Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Maybe more "Golden Ratio".

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

At the end of the day, what is the real, actual, and practical function of composition in photography? What is the use of all these theories, rules, diagrams, templates, or what great professors or iconic photographers preach- this, that or the other thing to do or not to do or never to do?

It's easy to get hung up and drown in a sea of technobabble.

The big deal in using certain compositional techniques to lead the viewers' eyes to the motif of your images and tell the stories you want to tell without distraction. For me, an image is well composed whe you can not add or subtract any element without spoiling the effect and story you want to express.

Place in the frame is half the battle. Actually, total composition entails effective application of colour or tone, useof negative space, lighting direction, rendition of text and muc, and much more.

Basically, you want to place the motif or main subject or concept of the image in the strongest place in the frame.

When you purposely break a so-called rule, you add another element or idea to your image. Perhaps you want express chaos or have the viewers' eyes travel around the frame and fine other designs or sub- motifs.

Burkley Loc: Park City

Pictures are meant to elicit emotion, composition is the tool. If beauty and balance or order are the desired effect, the rule of thirds is an exceptional foundation for the composition. If creating tension or disharmony is desired, breaking the rule of thirds is often required. Sometimes the subject matter can be so disturbing, like battle field shots, using the rule of thirds adds its own tension creating a photographic irony between carnage and balance.

Auschwitz Electric Fence

User ID

They all look like perhaps PSA, or NYIP, lessons. If you dont join then their stuff doesnt apply to you. No hey problemo ! Everything is optional ... see below:

Auschwitz as currently posted just above


Simulated 1940s vintage German photo

Burkley Loc: Park City

Also, some food for thought. The rule of thirds makes perfect sense as a point of physiology. I treat people with balance disorders: vertigo and imbalance. How we use our eyes to look at the world is hard wired. About 1 /4 of our brain, the cerebellum, has no other function but to integrate information from our ear, eyes and from the tug of gravity on our body so that we can stay upright and function normally in space. Significant amounts of our brain besides the cerebellum are also dedicated to our balance system. Our perception of the horizon is a major part of our balance system. We naturally divide the horizon roughly into thirds, foreground, mid ground and distant. The rule of thirds is part of the hard wired balance system that allows us to walk upright, as well as part of the balance system for most vertebrates.

For people with balance problems, if you take that visual perspective away, such as in the dark or going from Sun to shade or when entering a long hallway, the sense of imbalance can be overwhelming. As upright animals, the prime intent of our eye movement is to provide information to our balance system so that we can maintain our upright position, walk, track objects, and rapidly perceive danger requiring us to move quickly. Given that we are hard wired to look at the world in thirds, the rule of thirds in photography is not surprising.

User ID

Thaz all built into the AI in my camera.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

One of the things that's conducive to vitriol is when somebody suggests that there is an element of absoluteness in what they're suggesting. There's a place for absoluteness in things like our legal system and the world of science, but as you say, photography is an art, which means that absolutes are much thinner on the ground. And as with any art art, adherence to absolutes can be counter-productive.

The trouble is, people who like to think in terms of absolutes tend to be entrenched in their opinions and probably have a tendency to see their opinions as facts. That's when the vitriol is likely to start flowing.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Things (composition) done "this way" are usually more appealing to "most" people.
Whether one want to religiously follow the "guidance" or not, is up to the individual.
Their choice.
Simple.

It's interesting that so many people get so adamant about their opinion of whether to follow/not follow (utilize/not utilize) the guidlines (rules).

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

I personally don't see them as "rules", just useful guidelines. When following them, it's more easy to get a good composition... The zillion of people taking snapshots with phones, don't know a thing about them and create 99.999% of... crappy snapshots (just look Instagram)

By knowing the composition rules and other techniques, a photographer can turn snapshot taking in a craft or art.

The same happens to carpentry, blacksmithing, and other trades/crafts/arts.

autofocus Loc: North Central Connecticut

Let me start by saying kudos for a terrific post and subject, and one that many can benefit by. As for my thoughts on the subject I believe in the rules or guidelines, and use and adherence to them does, and will make a difference in one's work. And there's nothing new about them having been used and developed by the masters over the centuries, and who am I to say "they should be broken." I think we have three schools of shooters to consider, and maybe some would fit into all three categories of them. One, you have the photographer who wants to create art in their work, and the rules mean a lot to those folks. Then you have the casual shooter who's mostly interested in some memory shots of the family, or the places they visited. And maybe for those folks a tree branch "growing" out of their granddaughter's head is less of a problem, it's all about capturing that moment and having it to cling to. And, lastly, the photojournalistic photographer where the photo is all about impact, and the rules are often not even considered. I think a good example of that would be that classic Vietnam era photo of that little Vietnamese girl running and crying with much of her clothing burned off from napalm. I'd doubt if that photographer was too concerned about the rules when he shot that. But, the impact will be long remembered.
The rules of design and composition are just a part of it, but a good part, IMO. You might add some subsets about some of the guidelines about the types and styles of lighting used, portrait do's and don'ts like where to crop, and where not to crop, or just where and how to place the hands in a portrait. Books with full chapters are written about these things. But, when it comes to the category one folks mentioned above all of these things become important, and can be a wonderful study. And it's all what makes photography the interesting subject that it is. And in this shot below I knowingly broke a few of the rules. :)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The Rules exist whether you follow them or not.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Burkley Loc: Park City

The famous shot of Phan Thị Kim Phúc, the napalm girl, roughly obeys the rule of 3rds. The row of soldiers in the background, the boy to the left is in the foreground and the girl and the other children in the mid ground. The kid to the left, the girl and a soldier and the kids to the right and 2 soldiers create the vertical thirds.

autofocus Loc: North Central Connecticut

not really, you can justify it anyway you want but it's obvious the little girl is the primary subject and she's basically in the middle. You can't take any part of a picture that's not the subject and say it complies to the rules

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

I doubt more than a small handful of Hoggers are NOT aware of the rule of thirds and each of those will learn about it in short order if they stick around more than a day or two. Not ONE of the aware thinks that rule is written in stone and can never be broken.

I'm guessing it's one of the most agreed upon subjects "debated" here on the Hog.

Personally, when I first learned of that rule, I started using it, and felt my compositions improved. Soon after I began noticing anytime that rule was strictly imposed. It started to stick out like a sore thumb on many pictures. I still notice it when it's blatantly obvious and it's rather distracting if not downright annoying, even if it might be the best option. I still consider it in many of my pics, but often alter it a little just because I can and don't wish to annoy myself too much🤷‍♂️