can say "the rules can be broken" bothers me. This sets the rules on a pedestal. I disagree with that heirarchy. I think the idea should be on a pedestal and artists should be direly warned against "breaking the idea." The rules you can look up, your idea passes through but once.

Well put! :drinkup:

[Ilaekae]

The journey begins with an idea...

The rules (of composition and whatever):

I go to the local stuff store and pick up every map and cheap tourist guide I can find on the place I'll be visiting. I read them from beginning to end til I'm bored shitless.

The execution:

I toss everything in a basket except one bare-bones street map, pack some clean gutchies, my pills, ID and wallet, money and a .357 mag with a box of ammo or a hunting knife, and buy a bus ticket. As far as I'm concerned, I'm ready for anything that can come my way. Where I ultimately end up and how is just a matter of reacting to interesting things along the way. Will I get lost? With the prep I went through, probably not, and if I do, not for long.

The end result:

If not memorable, at least make notes of the good parts. Go to the stuff store for more maps. Do it all over again.

[Maxine Schacker]

I'm not going to get my point across, am I ?

You are talking about hack work, and that has nothing to do with this discussion. I don't know what you're afraid of. I finally was able to open the link to your work. Most of it is really very good, and passionate. You can draw and you can paint. The few pieces that don't work don't work because the composition doesn't work, and in one case, I think, is actually fighting your intentions.

As long as we live and work, hopefully we grow.We are all works in progress. It would be very boring if any one of us knew everything, don't you think? You are very good, and my guess is that you have years of exciting work ahead of you. The better you get, the more dangerous the temptation to stop stretching. Some of what you are fighting might actually inspire you. You love art too much and you have too much talent to fall into the usual traps!

The best of luck to you in your artistic life, and Happy New Year!

[kev ferrara]

Maxine, Thank you for the kind words.

The best of luck to you in your artistic life, and Happy New Year!

And to you!:hatsoff:

Do you have a link to your work, Maxine?

[MarkHarchar]

So, I have been following behind the behemoth snowball as it rolls down this mountain of philosophical furrows and speed bumps and I would like to add my viewpoint on my issue (as the thread originator) and see if it strikes a chord with anyone else. I am a 30 something guy who has been places and seen stuff. I always thought I had a rather interesting set of images that my bounced around in my little brain box there, however, they always were at a certain level of amorphousness. The “ideas” were there and interesting (kinda in the way roadkill to a 10 year old is as he pokes it with a stick) but were often non descript (kinda in the way roadkill to a 10 year old is as he pokes it with a stick).

Anyway, I am engineer by trade and training and have always had a mathematical thought process. I figured that if I learned the ABCs and 123s of how to “compose” this mass of “idea meat” into something more beef bourguignon like, I’d be golden. What I have found is that as I learned the rules, the do’s and don’t, my amorphous idea turned into “meatloaf”, boxy, geometric, all 90 degree angles and such.

It wasn’t until reading Elwell’s book recommendation that I now am starting to get the concept of theme development for not only visual impact but emotional impact as well. My snow image from earlier started out as a feeling of loneliness as I walked down a city street, feeling scared, alone, threaten, empty. The initial idea wasn’t enough to drive the image. Applying rules to the idea themselves didn’t drive the image. Using the rules and concepts to explain the emotion to generate something that would make others feel the same emotions (which to me is a combination of both rpace’s and kev’s methods) is what began to bring the image closer to fruition.

Starting with an idea, trying to fully develop it in your head for not only visual impact, but emotional impact, then apply composition methods and rules to the image seems like the path I am going to pursue in this quest (at least at the present).

[Maxine Schacker]

hylandr2, sounds like a good plan to me.

Kev, I need to get my work posted and I've been promising to do it for too long. We are such a small group and so overloaded, and I am so lacking in computer skills, that it hasn't happened yet. I also find that a drawback to getting older is that you can't work night and day. You have to rest sometimes.

I have a friend who has promised to take digital photos (but she's overworked too!), and our tech person can help me...when we have time. My guess is that it won't happen until spring. I'm actually excited about doing it. I never meant to do anything but paint and can't believe where fate has taken me. I think getting my work on line will help me return to it in a serious way. I find it painful not to be fully immersed in my work. I never was a Sunday painter.

However, we all need to pass on what we know, especially in these times. That's what we're trying to do.

When I finally get the work up I'll look forward to your comments. I think, as we progress, it gets difficult to find people who can make insightful criticisms and suggestions. One tries to do it for oneself, of course, but its a gift to have people you respect comment on your work. I always learn more from the failures than I do from the work that succeeds.