Rule of Thirds - One Scene

Status
Not open for further replies.
rh1944

rh1944

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,971
Edit My Images
Yes
While taking pictures from my balcony in Vieques, I attempted to apply the rule of thirds to the same scene. Here's what I got:

#1 posted today in my 10 to mark 3000 thread

2795986964_13aba42bdb_o.jpg


#2 moved the Sun's relection

2796880174_1439af4eac_o.jpg


That's as close to a practical application of the rule of thirds as I have. I took the images one after the other in less than two minutes.
 
Good reference to see the effects on one picture.
 
I like the 3rd one best, so I'm going to use that rule from now on!! ;)
 
Ooooh their lovely shots Russell, and a good experiment, that you pulled off, think my favs #2 :thumbs: you did great to get so many using the thirds rule
 
Markk said:
Good reference to see the effects on one picture.
Click to expand...

I do that quite a lot when I am undecided on what is the best composition. Sometimes I just don't know and need to look at all four in the computer. Thanks

candlestick said:
I like the 3rd one best, so I'm going to use that rule from now on!! ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks, I try and use it when I can. If I can avoid using a crop then I am happy, so I try and give myself the choice of complete images.

Just Dave said:
Ooooh their lovely shots Russell, and a good experiment, that you pulled off, think my favs #2 :thumbs: you did great to get so many using the thirds rule
Click to expand...

Thanks, I try and do this if the image allows. Often there is no vertical or horizontal point of interest so I shot the two available. I actually put #1 in my 10 to mark 3000 thread today. Which shows you how good my taste is.;)
 
Number three looks like you have some funny colouring going on at the right side and also the middle boat is touching the bottom of the frame and that looks odd.
 
JPS said:
Number three looks like you have some funny colouring going on at the right side and also the middle boat is touching the bottom of the frame and that looks odd.
Click to expand...

I am bemused by your comment. None of what you say has anything to do with the point of the images. The thread is an example of using the rule of thirds on the same scene in four different ways. I certainly do not want to enter into a debate that kidnaps a thread I started.
 
I'm sorry .... i agree with JPS.

I don't see the point of applying the rule of thirds if by avoiding other photographic/presentation rules you destroy the composition of the photo. Rules can be broken and sometimes will work but in the four photos above I don't (IMHO) think this is the case. :shrug:
 
Hammerhead64 said:
I'm sorry .... i agree with JPS.

I don't see the point of applying the rule of thirds if by avoiding other photographic/presentation rules you destroy the composition of the photo. Rules can be broken and sometimes will work but in the four photos above I don't (IMHO) think this is the case. :shrug:
Click to expand...

You have completely lost me. I do not understand either of the sentences in the second paragraph. I am not going to enter into a debate with you.
 
Although the photo's are not very good Sorry RH :P , all he is trying to do is show how rules of the thirds can be applied to a single scene. Yes rules of the thirds can be broken but that is also not what rh is showing :)
 
JPS said:
Number three looks like you have some funny colouring going on at the right side and also the middle boat is touching the bottom of the frame and that looks odd.
Click to expand...

I agree. The rule of thirds is an interesting subject but its been over ridden in this case by the strange colours and the partially cropped boat at the bottom of one photo. Just my two penneth, its a public forum, you should be happy to debate.....
I do like no 1 by the way :)
 
I'm not saying he is breaking the Rule of Thirds. The point I was making is that without other rules being addressed it destroys the composition.

But if RH takes the stance that ... "you are not making the comments I want to hear then I will just ignore you" then the post is pointless. Which is a shame as I think the original points are a good starting block for those who have no or very little idea on the Rule of Thirds and its impact on composition.:shrug:
 
I have to confess, I don't get this. As rule of thirds examples, they all appear off to me - sorry Russell. Horizons in #3 and #4 are fine, but the boats are nowhere near.

I use a thirds grid in PS as a default so that I can check things like this if needs be.

