I generally do my composition in multiple steps, the first step being done using only lines and shapes, then step 2 is light and shadow, and step 3 is color. I usually just make drawings though, so sometimes I don't even get to the color step.

When composing my line drawing I usually try to have the image be balanced from left to right, but unbalanced from top to bottom to add atmosphere. For human figures I try to make them have their spines in a s-shape, so their pose is 'active'. For 2 figures touching you have to imagine them as one object and make sure they have a good shape together as well as each separately. It's usually good to have more than one object that show the same or mirror-image motion (e.g the pegasus and the cross leaning away from each other below.)

Another element of composition I got taught about in high school that nobody mentioned yet is 'visual path', the path a viewer's eye takes when it travels over the image.

Here are two pics (not mine!) which I think show beautiful composition.



Edited by - sunandshadow on January 17, 2002 10:27:53 PM

quote:Original post by sunandshadow
When composing my line drawing I usually try to have the image be balanced from left to right, but unbalanced from top to bottom to add atmosphere.

My concept of balance usually means the main focal point being off-center, and an object of secondary interest that is possibly smaller balancing the image on the other side. However, this is overly general, and rules are made to be broken all the time depending on the situation.

quote:Original post by sunandshadow
Another element of composition I got taught about in high school that nobody mentioned yet is 'visual path', the path a viewer's eye takes when it travels over the image.

This is an excellent point. A visual path helps to lead the viewer into the image. It could be a roadway or trail, long shadows, a row of fenceposts, the direction of travel of something, or the direction in which someone is looking. And speaking of a viewer's eye traveling over an image, the longer the viewer's eye lingers on the image, and the more detail the eye has to absorb, the more likely the image will be successful.


___________________________________



Edited by - bishop_pass on January 19, 2002 2:36:31 AM

I wonder if there wouldn''t be a feature article one day on the gamedev.net front page which covered a small subset of the fantastic ideas being tossed around in this thread?

quote:Original post by Graylien
I wonder if there wouldn''t be a feature article one day on the gamedev.net front page which covered a small subset of the fantastic ideas being tossed around in this thread?

That''s an interesting thing to say, and I hope you aren''t being sarcastic. I don''t know who would be qualified to write such an article. I personally have no formal art training, but instead I have independently studied outdoor photography for eight years or so. I really don''t feel qualified myself.

I''m actually surprised at how receptive most have been to the ideas in this thread. I just wish more would throw out ideas on the subject, as vague as it is.

Like I said, take any theme, and try to previsualize.



___________________________________

Bishop_pass :
I was wondering if you know about the Golden point thing ?
I notice you said :

quote:My concept of balance usually means the main focal point being off-center, and an object of secondary interest that is possibly smaller balancing the image on the other side. However, this is overly general, and rules are made to be broken all the time depending on the situation.

It''s quite funny, ''cause that basically means you are using the rule without really knowing.
I think you should try to look up on "gold number" and art, you would be surprised.
As well, you describe balancing the masses in the picture in a nice way It''s fun to see you know the basic rules but you say you have no artistic formation.

Anyway, I wish I had more time, ''cause there is lot more that can be talked about in this thread, but I am getting kicked out, now




Sancte Isidore ora pro nobis !

quote:Original post by ahw
It''s quite funny, ''cause that basically means you are using the rule without really knowing.
I think you should try to look up on "gold number" and art, you would be surprised.
As well, you describe balancing the masses in the picture in a nice way It''s fun to see you know the basic rules but you say you have no artistic formation.

Well, let''s say I am informally aware of these ideas through my reading. I''ve soaked up a lot of concepts related to photographic composition. Sometimes different words are used, or the ideas are presented casually in an author''s story of how a picture was composed. Words and phrases like ''balance'', ''the rule of thirds'', and I''m fairly certain phrases using ''golden'' have cropped up. I just haven''t internalized it all in a formal fashion, but rather worked it all in until it becomes a little more second nature.

___________________________________

I''m not being sarcastic, quite the opposite actually. And I don''t think that you should be the least bit surprised at how people have warmed to the topic of this thread; the denizens of GDNet are by in large a creative and enthusiastic bunch.

In truth there was one word which prompted me to speak up: previsualize. The genesis of theme via compositional building blocks is by no means a trivial process. Great care is needed to properly nurse an idea out of the primordial fog of inspiration, lest the true potential of your vision slip through your fingers like a child reaching for the smoke of a candle.

But please, don''t let my comments derail your thread.

quote:Original post by bishop_pass
I don''t know who would be qualified to write such an article.

That''s an interesting thing to say, and I hope you aren''t being sarcastic.

I suppose we out to mention contrast - no matter how well laid-out and balanced and dynamic the lines and shapes of a composition are, if the figure and the ground don''t contrast with each other the picture is unpleasant or uninteresting to look at. I''m trying to remember all those little exercises I had to do for art class to illustrate these principles, but that was 7 years ago and I have a memory like swiss cheese... I know we played with the color wheel, and we did something that was just black and white to focus on figure and ground, and there was an exercise using only shades of a color to illustrate hue. There was another black and white one with areas of different textures... I''m sure all this stuff can be found in a book about how to teach art.

quote:Original post by sunandshadow
I suppose we out to mention contrast - no matter how well laid-out and balanced and dynamic the lines and shapes of a composition are, if the figure and the ground don't contrast with each other the picture is unpleasant or uninteresting to look at.

This is an excellent point sunandshadow! It is another thing that I seem to automatically do when I compose an image (actually it is something that I deliberately do). A classic example is the silhouette. A sillhouetted tree is best against either a sky or a monotone background such as a mountain shrouded in haze. I think the image becomes weaker if a sillohuette is allowed to be in front of both at the same time or against a very complex background. To manipulate such geometry, the point of view should be changed. For example, to get a tree completely against a sky, one would either use a tree that is on a ridge or lower the point of view which has the effect of raising the tree against its background.

The little image of the cacti in the far left of my sig is an example of this.



___________________________________



Edited by - bishop_pass on January 21, 2002 6:28:20 PM

Hey Graylien, this little website might be useful for you and anyone else interested in this stuff (including me!) - Ruben

Hope you like it!

Edited by - Garott on January 22, 2002 4:13:41 AM