Hello Alister! Since I came from the "question everything" generation of the late 60's and early 70's, I have often questioned lately the redundancy and repetitiveness of many of the TH-cam photographers I have followed since I picked up photography as a hobby after I retired from my career in marketing 2 years ago. Being new to this art form, I used the videos I found on TH-cam as my teacher in the beginning. Now 2 years into the world of photography, I had already begun to question many of the things that were being said on these videos. The same things from the same people that result in the same images being produced by all. Then I found your channel. I have followed it now for over a year, and it has been a breath of creative fresh air that I've needed for the budding creator I've discovered within. Today's video has motivated me to make a decision about how to continue growing on my journey. I may never be able to attend a workshop or travel to exotic locations around the world, but I can at least afford to purchase your e-books and immerse myself in them, while also turning off some of the videos from the "rule of thirds" crowd to explore my own creativity a little more deeply. Thank you!
I agree, with the exception of Alister and a few others, I have become bored with TH-cam photography content creators, they are mostly in lockstep with each other. I've noticed a pattern that when tackles a subject the others quickly follow. All the images are starting to look the same.
Thanx again, Alister! Real nice pano, in deed! I‘ve been watching your content for some 2 years now and I‘m playing around with aspect ratios since then. Meanwhile I regard this tool as the most powerful in processing. For example I never used the 4/5 vertical ratio ever before… (unnecessary to say I was a total amateur then and still am…). Kind regards Martin
I wrote a chapter on composition for a UK-published book, The Digital SLR Expert - Landscapes in 2008. I wrote the whole chapter, picked images for illustration, and never mentioned the "rule of thirds" once. The editor contacted me, asking why I didn't mention this rule. I said that I don't use it. At their insistence, I wrote a brief paragraph explaining it. And added a cautionary note against following any rules when composing photographs.
Excellent, I totally agree! Too much photography is looking like different people took just slightly different variants of the same photos. Rules KILL creativity!
Alister, Thank you so much for this. I have found the Rule of Thirds something of a straight jacket and I’ve tired of being criticized for not following them. Sometimes I do, but not always. I am glad I know about them, but I know I should feel good about not following them, so thank you for that.
Great video Alister. Brendan Van Son said a couple of years ago that he goes by the rule of 'Does it look good' and that's what I try to stick too these days. In my camera club I'm organising a 'Break The Rules' competition whereby we submit images and you get docked points for following the standard compositional rules. Should be interesting to see what everyone comes up with.
Spot on. 👍 Slavish devotion to the golden ratio/spiral is another that doesn't make sense, although less commonly met. "One rule to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them," indeed! 🤣
I think restrictions can be very beneficial when first learning something. Painting, music, photography etc. are such overwhelmingly vast subjects that it helps to restrict what you are "allowed" to do, until your understanding of the subject has grown enough to develop your own style.
Hi Alister, I couldn't agree more. If photography is an art, it's dictated by feeling not rules. Making an image is an instinctive process not an engineering one. Ticking boxes is not art. Cheers.
Greetings from Alberta Canada. As a hobbyist who loves photography and deliberately avoids sharing on social media, I tend to do my own thing vis a vis composition and cropping. So I agree that we shouldn't be slaves to any rules but our own sensibilities of what looks good. One point where I respectfully diverge from your practice is that I never crop in-camera. I retain all the pixels in the photo as shot because it gives me the flexibility to recompose after the fact. I find the ability to rethink the composition a few days, weeks or even months after the original shot date incredibly rewarding. Love your channel, Cheers!
I’ve always felt like the rule of thirds was the first compositional rule that a lot of photographers “found” once asking “how can I improve?” It’s a great first step for understanding composition and the importance of it, but it’s also easy to fall into the trap of assuming it’s a requirement. I know I did for a long time! It’s only been recently that I decided to stop even checking as much for it, but it took a good amount of experience to get there and break out of that set thinking
Exactly my thought. In the beginning it helped me to look better and read the image. Now I abandoned it because most of the time I ended up with a picture that didn't comply to the rule of thirds and still pleased me.
Great video! 👍 My six-year-old loves taking photos, and overflows with exuberance and joy when she does. (It's a great reminder that photography should be fun!) If she's ever interested in growing her photography, your content (including e-books!) has given me a different framework for giving her advice...especially advice that focuses more on the enjoyment of the art. And I appreciate that very much!!
This cannot be emphasized enough. I believe that it is very difficult to be creative when we are inundated with rules. This is very helpful in that it reemphasizes a very important point.
This is something I read only the other day in Guy Tals book. But you told me to turn off the grid on my live view. It’s incredibly liberating. Thank you for these videos!
Much agreed... this should be much more about balancing the content in a way that makes sense to you personally rather than a standard recipe. It's like cooking!
I found this a refreshing discussion. I just go by what looks good to me. Sometimes, the rule of thirds works; often, it doesn't. I will say this, though -- I have frequently found that someone new to photography who is one of those "symmetrical" people, the rule of thirds gives them a way to break their mindset that everything must be centered, which I think is an even more restrictive way of approaching things. I have seen people literally walk away from a shot because it cannot be centered. They seem to need "permission" to learn asymmetry, and I have seen their faces light up when they find out about the rule of thirds. So, I do think it has its benefits.
