submit photos and photo theory

Submit your favourite landscape photos to this site, from anywhere on Earth, not just Australia. Send 5-20 photos to the email address below, don't forget to cut the “(no spam)” out. Photos should have good composition and art values, they should evoke a response. You retain copyright if any commercial offers are received, free for non-commercial use as with my photos. Your photos may or may not be included depending on my (possibly flawed) judgement and available space. If in doubt send it in, I'm sure to like a good photo.

For many years I did not know the answer to this question. Many people like me as I did then, might just see the subject. The thing is to see the whole photo, the subject and the background, the geometric shapes from the outlines of the subject. While there are all sorts of “rules”, I find that photos that strictly apply these rules may be technically good, but not art. The thing is to understand the rules and then forget them, or just use them as seems appropriate in setting up the shot. Usually for instance it doesn't work to have a subject in the centre of a photo, but sometimes it might. Once you have a concept of the rules, look at other photographers' work, not to copy, but to understand why they did what they did, also to visit an art gallery and look at the work of some of the masters would be useful. See the links at the bottom of this page for commonly accepted "rules".

A professional photographer once said to me you are looking for something extra in a shot, everyone can photograph a subject, can you get an extra feature (such as lighting). As an example this photo has a couple I met on the beach, the trees are well lit and as the extra 110% there is a nice reflection in the wet sand.

This is not to say a photo must be perfect, as perfection is impossible. But good enough with something extra. And that is what makes a good photo. You don't have to cram too much into a photo. Simple photos send clear messages.

Everyone has a different creative direction, so understand the principles, experiment with technique, and freely create what you like best. All artists should beware of false authorities and people who generally seek only to invalidate and stop other's creativity. This is why you must learn to think for yourself and ultimately invent your own idea of what art is. What follows is some of the ideas I have developed, obviously you can accept or reject it.

My definition of a photo: "a mosaic of colour and shape, with meaning created or discerned".

Some people may think a photo is an accurate copy of a scene.

I would suggest that it is a mosaic of colour and shape, with the added dimension of meaning. The meaning can be discerned or planned.

For example even a simple shot of a golden bowl with a purple background, lets say excavated from a 3000 year old tomb. The photographer chooses the angle of the light, the approach to the shot and the colour of the background. This already has many more factors than the two elements immediately apparent.

In photographing the bowl, the angle, background and lighting are created, so one is creating the context in a wider sense for the object. EG royal by choice of a purple background, which suggests a time and a place.

Alternatively what you select to include in your image, and how it is framed is art. In this sense we use mathematics, sequences, proportions, lines, colour and shape. So, if you just take a photo of a boat and some waves, we have an intersection of the object and its environment. As this is selected by the photographer, or later in cropping the shot, it is still created even though it is just a copy. And in this sense the photograph is a mosaic of colour and shape with the added dimension of meaning, as we look at the whole photograph and its rhythms, perhaps there is the triangle of the sail and an echo in the shapes of the waves, or maybe clouds. Even a moron will say it is a boat, but below his level of awareness he will feel the quality of the shot and like it. But at any rate a meaning has been added, those with a little more qualitative view will see the interrelationships of the subject and environment, which build against each other, and their position in the frame (which is completely determined by the photographer) and the suggested meaning which the viewers discern or possibly create for themselves.

As a photographer I used to just see the subject, and in viewing my shots would superimpose my memory of the subject, so that I wasn't even seeing the photo I took. One has to deconstruct one's vision in order to see the whole photo, its the shapes and colours and their interelationships, effectively a mosaic, that make a great photo, or a muddy and confused one.* When I am taking photos I look for these interrelationships, I walk around an object to create the viewpoint I want. I am selecting the proportion of two elements, subject and context, and that is what I am creating.

So, my definition: a photo is a mosaic of colour and shape, with the added dimension of meaning. The meaning can be discerned or created.

* Many "not so good" photos can be fixed simply by cropping, and of course fixing various flaws, such as camera not held horizontal or poor contrast etc, with a photo editing program. But to use such programs successfully you still have to have an eye for a good image.

Meaning is a subject that relates to art in general. It can be on many levels. Really meaning is what you intend it to be. You can go to a gallery and read convoluted explanations for paintings, sometimes they have some use, often they are so much rubbish. "Do you like the impression created?" is the first question I ask myself. Significance can be a big trap because it is really reference to something else, not the thing itself. Sometimes I like paintings for completely different reasons than written by the curator.

Photos have mood, this will be conveyed by colour, light and shade, and arrangement or in a portrait position and expression. There is also symbolism, in my photo "windswept" the house is a metaphor for being, and the photo has interesting dynamic elements with the trees appearing to bend over the house, so "being" and "environment" as two elements; but also the trees intersecting with the clouds and lines which intersect with the borders of the photo, lots of triangles, which has power and the lighting is nice and cheery with a slice of sea and mountain in the background.

This was the best photo out of several hundred I took on the trip and is a case of keeping an eye out for a great shot and trying different things.

Photo theory links, from simple to advanced.

Basic concepts

Composition tips

Photography composition articles

Back to index