Previous analyses suggest that artists prefer poses showing the left side of the subject's face when composing a portrait, but showing the right side when composing their own self-portrait. There is also some evidence that artists may prefer compositions with key features on the right of the picture. Do these findings generalize to spontaneous, pseudo-artistic productions by individuals with no formal training in painting and art history? To investigate this issue, we tested a sample of 104 British schoolchildren and teenagers (mean age = 13.8 years; 80 females). We analysed posing biases in individual photographic self-portraits ("selfies") as well as of self-portraits including also the portrait of a friend ("wefies"). Our results document a bias for showing the left cheek in selfies, a bias for placing the selfie-taker on the right in wefies, and a bias for showing two left cheeks over two right cheeks, again in wefies. These biases are reminiscent of what has been reported for selfies in adult non-artists and for portraits and self-portraits by artists in the 16th-18th centuries. Thus, these results provide new evidence in support of a biological basis for side biases in portraits and self-portraits independently of training and expertise.
Composition is an important topic in visual art. The literature suggests a bias for objects on the right side (Levy, 1976) and two additional biases with respect to positioning of objects within a rectangular frame: a Centre bias and an Inward bias (Palmer, Gardner, & Wickens, 2008). We analysed images of animals from three datasets of works of art: two datasets were from artists well known for their portraits of animals (Bewick, Stubbs) and the third was a medieval bestiary. There was no overall displacement of the subject to the right or to the left of the picture. However, we found a bias consisting of more space in front compared to behind the animal, consistent with Palmer at al.'s findings and with their definition of an Inward bias. Because our animals never face towards the centre we use the term Anterior bias. In addition, we found a modulation of this bias on the basis of the facing direction of the animal, consisting of a stronger Anterior bias for left-facing animals. This asymmetry may originate from a combination of an Anterior bias and a Right bias. Finally, with respect to size we found that the size of the animals predicted the proportion of the picture occupied, an effect known as "canonical size".
The aesthetic appeal of symmetry has been noted and discussed by artists, historians and scientists. To what extent this appeal is universal is a difficult question to answer. From a theoretical perspective, cross-cultural comparisons are important, because similarities would support the universality of the response to symmetry. Some pioneering work has focussed on comparisons between Britain and Egypt (Soueif & Eysenck, 1971, 1972), including both experts and naive subjects. These studies confirmed some degree of universal agreement in preferences for simple abstract symmetry. We revisited this comparison after almost half a century. We compared preferences of naïve students in Egypt (n = 200) and Britain (n= 200) for 6 different classes of symmetry in novel, abstract stimuli. We used three different measurements of complexity: Gif ratio, Edge length and the average cell size (average blob size, ABS). The results support Soueif & Eysenck's findings regarding preferences for reflectional and rotational symmetry, however they also throw new light on a greater preference for simplicity in Egyptian participants already noted by Soueif & Eysenck (1971).
There are compositional biases in works of art that have been documented in static images. This study extends the analysis to moving pictures. We examined eight films by four different directors (Ford, Leone, Kurosawa, Chahine), each with a male actor in the major role. These directors are also from different countries (USA, Italy, Japan, Egypt). The analysis focused on three compositional aspects: a) the orientation of the face of the actor (which cheek was visible), b) the position of the face within the image (positioned either to the left of the screen showing the left or right cheek or to the right of the screen showing the left or right cheek), and c) the movement of the actor within the scene (moving to the left or to the right). Unlike in paintings there is no evidence that the left cheek was visible more often than the right. However, we confirmed that position and facing direction are related, i.e. the actor tends to face toward the centre of the screen. With respect to the analyses of movement, there was a greater frequency of movements from left to right, and this may explain the lower than expected frequency of the left cheek. Interestingly, we found a cultural trend in that the pattern of results from Western directors did not extend to the films by Chahine, which may be influenced by reading direction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.