I fully, fully agree. Why are they even called rules? Guidelines at best. And guidelines to be broken. Another of these "rules" is to NOT divide the photo across the middle. I see Mads doing this often in his videos and his choice to me, is perfect. Loving your videos!
“Rules, subject must be clear”. A rock face with texture, contrast, pleasing color, luminosity and geometry. But does it have a subject? A local camera club monthly competition feedback has me second guessing this and others photos I have made.
Was the video at 2:08 where you are talking about the time spent in the field, taken at the Birks of Aberfeldy? That rock looks very familiar. I would love to see the results. Thank you for another thought provoking video.
Cheers Alister, it’s Sean in Atlanta! I really enjoy your videos but I especially liked this one because, as a self-taught photographer primarily from TH-cam, I started adhering to “rules” like the Rule of Thirds. But as I grew from trial and error, I discovered the one rule I had to follow was to be true to myself! The person I try very hard to impress with my style of photography is the guy who stares back at me from the mirror! If that guy isn’t happy with my photos, what’s the point? Good subject and thought provoking video! I believe you can either nurture creativity by doing what you believe in, or you can stifle creativity by listening and doing what other people tell you to do! Sean
Hi, Allister. The biggest thing for me is 65 x 24. I should look at that more. All of the "rules" can be a guide only. They all willl allow the artistic reason why a photo or painting or drawing is pleasing to the eye, provides an emotion. You are in a round about way teling people rules are meant to be broken, but only once you understand the aesthetics of particular "rules" do for an image. 65 x 24 worked better on the seascape than the original 16 x 9 beacause it worked better on leading lines, another "rule., Neither aspect ratio relied on the thirds, but they definately relieid on leading lines, one much stronger than the other. Thanks for your tip.
Hello Alister¡ I agree with you. Rules are designed to make things precise, predictable and repeatable, and this is the opposite of photography. In fact if there is a more typical "rules are meant to be broken" this is a disaster, twice over. Photography will be good or bad, depending on the relationship you have with your referent, be it subjects or elements. The rule of thirds, this term was invented in 1797 by John Thomas Smith, a small-time engraver and painter who misinterpreted the artist Sir Joshua Reynolds, who simply pointed out that if an image has two distinct areas with different levels of brightness, one should dominate the other. Smith wrote analogously to this rule of thirds asking Sir Joshua for permission to call it so, but unfortunately no one told him that he did not have permission to call it so. Reference: His book: 50 Paths to Creativity by Michael Freeman.
Hi Alister! Just came across your channel for the first time. I don't know how many years I've used my camera with the rule of thirds grid overlaying my screen. It has definitely stifled my creativity. Starting today I'm removing it and trying new things. Also, I have the GFX 50R and just came across the ultra wide aspect ratio. I'm trying it with a 24mm (19mm FF equiv) lens. It looks so incredible.
Great video. As the saying goes: rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise. You can apply perfect geometry to a composition and it may look contrived or sterile. Some compositions may be disturbing and challenging and that may be the intent of the artist.
Thanks so much for this inspiring content 🙏 yes, I do use the rule of 3rd too often, but somehow without even noticing it. When I watched you changing the aspect ratios, I somehow wanted to place things in balance for a certain need of harmony. Of course, sometimes specially the negative space is, what actually tells the story. Well, it started me to think outside the box, to have courage to play around with the perspectives of aspect ratio. Thanks so much!
As others have said, us older folk which have retired and taken up photography .......full time, probably started the journey on YT. I, and I am sure others got to a point around two years where the learning curve had plateaued. Then of course comes the difficult next step. Your channel is I would say exclusive as far as providing this inspiration to think for our selves, create photos that we like regardless of how. It's funny because I subscribed quite some time ago but to be honest didn't really get it. But now it's the way to move forward. So thanks for posting.
I know I pedal a pretty obscure concept, it takes time to grasp, and it isn’t for everyone. It takes effort and a strong desire to step away from the 🐑🐑🐑 it is worth it though ❤️
Hi Alister, like you I compose in the camera more by feel than by using any specific compositional rules. To me, too many subjects I want to shoot don't fit the compositional rules in a nice, tidy manner.
Hi Alister. Great points. I do think the ‘rules’ (which are more like general guidelines) are good to know and have an understanding as to why they may result in pleasant images in some situations, but they should not interfere with the photographer’s creative process. Thanks for your insight! On another topic, I look forward to hearing you speak at the Lightchasers Nature Photography Conference in May.
