This fellow told me that a photo I took of my white cat is very goog because of the composition, that it has an L shape.
He also said for better photos I should try for a composition with a 3, 5 or 7 shape.
I don’t know what to make of this.
Also what is the deal with the camera, should the sun be behind me as I am taking a photo?
What about if it is noon, then what difference would that make?
I have no idea aboput 3, 5, or 7 shapes, whatever the hell those are. As for the sun, as long as you have a proper light meter, it doesn’t have to be behind you. Just make sure the actual sun is not in the frame, and pay attention to the directions of shadows. Never take pictures at noon. Noon is absolutely boring.
Sun behind you is OK sometimes but for a white cat I’d like the sun behind me to give the fur that nice glow. (OK, so I’m talking greeting card kitsch here.) Of course for people, having the sun behind you terrible because it makes them squint (or even sneeze). I believe people should be comfortably out of the sun and illuminated with a fill-in flash.
OK, I’m a professional photographer/photojournalist, so I can go on forever answering your question.
I don’t know what this L-composition or 3- 5- 7- shape stuff is. This doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, I’ve just never heard it labeled as such.
The basic compositional rule you learn when you start is the “rule of thirds” or “the golden mean.” Now, let’s start by not calling it a rule, but a guideline. Basically, divide your frame into thirds horizontally and vertically. If you place your subject on any of the intersections of these lines or along one of these lines, the composition will be generally stronger than if you centered your subject.
“Never take pictures at noon.” Generally, this is true, but once again, there are exceptions. Noon light tends to be boring because of the angle, and because of the quality of light. Us photographer types love early morning and late evening light, when the angle it hits the face minimizes shadows, plus, because of the way it enters through the atmosphere, it takes on a golden quality.
Always have the sun behind you – Good general point, but does not always hold true. The basic thing you should learn is LOOK at what you’re taking a photo of. Look at the light. Look at the shadows. If you’re taking a shot of a building, sometimes it’s nice if the sun is off at an angle, so the light hits the facade obliquely and gives the building nice contours. In this case, the sun is not behind you. But the main point is observe. Your film is not going to make the picture better if the subject is in shadow. No matter what speed your using.
As Yeah said, illuminating people with a fill flash is much easier than having them stare into the sun. But another tip, if you want to make your flash photos look better, is to use a bounce card and/or take the damn flash off the camera (if you can) and hold it with your arms outstretched to the right or left, slightly above your subject. There is nothing more boring and ugly than direct flash. (unless you’re going for that Weegee look.)
And, one last compositional tip: Get in close. As Capa said, if you’re pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough. Eliminate excess details in your frame. Get close to your subject.
If you have any more questions, feel free…
If possible, I try not to have people looking directly into the sun so that they’re not all squinty-eyed.
I personally prefer some angle where they can look a little more normal, then use fill flash to soften some of the shadows on the non-luminated side of the face.
Use of lighting/shadowing in photography is an art. I’m not an expert in it, but I do understand it.
I grew up around art and have always had the principals of design thrown in my face. The difference between good art and great art is often the application of these concepts. I have never heard of the L thing, but who am I question it doesn’t exist? The 3,5,7 thing could be refering to the concept that objects tend to work better in odd numbers. It creates a better sence of balance.
I think that if you are serious about photography as a career or hobby, you need to learn about these concepts. There are many books on the subject, try AOL keywords. Or, find a pro in your area snd talk to them about it. Good luck.
(I am of course not a professional and I would listen to the advice of one over me!! 
)
OK.
Any opinion on which is a better camera, Nikon or Canon?
Is 400 speed film all right, or is 100 just as good for mostly daytime photos?
Nikon vs Canon … everybody loves asking this question it seems. Honestly, I use Nikons, but Canon is just as good. In the high-end lines (Nikon F5 vs Canon EOS 1V) the Canon beats the Nikon in autofocus performance, but the F5 isn’t far behind. Generally, the thought is Nikon has the better flash technology and Canon the better autofocus, but, in practice, I feel one is as good as the other.
As for the consumer models, I don’t have much experience in these, either, but, once again, from what I’ve heard and read, they’re pretty much as good as each other. Minolta’s consumer-end line is also supposed to be really good.
As for films, here’s the drill:
These days, 400 speed film is the good all-purpose film for any situation. I, however, would never use 400 speed film in bright sunlight unless I am out of all other film. It depends on what you’re doing. Generally, use the lowest ISO speed film you can for the situation. I normally shoot 50 ISO and 100 ISO, for maximum quality and best reproduction value. If you plan to blow up your image quite a bit, then use the 100 in daylight. If you’re gonna carry a point-and-shoot around and shoot lots of things in all sorts of situation, then you’ll be fine with 400, especially if all you want is 3 by 5’s or 4 by 6’s.
Also, this means if you’re taking late evening/night shots with a tripod, by all means use 100 ISO or 50 ISO film. Basically, this would be for city scapes and the such, but the possibilities are endless. Just remember, the best night shots are generally taken when there still is just a bit of color left in the sky – some dark blue. Once it gets completely black, it’s a little dead.
You can always check my web site (shameless promotion)
http://www.angelfire.com/ab/pawinski
On the Budapest Baths collection, there’s a night (late evening) shot of a building. You’ll see what I mean by a little color left in the shot goes a long way.
Leica
Is 400 speed film all right, or is 100 just as good for mostly daytime photos?
**
[/QUOTE]
The faster the film, the more grainy. If it’s daylight, I always use 100 or sometimes even slower. 400 is good for night time or dark rooms if you don’t have a tripod. If you have a tripod, use it and slower film and expose for longer. You’ll get better pictures (less grain).
About the 3,5,7 shapes:
One of the “rules” in photography is that the “S” curve has an aesthetically appealing look to it, and can make for great photographs.
The shapes of the numerals “3,” “5,” and “7,” might be extensions of the S-curve philosophy; and that it’s not so much the “oddness” of the numbers, but the “shape” of the numerals–which sorta have elements of the S-curve.
Or I could be full of it. . . .
The main compositions that work are, S, X, /, , thirds & Z.
On the idea that 3-5-7 refers to odd numbers:
I have read in gardening books that planting bulbs or individual plants in odd numbers looks better. I’m not sure why this is, but I do think it is so, when dealing with small numbers. Obviously, in a swath of 50 daffodils, one more isn’t going to matter, but in a small clump, 5 or 7 is more pleasing to the eye than 6.
I think it’s because the eye is drawn the to the middle of things, and if you have 3, 5, or 7, there is a middle flower. Whereas if you have 6, you’re looking at dirt.
3,5,7 look like S,Z, / Maybe just an attempt to try to be original.
I think the fellow was talking about the rule of thirds, you’ll get an L shape if you use 3 of the 4 intersections. Click here for a neat page with some decent links illustrating the principle. Once you know it, you’ll see it everywhere.