Thinking Inside the Box

"Shooting square" helps this portrait draw attention to the eyes. In a rectangular format,
there would be too much extra space for the eye to wander around in.

I periodically come up with challenges for myself in order to expand and improve upon my photographic abilities, both technical and aesthetic. This is a long accepted practice, and I've (usually) found it does help me “think outside the box”. Most of us can fall into creative habits which can not only limit what we produce when it comes to our images, but leave us in a rut as well.

I'm starting 2019 thinking inside the box. A 1:1 box that is. Square photos.

Why am I doing this?

There was a time when a great number of photos were being taken with cameras that shot in square format. 2 1/4” square (120 film format) twin lens reflex, and then later single lens reflex cameras were once the choice of professionals and enthusiasts. They wouldn't do a wedding or portrait shoot with anything less. Even amateurs would find themselves “shooting square” with a variety of “box cameras” and lower end models, such as the various “Brownie” iterations and the 126 Instamatic of the 1960s.

One advantage of square format cameras is there is no need to change the orientation of the camera for “portrait mode” as is done with rectangular format cameras. This can also be a bit of a disadvantage, because if you do want to frame a shot in a vertical format, you have to crop off a portion of the frame. Still, this wasn't that much of an issue when cropping from 120, medium format cameras because the resulting image would still have more detail than that taken with most 35mm films.

However, various factors-most notably the growth in popularity of 35mm cameras as well as the 110 Instamatic, rectangular format, mostly with a 3:2 ratio, has pretty much taken over photography. The exception is still professional or enthusiast use where medium format dslrs are preferred.

So then, why shoot in square format?

Good question.

I already crop rectangular images to square compositions regularly.(I shoot Olympus m4/3 cameras, which happen to have a native 4:3 ratio). Sometimes an image looks best that way, especially portraits. Often I “previsualize” an image that way while I'm composing in the viewfinder. (Previsualization is an important aspect of creating strong and appealing images.) Other times, I decide in post processing that an image will look better in a 1:1 ratio.

Since my mirrorless cameras allow me to set a 1:1 format that appears that way in the viewfinder, I've decided to “go retro” in a way and do most of my personal work that way for the next few months. The goal is to force myself to think of compositions in terms of the benefits and constraints of a 1:1 ratio.

I had my camera set to square format, so this is what I saw in the viewfinder. I switched
to 4:3 format and didn't see a composition I liked as much as this.

Aside from the afore-mentioned benefit of not having to turn a camera on its side to compose an image, there are some aesthetic opportunities afforded by shooting in square format:

• The “Rule of Thirds” takes on a different dynamic. The squares and intersections of the Rule of Thirds are equally distributed within the frame, which can both help or hurt using this technique for composing.
• The dreaded “dead center” framing can actually work well in square format. This is because there is less “dead space” along the sides.
• The format itself creates a different emotional/aesthetic response in the viewer. It can create a more “static” appearance: it actually leads the eye to stay within the frame more. This can either lead to boring photos, or force better use of not only Rule of Thirds, but “S” curves, triangles and other methods of composition that make for more engaging images.
• "Negative Space" can create a decidedly different effect than when used in rectangular formats.
• Square format stands out from the multitude of rectangular images people see every day.

So, if you're looking for ways to broaden your photographic horizons, give “shooting square” a try. In fact, you don't even need to “shoot square”. You can always just go back through your existing images and experiment with cropping in 1:1 format if you don't already. Still, this doesn't get the creative juices flowing quite as much as actually making captures in 1:1 format.

If you have a mirrorless camera, you can probably already set it to 1:1. It will only produce .jpegs in that format: RAW will still be rectangular. Many smartphone cameras allow for setting 1:1 ratio. There are also smartphone apps you can download that offer this ratio. Compact cameras are a mixed bag: some allow for 1:1 shooting, some don't. You'll just have to check the menu to find out.

If you shoot with a dslr, you're pretty much stuck shooting rectangular and cropping in post. This is where previsualization comes in, which is a good thing to work on anyway. It can take time and practice to look through a rectangular viewfinder and see the image as a square composition, but you can do it if you are patient. People shooting 35mm cameras did this for decades.

Give thinking inside the (square) box a try. You might find it opens up levels of creativity you haven't touched on before.