blackest Loc: Ireland

Grids are interesting and i decided to make some based on a 60:30 triangle. when i established my pattern i found it was 4:3 over all and it could easily be repeated to 16:9 I had seen an 'analysis' applied to a scene from blade runner the aspect ratio is wider than 16:9 and i stretched it out to fit the frame. i include the stretched grid over the scene along with the designs applied by other people. I leave it to the viewer as to which is legitimate... probably none.

On the other hand what makes the rule of thirds so special? If you compose by the rule of thirds and crop equally round the edges your focal points are no longer on the thirds points and likely nothing of value was lost... It still would be composed on the diagonals.

composition on grids

(Download)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I would say the rule of thirds points to one possibility that usually works. I've never used it while shooting but I have used it in PP when I just couldn't decide how to compose.

I think you're right in suggesting that the more complicated composition possibilities very often have questionable value and such grids can be made to look relevant in all sorts of situations. But as possibilities they often have something of merit, and if we're aware of those possibilities we are more likely to be looking out for them and notice them as a result.

For that to be true about the more complicated relationships we need the grids to guide us to those possibilities. My guess is that most of us aren't going to be able to spot complex compositional relationships without the assistance of a grid.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I think one relevant point is that when objects line up to create virtual lines, the value of those lines depends on where they lead the viewer's attention and whether it's appropriate or not. Whether those virtual lines coincide with the lines of the grids is, I suspect, very much a secondary issue. A well-placed and appropriate virtual leading line will be a strong compositional element regardless of what grid it coincides with, and to a lesser extent the same is true of non-leading virtual lines (i.e. lines that simply provide structure and order to the composition).

Since we have limited abilities when it comes to noticing - and even remembering - the various composition possibilities, I would say there's something to be said for concentrating on the simple, effective, easily remembered and easily noticed possibilities. Virtual lines and virtual shapes are two such possibilities. Now THAT's something that's condensed enough and simple enough for just about anybody to take away from a thread like this.

blackest Loc: Ireland

If we look into the work of artists, painting drawing and design, there is a lot of use of grids or armatures. Even two columns of text on a page side by side we expect the lines to line up across the 2 columns.

I have a great little program called affinity designer and it constantly looks for alignment if i have two photos say on a page affinity designer will highlight possible relationships e.g aligning the top bottom or centre of the one i'm moving with the existing photo if the first photo is 50 pixels from the left of the page dragging the second image to around 50px of the first images right edge will prompt an alignment mark to place the 2nd photos left edge 50px from the first. It constantly looks for relationships between objects on the page, I really like this program.

https://www.artistsnetwork.com/art-mediums/oil-painting/pech-harmonic-armature/

I will quote from this page:

The Greek mathematician Pythagoras (ca 570–ca 490 BC) discovered a relationship between numbers (specifically, proportions) and sensory perceptions that are pleasing to our ears and our eyes. In a word, we respond positively to intervals of one third, one quarter, one half, two thirds and three quarters. The harmonic armature is one of several compositional devices based on mathematic or geometric principles, such as the golden mean and root rectangles.



and here is the same painting with the harmonic grid.


In this case we can be sure that this use of the grid was deliberate as it's the artist who created the page.

here is another

and the grid imposed


I think if we had photographed either of these paintings we would classify them as keepers.

Here lies the problem for photographers, it is pretty difficult to get the world to cooperate with our vision. We probably could arrange a still life to fit an armature. It's not going to be possible to move mountains to conform, although maybe with photoshop we can adjust and place elements.

https://www.artistsnetwork.com/art-techniques/fibonacci-sequence/?lid=atvbsp

Leonardo of Pisa, known as Fibonacci, was a 13th-century scholar who created the series of numbers given his name. The ratio created by any number in Fibonacci Sequence to the next larger number approximates a proportion also known as the divine proportion or the golden section. The divine proportion is a ratio approximately 1:1.6. As a rectangle, it would be the ratio of height to length.

Fibonacci found that a sequence of numbers, if carried on indefinitely, would approach this same ratio and that it would become more exact the further one carried the sequence. As the sequence progresses, each new number is the sum of the previous two numbers. Thus, the sequence is 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, etc.

