If a photograph is to communicate its subject in all its intensity, the relationship of forms must be rigorously established. Photography implies the recognition of a rhythm in the world of real things. What the eye does is to find and focus on the particular subject within the mass of reality; what the camera does is simply to register upon film the decision made by the eye.
We look and perceive a photograph as we do a painting, in its entirety and all in one glance. In a photograph, composition is the result of a simultaneous coalition, the organic coordination of elements seen by the eye. One does not add composition as though it were an afterthought superimposed on the basic subject material, since it is impossible to separate content from form. Composition must have its own inevitability about it.
In photography there is a new kind of plasticity, the product of instantaneous lines made by movements of the subject. We work in unison with movement as though it were a presentiment on the way in which life itself unfolds. But inside movement there is one moment at which the elements in motion are in balance. Photography must seize upon this moment and hold immobile the equilibrium of it.
The photographer’s eye is perpetually evaluating. A photographer can bring coincidence of line simply by moving his head a fraction of a millimeter. He can modify perspectives by a slight bending of the knees. By placing the camera closer to or farther from the subject, he draws a detail – and it can be subordinated, or it can be tyrannized by it. But he composes a picture in very nearly the same amount of time it takes to click the shutter, at the speed of a reflex action.
Sometimes it happens that you stall, delay, wait for something to happen. Sometimes you have the feeling that here are all the makings of a picture – except for just one thing that seems to be missing. But what one thing? Perhaps someone suddenly walks into your range of view. You follow his progress through the viewfinder. You wait and wait, and then finally you press the button – and you depart with the feeling (though you don’t know why) that you’ve really got something. Later, to substantiate this, you can take a print of this picture, trace it on the geometric figures which come up under analysis, and you’ll observe that, if the shutter was released at the decisive moment, you have instinctively fixed a geometric pattern without which the photograph would have been both formless and lifeless.
Misunderstanding the Decisive Moment
Depending on what photography website you go to, you will find different interpretations of the “decisive moment.” However, one mistake I see repeated often is that many photographers will assume a photograph is a "decisive moment" as long as it tells an effective story or displays a clear message that translates to the viewer. Unfortunately, this interpretation isn’t always correct.
In other words, just because a street photographer captured a moment in time that tells a particular narrative, that doesn’t mean it encompasses the full definition of a decisive moment. A precise and deliberate design must always be present. For example, as noted in the paragraphs above, Henri Cartier-Bresson discusses perspective, coincidences, organic elements that balance, relationships of forms, and the act of analyzing his photographs after they’ve been taken. These considerations are those of the visually literate artist and are thoroughly discussed throughout this website.
Make a donation of $10.00 or more to help support Dynamic Symmetry Art and receive a free extended edition of The Art of Composition: A Dynamic Symmetry User's Guide for the Modern Artist. This PDF edition contains 474 pages and is uncompressed for maximum resolution (275 MB). All donations help pay for hardware and software expenses, as well as research and future development. Thank you for your support!