Rule of Thirds? How come?

d.bradley · 12-11-2007, 10:20 PM

Say, do you think that the rule of thirds is often agreeable in photographic viewing because of our brain's heightened sensitivity to facial expressions? Perhaps because we are drawn to the eyes, which are about a third of the way down a person's face, and the mouth, which is about a third the way up from the bottom?

Food for thought.

stewart_photo · 12-11-2007, 11:30 PM

Not exactly sure where it came from, but agree with the premise. In my opinion, scenic images look better with the horizon placed about a third from the bottom to emphasize the sky or a third from the top to emphasize the Earth (water or land). At the same time, images look better with people placed a third from either side generally facing towards the center (space on the opposite side for the subject to move into or look into). I guess that concept simply follows into other photo situations as well.

stewart

Bassism · 12-11-2007, 11:49 PM

Whatever the reasoning, people have found the rule of thirds to be beautiful since antiquity.

The Greeks loved to use the golden ratio in their art and architecture, which is almost (though admittedly not quite) equal to the rule of thirds.

Finn · 12-12-2007, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by Bassism

Whatever the reasoning, people have found the rule of thirds to be beautiful since antiquity.

The Greeks loved to use the golden ratio in their art and architecture, which is almost (though admittedly not quite) equal to the rule of thirds.

I think that's more like it. "Rule of thirds" is a lot easier to remember than "Rule of 1:1.618..."

Buddha Jones · 12-12-2007, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by d.bradley

Perhaps because we are drawn to the eyes, which are about a third of the way down a person's face, and the mouth, which is about a third the way up from the bottom?

Food for thought.

<--- Former art student.

Actually, that is not true, when you draw a face, the eyes are actually dead center and everything kinda works its way down from there like in this drawing.

m8o · 12-12-2007, 09:06 AM

...what people have said already, which I read from places on the 'net. Like these that do a great and concise job on the subject:

Photography Techniques - THE GOLDEN MEAN
Photography Techniques - RULE OF THE THIRDS

It's worth the two minutes to read.

d.bradley · 12-12-2007, 10:30 AM

Buddha, entertain me if you will, but in terms of our perception and communicative body language, let's say we are more sensitive to the face from mid forehead, where our eyebrows and forehead communicate to the chin... not so much the head as a whole:

Taking only the face into account, the eye and mouth idea it's not too far off the rule of thirds, as in this example:

Yes there is math involved, but humans have developed such a subconscious ability to read even the most subtle of facial expressions, there must be some connection between artistic perception and this highly advanced visual acuity.

Tom M · 12-12-2007, 11:04 AM

Buddha - that's some talent ya got there!

As far as the ROT for landscape - it works, it makes sense HOWEVER, some of my favorite landscape images to look at are early paintings that do not use the rule of thirds, many times the horizon is centered. I can think of a few images where a deer is centered, and the horizon disapears behind it, also centered.

I tend to shoot using the ROT but it's no hard rule for me.

simonkit · 12-12-2007, 11:58 AM

The ROT is a great starting point & it does work without doubt. However some of the best shots I've seen have completely ignored it !!

Simon

craftsmansky · 12-12-2007, 12:11 PM

its not a rule. more like a guidline (now why do i want to say ARGGG after that?)

the Rule of thirds only applies at my families house at thanksgiving. if you reach for thirds, you might pull back with a stump.....

along with the ROT, diagonals also play a part in good composition, leading the eye to important points or areas.

Ed in GA · 12-12-2007, 12:24 PM

The instructor at a course I recently attended had this to say about the rule of thirds.

"In order to by a good photographer, you must learn and undestand the premise of the rule of thirds." "However, it is quite alright to break the rule provided you understand it to begin with."

m8o · 12-12-2007, 12:27 PM

He teaches the Pragmatic over just the Dogma... my kind'a teacher.

d.bradley · 12-12-2007, 12:32 PM

Interesting thoughts on the matter, but I'm trying to extend this beyond compositional elements into psychology.

I think we can enjoy landscapes shots, for example, that follow the ROT because it has a subconscious personification, an identification with the human and emotional elements which we normally pick up from facial expressions.

Think that's a good enough thesis for an MFA?

Finn · 12-12-2007, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by d.bradley

Interesting thoughts on the matter, but I'm trying to extend this beyond compositional elements into psychology.

I think we can enjoy landscapes shots, for example, that follow the ROT because it has a subconscious personification, an identification with the human and emotional elements which we normally pick up from facial expressions.

Think that's a good enough thesis for an MFA?

Yeah, but you might need some data for a PhD...

Bnack · 12-12-2007, 02:41 PM

actually there have been some very interesting studies that have analized the faces of "beautiful people" through the ages.... and they all share stikingly similar compostion in that the all follow the golden mean, or golden ratio... similar to da vinci's man. I read an article about this a while back... I belive on the BBC, but couldn't find it now. Anyways... it seems that there's a certain constant over time with regards to percieved beauty. As a biologist I'm required to bring up the point that the reason we enjoy symmetry is because it an indicator of health and genetics... as well might be a face and body that follow the golden mean. So it would of made sense for us not to mate with lopsided people. I think cindy crawford's mole is the rule breaker on this one though.