6323019456316223548.jpg


4255428343992588976.jpg


5345815866352954693.jpg


3639255226161216821.jpg
 
Pirate Neilsouth said:
Although the photo's are not very good Sorry RH :P , all he is trying to do is show how rules of the thirds can be applied to a single scene. Yes rules of the thirds can be broken but that is also not what rh is showing :)
Click to expand...

Sorry PN .... got the wrong end of the stick from your post above :$ :coat: .... i am not trying to be confrontational .... as I think the thread is very valid and is potentially a good source of info for those wishing to know more about the Rule of Thirds. I'll cut from posting in thread any more but will watch with interest.

There you go mobilevigin got it back on track ...... and has given the thread some much needed explanation .....
 
I have to agree with mobilevirgin, pics 3 and 4 are valid as they make use of the lower thirds line on which to place the horizon, but I don't see anything in pics 1 and 2 even vaguely complying with the ROT, unless Russell is under the impression that key points (the boats it seems, in this case) should be placed in the boxes rather than at 3rds intersections - a common misconception.
 
You seem to be under the illusion that the rule of thirds only applys to a horizon.

As seen in a thread here-it looks like a noughts and crosses grid and items of importance should be placed within the intersections of the lines.

if the rule is to be broken it should be done so a greater dynamic is chosen like the factor of the horizon whilst not detracting from the general composition of the shot.



Using the correct lens or zoom would allow for the horizon and boat to be in the rule of thirds.

Not trying to flame an arguement just showing that whilst your experiment obviously has some meaning to you-its not a true rule of thirds.
sample_rot_1.jpg


Also there is far too much expanse of water in the op-this pic is about as close and can be got with your composition.
 
Also, on this point. The rule of thirds is not the end of the discussion - its a starting point. What you're really aiming for is The Golden Ratio. Then you know you've cracked it.

I've managed it once or twice. Perhaps.

58827034922326645721.jpg
 
rh1944 said:
I am bemused by your comment. None of what you say has anything to do with the point of the images. The thread is an example of using the rule of thirds on the same scene in four different ways. I certainly do not want to enter into a debate that kidnaps a thread I started.
Click to expand...


But for someone who is always telling other people on their image threads that they need to crop this or that and use the rule of thirds or clone out this that and the other, you really do need to pick better examples of your own photography before posting them on here as a 'mini guide' or a 'how to' session.

As I mentioned in your thread about the people candids, you tend to come across as someone who knows a lot, but doesn't execute that knowledge in your own photos too well.
 
CT said:
I have to agree with mobilevirgin, pics 3 and 4 are valid as they make use of the lower thirds line on which to place the horizon, but I don't see anything in pics 1 and 2 even vaguely complying with the ROT, unless Russell is under the impression that key points (the boats it seems, in this case) should be placed in the boxes rather than at 3rds intersections - a common misconception.
Click to expand...

I was using the sun's reflection as the object I wanted on the thirds, not the boats.
 
if you look at the images the first thing you see is the boats, i think thats why people have missed your point Russell, i dont think there is any malice or thread kidnapping going on, people are simply commenting on the images as they see them

Number three looks like you have some funny colouring going on at the right side and also the middle boat is touching the bottom of the frame and that looks odd.
Click to expand...

a little more expansion on this might help it make a bit more sense i think, it could be taken as a bit too brief
 
rh1944 said:
I was using the sun's reflection as the object I wanted on the thirds, not the boats.
Click to expand...

Ah... I do see where you're coming from then Russell. Unfortunately as you can see from the responses, the significance of the reflections as a key element compared to the boats was lost on most people including me. ;)
 
CT said:
Ah... I do see where you're coming from then Russell. Unfortunately as you can see from the responses, the significance of the reflections as a key element compared to the boats was lost on most people including me. ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks for appreciating what I was trying to do. I think if you read the original post, you'll see that I said moved the Sun in the images. I might have been clearer and said that the reflections and the horizon were the two key elements in the application of the rule. Since I had mentioned this in the intros to the images, I felt it unnecessary.

