Background clutter : Blankets of all sorts.
I wanted to shoot a portrait with the blankets being part of the atmosphere since being next to the couch is a favorite spot to watch TV.
You've confessed that the background rule was broken and that it doesn't work. So, that doesn't qualify you. I'm lost on the lighting rule. If you're shooting vertical and your flash is parallel to the camera, it is also vertical, so you followed that rule, not broke it. If you had a horizontal flash and a vertical camera you could claim that rule. As is, still not qualified. If it was up to me to bullshot my way thru this, I'd maintain the background clutter defense, stating that I thought it added a sense of place to the image. ;) Please feel free to make this claim, or try another, but do change it in the blue text under the image before returning it to the proper gallery. ~ Lonnit
Clutter background, I just snapped the portrait, thinking the background would be blurred so the blankets would meld into place but its a 'distraction' - not pleasing background.
~````````
Lighting - didn't want to bounce the flash like I usually do so just shot as is when I tilted the camera 'vertical'
NIce image, but will need you explanation as to why breaking the rule worked, in order to qualify. As for the rule of thirds, it was strictly adhered to, not broken, TV. ~ Lonnit
I think you may qualify under the "Green Tractor" rule that clears states that thou shalt not have a green tractor compete with subject for attention. John
I think this is an attractive shot solidly breaking ye olde "thirds" rule and will pass because it misses all the "rules" for positioning. The resulting triangular composition is, however, classical in the Renaissance sense. (an outdated "rule"?) Think Madonna and Child in several permutations. -tv