Joe Blow

First, you don't give any reason why anyone should read the article. Generally, that involves a synopsis. Just a link with no description means its a waste of time.

Second, locking into anything is never recommended by any teacher or knowledgeable person.

Third, the suggestion that the Rule of Thirds is wrong is, well, just wrong. I use it often and effectively. One example is in my softball pictures. A base runner running the bases on the right third of the shot looking at the 2/3. It give her running a sense of direction, purpose, and effort. It is much more effective than a close up of the runner in 2x3 format.

Fourth, I also use the Rule of Halves. The photo I'm thinking of has a close up of our daughter at bat, just her head, shoulders and hands holding the bat. She is looking out over the blank half toward the pitcher. The extra space accents her "showdown stare". It is much more effective than a square crop of just her.

No rule is a law. But they do give emotion and context when properly used. They can draw attention to the whole. And no rule of composition will work in most, let alone every situation. The key is to knowing why a composition rule works and why it doesn't.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

My take on the Rule of Thirds is that it is an approximation to the Golden or Devine Section which is based on one of Euclid's propositions. The ratio is 1.618... The inverse is 0.618... So R -1 = 1/R. Many natural objects display this ratio. One is the sunflower seed pockets formed by two curved sets of swirls: one left-handed the other right-handed - in the mature flower-head the number of swirls in each stand in the Devine Ratio. There are whole books written about natural occurances of this ratio. But the question as to composing picture elements per any ratio is debatable.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

The 10 myths of why the Rule of Thirds should die. Hmmm.
Some people to get attention in the new world of getting attention in social networking to more forward.
Subtracting one approach to composition and hoping it dies seems to be ridiculous.

Compromise is looking at many design composition approaches and using the one you want at the time.
Just going with your instinct and looking through the viewfinder or the LED helps to create your own creativity.

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

RoT never really made sense to me. The Golden Spiral makes a lot of sense and I use it as a guide when framing/cropping an image.

To name just two things that bother me...one is when a judge's only negative comment about an image is that the subject is not RoT's; the second is similar, when the maker is showing soural symmetry and the comment is that center of the subject is in the center if the frame and not RoT.
I ask myself if those judges are really trying to see what maker is trying to say/show in that image?

hassighedgehog Loc: Corona, CA

Did not listen to the whole thing when it was obvious the video is a reaction to discovering the rule of thirds is not the be all and end all of design. It is one tool of many, not the only one. He is setting up a straw horse to be knocked down because it is not universal. Then he proceeds to bring out some of the other tools. Not really new.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Clickbait. Saying something sensational draws click throughs on YouTube. And if you are going to try to make money as a “pro” on YT, you really should learn fourth grade spelling and grammar.

Andy