Applying this sequence to geometry and the area of a rectangle, start with a square of any size and call it #1. Using a grid based upon this unit, start building. Add an equal square next to #1 (1+1). This square is "1" unit, too.

Now combine these two squares to create the sides and size of the next square. The next square’s side is equal to 1+1 or "2." Adding the length of "2" with the previous square "1." The next square’s side equals 3.



As this sequence increases in size, the proportion of the rectangle becomes closer or more refined to equal the ratio of "golden section." In nature, the growth of plants and animals is very similar. Think of seeds on a pine cone, sunflower or the familiar and exotic nautilus shell.


This is useful life has a pattern for growth! I can imagine how amazing it must have felt to see this design in living things, this isn't random, no wonder we created gods. Nature has an order, and we can seek it out.

It's kind of hard to see order as we tend to be surrounded by chaos but if we take music as an example, there is an order and we are very aware of a bum note. I think we also tend to be aware of the bum note visually when we try to organise what we see.

So it's not so much rules but rhythm feelings and order. I think we could have fun with that.

blackest Loc: Ireland

I recently found this PDF file it may be of interest.

https://ia802706.us.archive.org/1/items/pictorialcomposi00pooruoft/pictorialcomposi00pooruoft.pdf

DJphoto Loc: SF Bay Area

Interesting information, thanks for posting. I'm not an artist, I'm an engineer and the artistic part of photography is not really natural to me. I am more of the "I know what I like when I see it" kind of photographer and the "art part" is not in my formal thought process when I take a photo. I try to get the composition "correct" and often take a few shots of a scene to give me the chance to get a good one. Now that I have been post-processing in Lightroom for a couple of months, I'm trying to improve the artistry part of my photos.

blackest Loc: Ireland

Art is a foreign field to me also, but looking into it, Art could be considered design. Which can kind of relate to engineering. A well engineered design is a beautiful thing.

limited angles, reflection of other elements applying some order and balance. It's certainly not easy for a photographer to create an order in a scene. For an artist they get to place things where they want them to appear. We get taught the rule of thirds but it's a long way from being the only way to order an image.

If you have something to place on 1/3rd then you really need something to balance on the other third, otherwise isn't it just dead space?

I think an engineer is a designer too in many cases, so learning the terms and devices of the field an engineer can produce good art too.

DJphoto Loc: SF Bay Area

Interesting thoughts. I'm an aerospace engineer, and there are many aircraft designs that "just look right" and they usually are good performers too. Maybe I didn't fully consider design as art, though it certainly is a form of art, just not in the classical sense of art? One of my interests is aerodynamics and the flow around a well shaped aircraft produces less drag and is usually very pleasing to the eye.

blackest Loc: Ireland

One question we don't really ask when we look at a painting or drawing is why? Why did the artist choose to place the elements where he or she did? It has to be a choice, at least if its not jackson pollock, although he wasn't entirely random either. There is a design that the artist creates.

As photographers we surely try to compose and design our photos ...

R.G. Loc: Scotland

That's one of the reasons why it's a good idea to keep the composition tactics simple. If we had to wait for specific placements and positional relationships between objects within a scene it would be too restrictive. Getting things to line up with our line of sight or with the corners of the frame is much easier and therefore far less restrictive. And leading lines, channels, natural framing etc are common enough to be realistic propositions for composition elements. I think that's what the crux of the matter is - our tactics have to be practical and realistic.



That raises an interesting point about negative space. When used appropriately, negative space can be a powerful composition element. But in order to use it appropriately we have to understand the difference between negative space and dead space. In a similar vein we have to understand the difference between inappropriate imbalance and dynamic imbalance. Imbalance and empty space can both be right or wrong depending on how they're used. Trying to define or describe those rights and wrongs would be tricky to say the least - it's a case of knowing it when you see it.

We've already had threads discussing negative space, balance and other aspects of composition, but when we discuss them with specific questions in mind it increases our chances of producing useful insights. For example, instead of having a general discussion about negative space we could address the question "When is empty space dead space and when does it act as a more positive composition element (as in 'negative' space)?"