Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Photo Evaluation
Photo Feedback
The Early Bird
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DW_" data-source="post: 50830" data-attributes="member: 8667"><p>An example of static balance is, say, an image of a bird on a pedestal smack dab in the middle of the frame. The composition is certainly balanced but going nowhere and without any potential for movement and is quite boring. I would call this "static balance". In the other extreme you can place the bird in the far left or far right without a any obvious reason, the image would be awkward and out of balance. If however, you place elements about a the fulcrum point so that they appear ever so slightly out of balance either one way or the other you create a tension and it is thru this tension that you obtain a type of implied dynamic balance, or tensive balance, if you will. In some cases of tensive balance there is an implied movement or future movement in this type of balance. Like a spring wound tight but much more subtle.</p><p></p><p>Here's an extreme example, say you had two kids on a teeter totter and the frame is centered at the fulcrum of the teeter totter and the two kids are perfectly horizontal. This is what I would call static balance. Everything about the image is in perfectly balance and totally equalized. Then say you have this exact same image however on one side or the other a child is about to jump off. The image still retains the original balance due to both sides being equal however there is an implied dynamic or tension in this balance due to the fact that the one child will go crashing to the ground while the opposite side of the teeter totter will shoot straight up. This is an extreme example and may be way out in left field but I see this kind of dynamic in photos that I admire. Whether or not the photographers would express it in the manner I am, who knows. Better yet, whether this exists anywhere other than in my head, that's another question I cannot answer. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DW_, post: 50830, member: 8667"] An example of static balance is, say, an image of a bird on a pedestal smack dab in the middle of the frame. The composition is certainly balanced but going nowhere and without any potential for movement and is quite boring. I would call this "static balance". In the other extreme you can place the bird in the far left or far right without a any obvious reason, the image would be awkward and out of balance. If however, you place elements about a the fulcrum point so that they appear ever so slightly out of balance either one way or the other you create a tension and it is thru this tension that you obtain a type of implied dynamic balance, or tensive balance, if you will. In some cases of tensive balance there is an implied movement or future movement in this type of balance. Like a spring wound tight but much more subtle. Here's an extreme example, say you had two kids on a teeter totter and the frame is centered at the fulcrum of the teeter totter and the two kids are perfectly horizontal. This is what I would call static balance. Everything about the image is in perfectly balance and totally equalized. Then say you have this exact same image however on one side or the other a child is about to jump off. The image still retains the original balance due to both sides being equal however there is an implied dynamic or tension in this balance due to the fact that the one child will go crashing to the ground while the opposite side of the teeter totter will shoot straight up. This is an extreme example and may be way out in left field but I see this kind of dynamic in photos that I admire. Whether or not the photographers would express it in the manner I am, who knows. Better yet, whether this exists anywhere other than in my head, that's another question I cannot answer. ;) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photo Evaluation
Photo Feedback
The Early Bird
Top