I appreciate that some of the horizons are off the third. The primary message is that as you play with the positions of the key elements you get very different images. The images were not intended to be a scientific experiment, I took them in a two minute period for illustrative reasons.

While I value your input to the thread, I am convinced as to the motives of others. This is the fourth instance of such behaviour that I have spotted since the guide lines on Etiquette came out. My guess is that those, who were so quick to jump the wrong conclusion and divert the thread, will be less quick to retract.
 
Yes rh but it only works if you retain a good composition of image. A good idea which could have had a bit more thought in execution-thats all.:clap:
 
I'm sure any confusion, Russell, was the fact that the eyes immediately go to the boats and the horizons and people were thinking they where what were meant to be on the intersections.

Even when you said "the sun"... as "the sun" isn't in the picture it wasnt at all clear that you meant the line of brightness on the sea that you wanted in the thirds.

I think its more a case of misunderstandings really.
 
JPS said:
I think mobilvirgin raises some good points with his grid, maybe this thread should be more of a 'how not to implement the rule of thirds rule'.
Click to expand...

JPS said:
But for someone who is always telling other people on their image threads that they need to crop this or that and use the rule of thirds or clone out this that and the other, you really do need to pick better examples of your own photography before posting them on here as a 'mini guide' or a 'how to' session.

As I mentioned in your thread about the people candids, you tend to come across as someone who knows a lot, but doesn't execute that knowledge in your own photos too well.
Click to expand...

Janice said:
I'm sure any confusion, Russell, was the fact that the eyes immediately go to the boats and the horizons and people were thinking they where what were meant to be on the intersections.

Even when you said "the sun"... as "the sun" isn't in the picture it wasnt at all clear that you meant the line of brightness on the sea that you wanted in the thirds.

I think its more a case of misunderstandings really.
Click to expand...

Janice, you may well be right about misunderstandings in general. Both the quotes from JPS are personal abuse. I await a retraction.
 
I must admit, I don't see the point in this exercise.

The rule of thirds is a rule of thumb and not one to be followed religiously. It is however useful and playing around with it can be a worthwhile exercise however you can't forget everything else, compositionally the photo has to work. Putting the sun's reflection or the horizon on a third does nothing to follow the rule of thirds on its own. The subject/point of interest is usually the thing you want to get on one on the intersections of thirds so in this case it would have mdae sense to have the boats on one of those intersections especially as the masts offer an effective vertical marker.

I think this exercise with this view would have beneftied from using different focal legnths and different formats to show the effect of the rule of thirds rather than merely altering the position of the boats/horizon/sun's reflection.

All IMVHO of course though.
 
rh1944 said:
Janice, you may well be right about misunderstandings in general. Both the quotes from JPS are personal abuse. I await a retraction.
Click to expand...


I will not be retracting what I said in post 21 of this thread. I believe the comments I made are correct as far as I am concerned with events. I believe the photos on this thread could have been a lot better to highlight the rule of thirds - and if they had been then this 'misunderstanding' would not have happened.

Read back through all the comments you make about other peoples' work on here and 95% (rough guess) of your comments are 'helpful hints' on how to make the picture/photo better in your opinion. Then look at the photos you post - to be honest (and only my opinion) most do not even follow your own 'helpful hints' as mentioned above and again in post 21.

There was a member on this board last year who claimed to be a top class wedding photographer and she was the bees knees at it, then when she posted her images they were frankly awful - taken with a p&s camera (not ideal for a top wedding 'tog) and she couldn't work out why the other members on here were critical of her work. She thought it was brilliant but the rest of us saw something else in her photos. To be frank - that's what I see with your photos too - someone who is always saying do this and do that, but his own images are below par with the same 'flaws' that you tell other people about on TP.

I don't claim that my images are the best ever, but then I don't get too many comments on mine either :shrug: anyway this is just how I see things, maybe like I mentioned before, you could have picked better photos for this thread and the confusion may never have happened.
 
