At the risk of causing another firestorm...
Dec 15, 2011 13:39:48 #
I see too many time folks invoking the 'rule of third' and imply that breaking it is a cardinal sin punishable by death or canning. Then you have the focusing, the white balance and whatever else you look at as 'quasi religious rules'.
Folks the rule of third is a guideline for composition used by folks who do not know how to compose an image. It was created for the 24x36 camera (2*12)(3*12). 2*3 or 2/3 so rule of third. It is a crappy easy guideline that kills your creativity. I was lucky to learn on a view camera 13x18 so I was never bothered by this so-called-rule.
Your composition does not depend on a set of rules but on what you try to show. As long as you use rules you kill your creativity. Killing your own talent is not a problem, after all, it is yours to do what you wish but trying to have other folks conform to your narrow point of view is doing them a gross disservice.
If you have to comment on C&C first check if the picture means something to you. If it does not, walk away. If it does and something troubles you, share that doubt because you are probably offering a pertinent advice or asking the right question. If your C&C consist of: Not in focus, not whatever, you really have nothing to say.
The person who posted the picture is asking for something else than the obvious (other than 'oooh' and 'aaah soooo cuuute', hopefully). I don't do fuzzy kitten.
Folks the rule of third is a guideline for composition used by folks who do not know how to compose an image. It was created for the 24x36 camera (2*12)(3*12). 2*3 or 2/3 so rule of third. It is a crappy easy guideline that kills your creativity. I was lucky to learn on a view camera 13x18 so I was never bothered by this so-called-rule.
Your composition does not depend on a set of rules but on what you try to show. As long as you use rules you kill your creativity. Killing your own talent is not a problem, after all, it is yours to do what you wish but trying to have other folks conform to your narrow point of view is doing them a gross disservice.
If you have to comment on C&C first check if the picture means something to you. If it does not, walk away. If it does and something troubles you, share that doubt because you are probably offering a pertinent advice or asking the right question. If your C&C consist of: Not in focus, not whatever, you really have nothing to say.
The person who posted the picture is asking for something else than the obvious (other than 'oooh' and 'aaah soooo cuuute', hopefully). I don't do fuzzy kitten.
Dec 15, 2011 13:43:30 #
Dec 15, 2011 13:58:26 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
[quote=English_Wolf]Folks the rule of third is a guideline for composition used by folks who do not know how to compose an image. It was created for the 24x36 camera (2*12)(3*12). 2*3 or 2/3 so rule of third.
I think you'll find it goes back WAY before 35mm and has been invoked for many formats.
From http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps%20quality%20composition%20i.html
"The 'rules of composition' are woolly beyond belief -- distrust anyone who tries to impose them rigidly -- and many of the best pictures make no use of them whatsoever. Often, too, they are imposed after the event: you shoot what looks right in the viewfinder, or on the ground glass, and only notice afterwards that it fits the 'rules'.
If a picture doesn't work, it doesn't work, regardless of whether it obeys or disobeys any or all of the so-called rules, but overall they are fractionally more useful than not. Sometimes a picture may be improved by adhering more closely to the 'rules', and sometimes it won't make a blind bit of difference; but at least the 'rules' are a collection of (rather blunt) tools for analysis, and they help you to think about how and why a picture succeeds or fails.
If you end up thinking, "Yes, if I'd done that, it would have been better," then it doesn't matter what 'that' was. It might be part of the 'rules', but it might also be a question of the decisive moment, or colour balance, or the wrong time of day, or almost anything. The important thing is thinking about it."
I'd add that if you can't see any other way to compose a picture, the Thirds are often an excellent starting point, because you'll compose 'on the thirds'; think 'nah, works better like this'; and shoot something that doesn't fit the Thirds at all, or that can only be forced into it via some quite sloppy 'Well, ALMOST on the thirds...'
Cheers,
R.
I think you'll find it goes back WAY before 35mm and has been invoked for many formats.
From http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps%20quality%20composition%20i.html
"The 'rules of composition' are woolly beyond belief -- distrust anyone who tries to impose them rigidly -- and many of the best pictures make no use of them whatsoever. Often, too, they are imposed after the event: you shoot what looks right in the viewfinder, or on the ground glass, and only notice afterwards that it fits the 'rules'.
If a picture doesn't work, it doesn't work, regardless of whether it obeys or disobeys any or all of the so-called rules, but overall they are fractionally more useful than not. Sometimes a picture may be improved by adhering more closely to the 'rules', and sometimes it won't make a blind bit of difference; but at least the 'rules' are a collection of (rather blunt) tools for analysis, and they help you to think about how and why a picture succeeds or fails.
If you end up thinking, "Yes, if I'd done that, it would have been better," then it doesn't matter what 'that' was. It might be part of the 'rules', but it might also be a question of the decisive moment, or colour balance, or the wrong time of day, or almost anything. The important thing is thinking about it."
