fthomas Loc: Philippines

In the past much of what I shot both hand held and on a tripod was Vertical. There are a number of reasons for that, but one of the prime ones was the use of the image for articles or advertising in print. Another reason was that the cost of film and processing lent itself towards trying to be a little bit conservative. Also, the side to side ratio of 35 mm does not produce a perfect 5x7, 8x10 ....... etc.

As I re-evaluate framing and trying to be more analytical of my compositions and my involvement here I would like to hear what some of you think about Horizontal vs. Vertical. I am not an adherent to the "Rule of Thirds", but subscribe to "The Golden Mean" - which has a ration of 1:1.61803398874989 or Pi. That in and of itself could be a whole other topic. That is what I aspire to use though I don't always quite get what I want.

To expound a bit on the Golden Mean, it has been used by classical artists for centuries. It is symmetry found in nature thus lends itself to being attractive to us in a natural way.

Back to Vertical vs. Horizontal. What are your thoughts?

architect Loc: Chattanooga

The guideline (and it is only a guide) called the Rule of Thirds (ROT) is a simplification of the Golden Mean, and is close enough for use as a guideline. If you are doing a design using classical architectural design principles, you might want to be more precise. But the ROT is plenty good enough for photography, and I can guarantee that the precise geometrical deviation will not be noticed by anyone except the most anal(litical) people.

As for vertical versus horizontal, be aware that most websites displaying images are biased for the horizontal (check your computer screen aspect ratio). So vertical formats are at somewhat of a disadvantage in terms of presentation size. A case where size does matter.

Golden Mean

ishuttertothink Loc: Washington State

I find that it mostly depends on the subject that I am shooting. Tall things (trees, people, buildings, etc), or single items, I will shoot horizontally, if I want to get more of the surrounding area, or a wider view, I shoot vertically. Totally depends on the subject.

architect Loc: Chattanooga

I agree. Especially if you are "grab" shooting spontaneously. I shoot horizontally and crop later in post processing.

Carioca

Same here.

forbescat

Hmmm, I think that is backwards...

Carioca

lol - I missed it, too.

forbescat

You'll have to forgive me for being anal - it's just that I see words as pictures. The word horizontally brings up a picture of a horizon. It drives my husband crazy because, of course, I hear "literally" and often miss his subtle humor.

fthomas Loc: Philippines

I have to admit to being a bit anal about it. I truly am working very hard for it become a subconscience thing. I don't actually think about it ad I should, but will often find myself putting the main subject on a side or in the top third portion of the frame either vertical or horizontal.

fthomas Loc: Philippines

Thinking about your comments and also have to agree with the format of our computers. A new and growing market if one is inclinec to sell images for stock.

I think your thoughts on The Golden Means could expounded on and would we an excellent sticky always at the top for all to read.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

BRAIN DYNAMICS: Forbescat, No it was not backwards, ishuttertothink said that they shoot horizontal for trees. As stated is correct; for trees you lay down so that as you hold the camera the long side is parallel to the line of the trees. I thought it to be clear as did forbescat who also "photothinks." we dyslectics, are clearly more likely to be natural born photographers! Forbescat opened up a world of picture reading to me since I often think as a picture and then find the words next. (for things like sports car, the image appears in my brain first, then the word) "Visual Learners Convert Words To Pictures" from Google-ng "see words as pictures"... SERIOUSLY, BRAIN DYNAMICS HAS A LOT TO DO WITH GOOD PHOTOGRAPHY. Some people follow rules; some just do with automaticity (next gen cameras will have an automatic 1/3 composition button!! Surly!) Please excuse the ramblings, but it fun, but it is also serious analysis. Thank you forbescat for the brainthink comment. :?: :idea: :shock:
====================
FOR WEDDINGS: Back to vertical vs horizontal. I have promised my self that the next wedding I shoot will be HORIZONTAL ONLY. Why? Well, 1)surroundings are important to the Bride,.. uncle Joe, aunt Sally should be included in photos!! Their choice, but typical for "shoot my wedding candid" young people. 2) I give them a contact sheet (vertical photos in contact sheets lose heads!) so they can choose sequence and which shots to use in the "slide show" for the 52" TV. Horizontal fills the screen, whereas vertical has blank color at the sides. 3) Altho camera to computer corrects the orientation, I use a card reader, so I have to manually rotate each, or break out and batch rotate. Sometimes I am so practical, it is disgusting. :twisted:
=====================
FOR FUN: For my personal stuff, I usually stand upright and take camera-vertical for a full bod portrait of a tree or person... dogs or people on all fours,, camera-horizontal. :lol:

penguinpete

As long as we are being anal about things, the Golden Mean/Golden Ratio/divine proportion, etc., is not Pi, it is phi. As Dan Brown had one of his characters say in "The Da Vinci Code", phi is one "H" of a lot cooler than Pi.

-- Pete

Blueduck Loc: Maryland

Uhh, vertical is up and down, ie trees people etc, horizontal (think horizon) is side to side, landscapes etc.

forbescat

I also have to see a word in order to spell it. Currently I am very good at spelling but have noticed that as I age, I sometimes lose that picture for a particular word.

ishuttertothink Loc: Washington State

I think you are right!! So, it's the opposite of what I just said :-)