Rule of Thirds - One Scene

[davidbridges]

Rule of thirds. I dont think i can get started on how useless photographic rules are. If it looks good in the viewfinder take it, generally it takes an artistic eye to see that not some rule of thirds.

Hmmmm

 

[Hammerhead64]

:rules:

 

[Matt]

Can we please consider very carefully what we need to post in this thread, i dont want to lock it as there may be more constructive comments that might be added, but ive had enough of RTMs that are appearing in the mod room, the thread is already flagged and if anything that the team feel is unnecessary comes up it will be dealt with.

 

[CT]

Rule of thirds. I dont think i can get started on how useless photographic rules are. If it looks good in the viewfinder take it, generally it takes an artistic eye to see that not some rule of thirds.

Hmmmm

The thing with The Rule Of Thirds David and the Golden Mean if you want to take it further, is that they're both taught at art college to artists, which is where I learned it. No-one is suggesting that the ROT has to be slavishly followed, but to dismiss it quite so summarily as you have done is daft to say the least.

Certain individuals may well be gifted with an eye for composition because a finger was laid on their brow at birth and it was deemed it would be so, but they'll be in a very small and elite minority- if you feel you're one of them then good luck to you, but most people, including artists, need a more structured and traditional approach.

 

[Hammerhead64]

CT makes so much sense in post #44 I'm not sure what I think now.

Is it because I do not apply the various rules (Rule of Thirds incl) at the time I'm taking the shot that most attempts fail or is this how you should take photos ...... no thinking just use your own instincts?

 

[CT]

CT makes so much sense in post #44 I'm not sure what I think now.

Is it because I do not apply the various rules (Rule of Thirds incl) at the time I'm taking the shot that most attempts fail or is this how you should take photos ...... no thinking just use your own instincts?

No-one says you have to use the ROT, but you only have to look at some some of the shots posted on this board from newcomers to see that they don't have the first clue about composing an image other than sticking their subject in the middle of the viewfinder - they don't even think about occasionally turning the camera to portrait orientation.

For these people the ROT is an invaluable guide to getting them to think about composition in their shots, and it's a system which works. When they know the rules, then is the time to start breaking them, but there'll be a lot more thought given to what they're doing and why.

From a purist point of view you should really compose your image in the viewfinder to comply with the ROT, but you can also crop an image which doesn't comply, so that it does, as Russell did when he kicked this thread off. Unfortunately he unwittingly picked poor examples which have caused mucho confusion all round.

Hope that helps?

 

[rh1944]

I was clear on my artistic intent when I took the images. The boats were a variable for me and not the points of interest. The examples may be poor in the respect that people assumed the boats to be the points of interest and the sun's reflection a variable. The Sufhis teach you never to assume; time for some Mullah Nasruddin stories for the unenlightened. I did not offer the images for a critique of the colours, sharpness, etc.

 

[EdinburghGary]

I was clear on my artistic intent when I took the images. The boats were a variable for me and not the points of interest. The examples may be poor in the respect that people assumed the boats to be the points of interest and the sun's reflection a variable. The Sufhis teach you never to assume; time for some Mullah Nasruddin stories for the unenlightened. I did not offer the images for a critique of the colours, sharpness, etc.

Most people will crit images whether offered or not I guess, its just the way if the forum it would seem.

Gary.

 

[eyeofskye]

The examples may be poor in the respect that people assumed the boats to be the points of interest and the sun's reflection a variable.

For many of us this is often the case. We create images that mean something specific to us only to find that other people interpret the work in completely different ways. I have come to expect it and not be disappointed. I'm pretty chuffed though when I get my message across unambiguosly. I must admit I find art experts' analyses of paintings completely impenetrable.

On the images that started the thread I would say that Rule of Thirds might better be renamed Rule of Thumb and that I prefer boats to sail into the picture if possible even if moored.

 

[jerry12953]

Could it be that we (or some of us) respond subconsciously to some aspects of a scene - for example the horizon and sun reflection in these pics - while consciously only noticing the yachts and responding to them?

OK then, perhaps not....


The rule of thirds is a useful component of the composition of an image, but perhaps its actually one of a hierarchy or collection of components. If one or more of the others are used poorly in an image (say in the deleted pics nos 3 and 4) then the rule of thirds can't rescue it.

 

[Dal]

I was clear on my artistic intent when I took the images. The boats were a variable for me and not the points of interest. The examples may be poor in the respect that people assumed the boats to be the points of interest and the sun's reflection a variable. The Sufhis teach you never to assume; time for some Mullah Nasruddin stories for the unenlightened. I did not offer the images for a critique of the colours, sharpness, etc.

I am sorry to do this as I don't normally search through previous posts, but you have implied that everyone viewing your shots should not have assumed what was the subject. Yet in another thread you posted this comment towards the end of your reply...

I appreciate the conditions were less than ideal, but without your intro we wouldn't know that and we'd judge the image as if it were shot on a bright sunny day.

I think it's fairly rude that you can fail to explain yourself correctly in the first post of a thread when attempting to show the ROT and then have the cheek to accuse others of personnally attacking you for pointing this out.

The phrase 'practice what you preach' springs to mind.

This is not a personnal attack and if you feel it is then I apologise and would gladly discuss this further in a private thread.

 

[petebarnes]

 

[Joe T]

Before this goes any further, please mind the doors.