Talk:Headroom (photographic framing)

A fact from Headroom (photographic framing) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 July 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the concept of headroom (pictured) in still and motion picture photography originates in the rule of thirds from classic portrait painting? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/July.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Filmmaking This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force. Photography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

• 
  A portrait of guitarist Adrian Legg demonstrates an excessive amount of headroom, with the subject's nose centered in the frame (a common mistake.)
• 
  A subtle lack of headroom with the subject's eyes only 28% of the way down from the top, not 33%
• 
  Good composition, with the subject's eyes one-third of the distance down from the top of the frame, following the rule of thirds
• 
  For moving images, the action of zooming in to fill the frame with the subject requires the simultaneous tilting up of the camera, shown by the red lines, to maintain the correct amount of headroom. Conversely, zooming out requires tilting down.

Who decided that the image on the left is wrong? I like that one best of any of these. It says "too much headroom," but I think this is better. In the "correct 'portrait'" there's too much chest and his head almost seems boxed in. --I'ḏ♥One 17:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's my image; that is, it is my framing and my upload, anyway. I put this gallery together based on the guides found at:

• http://books.google.com/books?id=kxeJpEDGBGQC&pg=PA64
• http://books.google.com/books?id=OR4pYn9yYDAC&pg=PA38
• http://www.mediacollege.com/video/camera/tutorial/01-framing.html
• http://books.google.com/books?id=omwNpTZ6LoUC&pg=PA97
• http://books.google.com/books?id=oofqv043A3EC&pg=PA84
• http://trem.ca/learning.html#4

Your opinion is valid, but the sources say that professional practices discourage the kind of framing shown on the left. Binksternet (talk) 17:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that appears to be just your interpretation of these sources. I think, the problem with the image you labelled "good composition" is, it does not actually reflect the rule of thirds. To do so, the body has to be moved left or right so that its axis aligns on one of the vertical rule of thirds lines (see below). You could argue, the topic is headroom, so only the vertical alignment would matter, but that is not valid because it is not a proper application of the rule of thirds — and that is what makes the "too much headroom" picture appear more appealing IMHO, it is centered both ways.

BerlinSight (talk) 01:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The section on rule of thirds is not well sourced -- references random blog posts and apparently a course handout referring _to_ the rule of thirds but not backing the claim as it relates to headroom. As can be seen in "rule of thirds", while certainly often repeated, there is little agreement on what exactly the "rule" describes, how it can or should be applied, or for that matter whether it has any particular legitimacy. Matthew Miller (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, in the example gallery, could we avoid claiming "good composition", and instead use terms like "composition following practices x, y, and z as suggested by a, b, c, which is claimed to yield result 1, 2, 3?" Matthew Miller (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think a good way to improve this Wikipedia article is to rename it "Headroom in Photography and Cinematography." Additionally, I think this article can be improved by addressing the following feature article criteria: well-researched, appropriate structure, and media. To do this, this article can be divided into three sections: 1) The History of Headroom, 2) The Psychology of Headroom, and 3) Examples of Headroom in Popular Culture. This article can benefit from six new reliable sources and the addition of three well-cited pictures from the Wikimedia Commons. GreenSmaragdine (talk) 16:25, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please explain to me why, in Manchester by the Sea, there is sooooo much headroom? Asking for a friend. 74.68.66.100 (talk) 01:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]