The web of forces within a rectangular frame being a twofold symmetrical affair, it is sufficient to follow the path of an object to the edge in any given direction - the one chosen for our illustrations is more or less arbitrary. On this trajectory it is possible to clearly acknowledge ten characteristic moments; four of these we will describe by their relation to the center, and other six in relation to the frame. This division has been made just to underline the transition from "one orbit into another", where each half of the travel appropriately defines its major ruling force. It is obvious that this division in practice does not exist, and belongs only to our analysis. The influences of center and edge of the frame are simultaneous in every position. Let's start from the beginning. Gestalt psychology can again be helpful, to understand the symbiotic strength of the center and frame. One draws the energy from the other. Center as the focus of composition, being the simplest and most direct placement of the object into frame, can be found in most of the primitive cultures, or in the novice use of the camera - or even still on tv, given the weaker authority of the small and oval frame. It is only thanks to bluescreen images behind the announcer or some sidebar that this sometimes gets avoided. The strict, dead center (fig. 1), taken with a bit more of semantic awareness, floods with meanings. There is immediate hypnotic effect of remarkable strength; this center rules all sides of the image, and everything rotates around this navel of the world. This emotional impulse invites symbolism, and some small thing in the center can impose its rule on the vast content of our memory bank of images and meanings. This might be the right moment to mention the pitiful abuse of central placement in the conceptual art, which trivializes it to a cheap effect. I still do believe in the bright future of central position, based on a very special transcendent feel, and the immediate reevaluation of the whole space within image, which restructures the relations according to everything orbiting around that center. If the position on fig. 2 loses some of this supernatural air, it trades it for the stronger ground in the natural. Let's call this an active center, since in many ways we still perceive it as a center, albeit possessing a clear orientation, longing towards the closest side. Fig. 3 shows the center out of balance. This is a somewhat defeated position, of something entirely stripped down of all the divine aspect, and in turn given the earthly life, sincere ordinariness. Every movement further, as on fig. 4, is perceived as suffering the strong gravitation of center, trying to move it from the unstable position. This force gets weaker with the increased distance from center: it becomes more and more neutralized by the appearance of the other attraction, the one of the frame edge.
	in the frame: distance from the center
	Locality of the hole here corresponds to the second described position. The center still has the authority, but is humbly inclined towards bottom (perhaps earthly) elements of the image.