Just to jump into the thread, It's the boats in these images that instantly capture your eye. I don't think using the sun / reflection etc as the 'change' has any usefull effect to the images imo. I would have been trying to create a shot, using the boats in good areas but still retaining the sun/horizon.

I like what you have tried to show, but I feel the images you have posted don't really demonstrate it particulary.
 
All very interesting!

My first impression was that pic no1 is perfectly composed and has a real feeling of serenity to it. I didn't consciously notice that the horizon and the reflection of the sun were on the 1/3rd lines (more or less). But I felt the yachts were perfectly placed in the frame.

Charlie Waite doesn't like his subject matter to break the horizon, so he'd probably complain about that. But it doesn't concern me.

The introduction in pic no2 of a third yacht on the RHS and the two smaller boats made it less pleasing to me, despite the fact that otherwise the pic is a mirror image of no1, and equally serene.

On reflection (;)) though, the appparently more random arrangement of the yachts brings out the position of the horizon and reflection of the sun more clearly and I now find this pic very pleasing as well.

No 3 doesn't work for me because the sky is too heavy and the middle boat is partly out of frame.

I would delete no 4 immediately.

The Rule of Thirds is useful in composition but it's not necessary to apply it religiously. There is also the question which arises here of what the subject actually is, let alone where to place it. We thought it was the yachts, but the photographer intended it to be the horizon and reflection of the sun.

It all gets very complicated when you start to analyse it.
 
:agree::plusone:
 
I think it was simply a bad choice of images and a lack of clear explanation that has caused the confusion and misunderstanding.

The ROT only works of you place the strongest elements in the scene, on those thirds. In this case, the strongest elements are the boats and the horizon. The reflection of the sun isn't, which is why everyone missed it.
Now it's been explained, the original post does make more sense.
 
jerry12953 said:
All very interesting!

My first impression was that pic no1 is perfectly composed and has a real feeling of serenity to it. I didn't consciously notice that the horizon and the reflection of the sun were on the 1/3rd lines (more or less). But I felt the yachts were perfectly placed in the frame. Charlie Waite doesn't like his subject matter to break the horizon, so he'd probably complain about that. But it doesn't concern me.
The introduction in pic no2 of a third yacht on the RHS and the two smaller boats made it less pleasing to me, despite the fact that otherwise the pic is a mirror image of no1, and equally serene. On reflection (;)) though, the appparently more random arrangement of the yachts brings out the positioof the horizon and reflection of the sun more clearly and I now find this pic very pleasing as well.

No 3 doesn't work for me because the sky is too heavy and the middle boat is partly out of frame. I would delete no 4 immediately.

The Rule of Thirds is useful in composition but it's not necessary to apply it religiously. There is also the question which arises here of what the subject actually is, let alone where to place it. We thought it was the yachts, but the photographer intended it to be the horizon and reflection of the sun. It all gets very complicated when you start to analyse it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for re-assessing the images in light of my intent. I have removed images #3 and #4 as I agree with your assessment of them.

EdinburghGary said:
For what its worth, I like image 01. Russ, you have an uncanny ability at starting great forum debates :D Not passing judgement, just an observation :)

Gary.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the comment. I'd like to take the credit for starting the debate, but I didn't. I walked away from it.
 
Less sea, more sky.

Why?

The clouds seems more interesting in the first pic than the quiet sea. Its sunset so the colours are all there, why not capture it?
 
I thought I had an understanding of the rule of thirds and I must admit I don't often put it into practice when looking through the view finder. However, this thread has confused me on what is to be achieved by using the rule of thirds. I wish I hadn't read it as I think I now understand less about the rule of thirds than I did before.
 
rh1944 said:
You have completely lost me. I do not understand either of the sentences in the second paragraph. I am not going to enter into a debate with you.
Click to expand...

He means some rules are meant to be broken, you don't need to apply the rules of 3rds in every given situations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top