Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-08-2010, 03:45 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
I will always take fact over opinion, no matter how well regarded that opinion may be.
What "fact" are you talking about?
That there are invalid claims about the "golden section" doesn't invalidate the whole concept.

Fact is that the "golden section" has been used by artists since the Renaissance. We are talking about artist like Dali, for example, who surely would not have used this compositional aid if they didn't approve of it. I'm not aware of a history of the "rule of thirds" in arts.

The "rule of thirds" is a dumbed down version of the "golden section". It is sufficiently dumbed down to become invalid. If there is any merit to the "harmonious" qualities of the "golden section" then it is certainly not maintained by the dumbed down version. If you can point to a success of the "rule of thirds" similar to the success of the "golden section" then we can start talking about facts supporting the equivalence of the two notions.

12-08-2010, 04:13 PM - 1 Like   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 121
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
What "fact" are you talking about?
That there are invalid claims about the "golden section" doesn't invalidate the whole concept.

Fact is that the "golden section" has been used by artists since the Renaissance. We are talking about artist like Dali, for example, who surely would not have used this compositional aid if they didn't approve of it. I'm not aware of a history of the "rule of thirds" in arts.

The "rule of thirds" is a dumbed down version of the "golden section". It is sufficiently dumbed down to become invalid. If there is any merit to the "harmonious" qualities of the "golden section" then it is certainly not maintained by the dumbed down version. If you can point to a success of the "rule of thirds" similar to the success of the "golden section" then we can start talking about facts supporting the equivalence of the two notions.
Just because many artists have used it does not mean that it has intrinsic aesthetic value. In fact, because so many artists have used it, we have become accustomed to seeing it, which makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Even the claim that many artists have used the golden ratio is shaky. How many artists actually claimed to use it?

Your last paragraph is a strawman, since I never claimed that the two rules were equivalent.

What I claimed was that the article you pooh-poohed was based in *facts* and your only counter-argument was an appeal to authority.

If you're not even going to pay attention, then you're wasting my time.
12-08-2010, 05:35 PM - 1 Like   #18
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
Just because many artists have used it does not mean that it has intrinsic aesthetic value. In fact, because so many artists have used it, we have become accustomed to seeing it, which makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
So it works?!

QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
How many artists actually claimed to use it?
Maybe you should read more about the subject.

QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
Your last paragraph is a strawman, since I never claimed that the two rules were equivalent.
Others did. Apologies that I couldn't extract from your "one liner" that you didn't concur with that particular argument. I asked you for clarification which "facts" you are referring to and still don't know what you mean.

QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
What I claimed was that the article you pooh-poohed was based in *facts* and your only counter-argument was an appeal to authority.
I didn't mean to provide a counter argument by appealing to authority. I could go on defending what I did and why I did it but frankly I don't think we'll be able to agree on anything. BTW, the wikipedia article on the "golden section" does a better job of debunking some of the exaggerations surrounding this concept then the article you found so full of facts.

QuoteOriginally posted by extravagrant Quote
If you're not even going to pay attention, then you're wasting my time.
Maybe it would be best if you could include me in your ignore list then. In fact, I'd appreciate it.
12-10-2010, 12:25 PM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 172
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
The "rule of thirds" is a dumbed down version of the "golden section". It is sufficiently dumbed down to become invalid.
I disagree. As I said at greater length in #8, the Rule of Thirds is really just to avoid the middle and edges of the frame. It shouldn't be taken as precise, but it doesn't need to be precise to be useful.

12-10-2010, 12:36 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,418
If you do not mind getting into some math, the best treatise on composition I have seen is Jay Hambidge's The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry, 1919, Yale University Press
12-11-2010, 06:42 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 107
On a lighter note.......

Composition is between the Imager and their subject.
Sometimes use the frame work and other times go with your instincts
They are often right..................(your instincts)

Last edited by Postumus; 12-11-2010 at 06:44 PM. Reason: Typo
12-11-2010, 06:58 PM   #22
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
FWIW, I tend to agree with Class A on the matter.

I often feel the Rule of Third is too extrem to be applicable and I intuitively approch a more centered composition. Which makes the 3x3 grid pretty useless for me in many cases. Of course, that's just my intuition. But ancient Greeks already must have felt the same

BTW, this is why I prefer the term Golden ratio (Phidias) over Fibonacci ratio.

What I found useful though is a composition by the 4x4 grid where I use the centers of the inner four rectangles. And if you do the math, the corresponding ratio is closer to the Golden ratio than 3/2 indeed.

So, I think it is a shame that Pentax called the overlay grid options in the K-5 LV as follows:

4x4 grid, Golden ratio, Scale.

Because their Golden ratio grid is a plain 3x3 grid.

That's a level of ignorance a photography corporation should avoid. IMHO...
And the Golden ratio grid is a missed opportunity.

Last edited by falconeye; 12-11-2010 at 07:03 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, lines, photography, ratio, rule, thirds
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Acquisto pentax negli Stati Uniti e garanzia Internazionale Mitch Photographic Technique 3 12-07-2010 03:16 AM
Macro Premières photos avec mon K-7 YOYO31 Post Your Photos! 6 11-28-2010 05:35 AM
Black & White Околица drmartin Post Your Photos! 4 11-21-2010 06:42 AM
FOV of wideange zoom lenses and fish-eyes zoms vulture Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 11-16-2010 12:47 PM
Sports Women's football - Santos FC Champions Cup Brazil 2009 Pedro Ernesto Guerra Azevedo Post Your Photos! 1 12-02-2009 10:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:52 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top