12-11-2007, 10:20 PM	#1
d.bradley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 631	Rule of Thirds? How come? Say, do you think that the rule of thirds is often agreeable in photographic viewing because of our brain's heightened sensitivity to facial expressions? Perhaps because we are drawn to the eyes, which are about a third of the way down a person's face, and the mouth, which is about a third the way up from the bottom? Food for thought.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How can I zoom and use the rule of thirds?	justtakingpics	Photographic Technique	8	05-10-2010 06:35 PM
People Moana beach rule of thirds	MoiVous	Post Your Photos!	13	04-22-2010 09:41 AM
Tutorial: cropping with rule of thirds	Dhruba	Photography Articles	1	05-09-2009 01:51 PM
Rule of Thirds	Lynn	Post Your Photos!	30	04-05-2009 01:27 PM
k100d have rule of thirds grid?	pete_pf	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	11-08-2008 10:23 PM

12-11-2007, 11:30 PM	#2
stewart_photo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Heidelberg, Germany Posts: 1,864	Not exactly sure where it came from, but agree with the premise. In my opinion, scenic images look better with the horizon placed about a third from the bottom to emphasize the sky or a third from the top to emphasize the Earth (water or land). At the same time, images look better with people placed a third from either side generally facing towards the center (space on the opposite side for the subject to move into or look into). I guess that concept simply follows into other photo situations as well. stewart

12-11-2007, 11:49 PM	#3
Bassism New Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 15	Whatever the reasoning, people have found the rule of thirds to be beautiful since antiquity. The Greeks loved to use the golden ratio in their art and architecture, which is almost (though admittedly not quite) equal to the rule of thirds.

12-12-2007, 04:35 AM	#4
Finn Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Phoenix Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,056	Originally posted by Bassism Whatever the reasoning, people have found the rule of thirds to be beautiful since antiquity. The Greeks loved to use the golden ratio in their art and architecture, which is almost (though admittedly not quite) equal to the rule of thirds. I think that's more like it. "Rule of thirds" is a lot easier to remember than "Rule of 1:1.618..."

12-12-2007, 07:15 AM	#5
Buddha Jones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,587	Originally posted by d.bradley Perhaps because we are drawn to the eyes, which are about a third of the way down a person's face, and the mouth, which is about a third the way up from the bottom? Food for thought. <--- Former art student. Actually, that is not true, when you draw a face, the eyes are actually dead center and everything kinda works its way down from there like in this drawing.

12-12-2007, 09:06 AM	#6
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	...what people have said already, which I read from places on the 'net. Like these that do a great and concise job on the subject: Photography Techniques - THE GOLDEN MEAN Photography Techniques - RULE OF THE THIRDS It's worth the two minutes to read.

12-12-2007, 10:30 AM	#7
d.bradley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 631 Original Poster	Buddha, entertain me if you will, but in terms of our perception and communicative body language, let's say we are more sensitive to the face from mid forehead, where our eyebrows and forehead communicate to the chin... not so much the head as a whole: Taking only the face into account, the eye and mouth idea it's not too far off the rule of thirds, as in this example: Yes there is math involved, but humans have developed such a subconscious ability to read even the most subtle of facial expressions, there must be some connection between artistic perception and this highly advanced visual acuity.

12-12-2007, 11:04 AM	#8
Tom M Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Lincoln Park, NJ Photos: Gallery Posts: 780	Buddha - that's some talent ya got there! As far as the ROT for landscape - it works, it makes sense HOWEVER, some of my favorite landscape images to look at are early paintings that do not use the rule of thirds, many times the horizon is centered. I can think of a few images where a deer is centered, and the horizon disapears behind it, also centered. I tend to shoot using the ROT but it's no hard rule for me.

12-12-2007, 11:58 AM	#9
simonkit Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: North Wales, UK Posts: 645	The ROT is a great starting point & it does work without doubt. However some of the best shots I've seen have completely ignored it !! Simon

12-12-2007, 12:11 PM	#10
craftsmansky Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: louisville, ky Photos: Gallery Posts: 163	its not a rule. more like a guidline (now why do i want to say ARGGG after that?) the Rule of thirds only applies at my families house at thanksgiving. if you reach for thirds, you might pull back with a stump..... along with the ROT, diagonals also play a part in good composition, leading the eye to important points or areas.

12-12-2007, 12:24 PM	#11
Ed in GA Guest	The instructor at a course I recently attended had this to say about the rule of thirds. "In order to by a good photographer, you must learn and undestand the premise of the rule of thirds." "However, it is quite alright to break the rule provided you understand it to begin with."

12-12-2007, 12:27 PM	#12
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	He teaches the Pragmatic over just the Dogma... my kind'a teacher.

12-12-2007, 12:32 PM	#13
d.bradley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 631 Original Poster	Interesting thoughts on the matter, but I'm trying to extend this beyond compositional elements into psychology. I think we can enjoy landscapes shots, for example, that follow the ROT because it has a subconscious personification, an identification with the human and emotional elements which we normally pick up from facial expressions. Think that's a good enough thesis for an MFA?

12-12-2007, 02:25 PM	#14
Finn Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Phoenix Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,056	Originally posted by d.bradley Interesting thoughts on the matter, but I'm trying to extend this beyond compositional elements into psychology. I think we can enjoy landscapes shots, for example, that follow the ROT because it has a subconscious personification, an identification with the human and emotional elements which we normally pick up from facial expressions. Think that's a good enough thesis for an MFA? Yeah, but you might need some data for a PhD...

12-12-2007, 02:41 PM	#15
Bnack New Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 20	actually there have been some very interesting studies that have analized the faces of "beautiful people" through the ages.... and they all share stikingly similar compostion in that the all follow the golden mean, or golden ratio... similar to da vinci's man. I read an article about this a while back... I belive on the BBC, but couldn't find it now. Anyways... it seems that there's a certain constant over time with regards to percieved beauty. As a biologist I'm required to bring up the point that the reason we enjoy symmetry is because it an indicator of health and genetics... as well might be a face and body that follow the golden mean. So it would of made sense for us not to mate with lopsided people. I think cindy crawford's mole is the rule breaker on this one though.