I'd add that if you can't see any other way to compose a picture, the Thirds are often an excellent starting point, because you'll compose 'on the thirds'; think 'nah, works better like this'; and shoot something that doesn't fit the Thirds at all, or that can only be forced into it via some quite sloppy 'Well, ALMOST on the thirds...'
Cheers,
R.
Dec 15, 2011 14:11:36 #
I do not wish to contradict you as this is not my goal... This 'rule' is new and if I related to 24*36 it is because this the format that prompted the establishment of this 'thing'. When I apprenticed in 1979/80 it did not exist many other things did and I had to learn them like it was a religion. Once I knew them (or thought I knew them) my master said, "Ok, NOW FORGET ALL OF IT and be yourself". That was also the day when it told me: "You are fired".
It applies to all format? I kind of doubt it, try shooting 6*6 with it... What is true thought and justly emphasized is that dead center rarely works BUT as the page sent also mention it is NOT a solution for everything.
It applies to all format? I kind of doubt it, try shooting 6*6 with it... What is true thought and justly emphasized is that dead center rarely works BUT as the page sent also mention it is NOT a solution for everything.
Dec 15, 2011 14:17:43 #
Pepper
Loc: Planet Earth Country USA
Actually Rembrandt talked about the rule of thirds. I don't know that he applied it but he mentions it.
Dec 15, 2011 14:20:51 #
Pepper wrote:
:shock: Actually Rembrandt talked about the rule of thirds. I don't know that he applied it but he mentions it.
No idea about painting but since this is about visual art, I would take your word for it. :-D :thumbup:
Just remember this is about imposing 'rules' on others I am questioning, not only the rule of third.
Dec 15, 2011 14:42:50 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
English_Wolf wrote:
I do not wish to contradict you as this is not my ... (show quote)
No, it's not a new rule. I personally heard it long before 1979/80, and a quick glance at my 1956 Focal Encyclopedia, shows a 'rule of thirds' drawing on page 250. Page 80 of 'Pictorial Composition in Photography (Arthur Hammomd, ARPS, Chapman and Hall, London, 1932) has a very similar diagram -- LONG before Leicas were taken seriously.
In other words, you'd never heard of it. So?
And, as I said, it's not a universal panacea. That is not the same thing as saying it's always and forever useless (which is a matter of opinion) or that it's new and applies only to 35mm (which is just plain wrong).
Cheers,
R.
Dec 15, 2011 14:43:50 #
Dec 15, 2011 14:44:01 #
Actually, the ancient Greeks wrote of the "Rule of Thirds" in thier art composition teachings. So it wasnt invented for any camera. Can it be overused?....YES! Does it's use make images more appealing?....SOMETIMES/OFTEN. Is it a rule?....NO, its a tool to be used when appropriate to the situation.
There have been several threads here stating exactly that...Ive never seen anyone condemn a photographer for not using it, but they have suggested it when the subject has been sitting in the middle of the frame or worse, clipped off at one of the borders.
There have been several threads here stating exactly that...Ive never seen anyone condemn a photographer for not using it, but they have suggested it when the subject has been sitting in the middle of the frame or worse, clipped off at one of the borders.
Dec 15, 2011 14:58:48 #
rocco_7155 wrote:
I have recently seen one. It set me off. Calling someone dumb for not using it in what were symmetric shots touched a nerve. (The thread was not recent but it made me realize that I saw this in C&C way too often)... THEN (damn it to hell) I started putting my thinking hat on... (Not as wide as yours thought! (j/k)) I saw the rest which can be resumed to: 'Conform or else' and that goes for everything!!! Ive never seen anyone condemn a photographer for not using it, but they have suggested it when the subject has been sitting in the middle of the frame or worse, clipped off at one of the borders.
Since I am not one to follow a crowd... You can guess where this is going! :shock: :mrgreen: :evil: :-D :-D :-D
Dec 15, 2011 15:14:42 #
I like the idea of thinking of the RULE of thirds as the TOOL of thirds....Rocco...thanks again!
Dec 15, 2011 15:22:12 #
rivernan wrote:
I like the idea of thinking of the RULE of thirds as the TOOL of thirds....Rocco...thanks again!
Well as you know....There is no shortage of "TOOLS" around here....(Did you expect me to resist that setup? Didnt think so!) :twisted:
Dec 15, 2011 15:22:19 #
rivernan wrote:
I like the idea of thinking of the RULE of thirds as the TOOL of thirds....Rocco...thanks again!
If I may play a bit with the letters in "rule of thirds" to make it " turd of rules" That may be a 1/3 right or 2/3 wrong or spot on.
Dec 15, 2011 15:25:28 #
English_Wolf wrote:
quote=rocco_7155 Ive never seen anyone condemn a ... (show quote)
English Wolf....I absolutely applaud you trying to get the lemmings to avoid jumping. I do think that some need such basic help that stating a few "rules" is necessary. They can learn to think outside the box after they learn to think AT ALL.
While I may bristle at your posts occasionally...they ALWAYS make me rethink my position and views.
Dec 15, 2011 15:40:02 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.