Compositional rules (and it's not just RoT) are useful for beginners because they get them away from putting everything dead centre! It's like learning to play music from a score - it's not creative, you're following the arranger's instructions, but it generally sounds better than guesswork. But as you get more experienced you introduce your own magic sauce into the mix and that may mean deviating from the "rules". But RoT in particular is only an approximation of the golden ratio and as such it only works in traditional aspect ratios like 3x2 or 4x3. The golden ratio for a 16x9 or 3x1 pano is very different to a third. So you need to understand the underlying rules of composition (which are based on studies and knowing what pleases an audience - and for a professional, pleasing the client is more important than pleasing yourself!) and not blindly follow them. So there is a place for these classical "rules of composition". But if you are "creating art" for your own satisfaction all rules go out of the window. You can do whatever feels good to you. (Although, like our tyro musician, knowing how to use the rules means you'll at least know when and why you are breaking them!).
I'd like to be able to make a short comment attached to a photo in the field, in order to guide my processing later. Most of the time I shoot full frame and stop zooming in just short of what I think is the best crop. A reminder from the field would help me recall the thought process. Another point is, why don't the camera manufacturers allow more aspect ratios? My Z6ii won' t do 5:4, but the Z7ii will. It seems mean to withhold the option unless you pay more for a "professional" rig.
Wonderful video. Photography is art why should rules apply, it take creative away. The images you showed do not look right when using the rule of thirds. Wonderful images as is. So interesting seeing others views. Thank you
I believe there are guidelines to look at for photography, but no rules. Also art is subjective and photography is a form of art, so do what you want do what makes you happy and the people who, like your art will find you
Instead of rules as photographers say (well some) how about the tools of composition (Artists) there are many armatures that are used. Add to that colour mass, Hue, saturation, luminosity. Contrast points, and on they go. You can chuck in Gestalt theory but JMW Turner seemed to manage before it turned up. Your photo at the end. My eye goes straight to the contrast point (the rock) it points across the picture then to help you along the outrun of the tides helps you continue across the scene. I hope people take notice of what you are saying as too many people on youtube refer to Rof3rds, all it tells me is that they understand very little about composition. Look to the world of Art, they have been composing pictures for a lot longer than photographers.
I always create and crop by feel but sometimes it does coincidentally follow the rule of thirds. Funny you should mention the pano crop. I congratulated Adam on his pano crops of Northern Spain in his video last week! Good stuff! 👍😄⭐️
That first image looks like it's based on phi to me. The original is perfectly awesome! Thank you for your thoughts and experience! This was inspiring.
I’d be interested in hearing/learning why you throw away the pixels and not crop in post? My brain says “don’t throw away the data.” I’m truly curious. Might make a good, future video. P.S. I’m grateful for your teaching style.
Basically it's the same as when I shoot 6x6 with my film Hasselblad, I enjoy the process of deciding what is in or out at the time in the field. It is part of my meditation, to crop in the field what feels right. I would advise most people to crop in post, but after 25 years of shooting, I feel confident to crop in the field.
My advice is look at endless photo books and painting and art in general, movies, the masters and creative photo projects through the history of photography. There are incredible lectures and docs on yt by top photographic artists. Fees your eyes and your own vision ensues through inspiration.
I wonder if Rule of Thirds (and the so called Fibonacci/golden spiral/etc) happened because we try to ...umm... "quantify" composition, more or less like we use zone system for achieving the desired exposure. After learning photography for a few years, I think composition is tricky. Yes, we know those various composition guidelines (take note: guidelines, not rules). Yes, we know color theory principles (e.g how to mix colors, how colors affect our mood etc). I think "The Rule of Thirds" only consider our eyes movements when looking at the photo, but ignoring how objects in the frame "interact" with each other. In lots of situations, I simply ignore that rule because I don't like the result :p
Thanks a lot for this. I fully agree with your position on this and am very happy each time a creative photographer deconstructs that "rule" and the usage made of it in the world of photography. For information there is an excellent video on the rule of third on the french channel "apprendre.photo" (not my chanel to be clear) the title is "La secte de la règle des tiers" (the sect of the rule of thirds) it takes a more scientific, factual approach that I found quite interesting.
Strange... Recently I've come across a book about photography written in 1970s, and the author said the rule of thirds was a creepy, old-fashioned idea. I wonder why it was exhumated in the digital age. Maybe due to the fact at some point photography has become a hobby for masses, with some 'artists' having completely no idea what they want to see on their photographs...?
If you're going to find the right answers, you need to find the right question. "What are the reasons....?" The 'ruule' of thirds is a guideline, nothing more, but it comes from how humans perceive - not see - the world around them. It likely comes from the days of the printing press and has crried on through newspapers ever since - specifically broadsheets. It's often used today in the print industry in general, escpecially on the covers of magazines. Movie-makers use it with the placement of the action and TV uses it in framing of newscasters and the like. How humans perceive photographs has been with us since caveman days, because our perceptions are based on how cavemen saw their world. While I find discussions like this interesting they don't go far enough, generally. What we need, I think, is a dialogue on how - perhaps on an umconscious level - humans unconsciously process what they see. In my opinion, photographers understanding how they perceive is possibly the biggest breakthrough from the rule of thirds. There is a level where the rule of thirds makes a lot of sense.
Ever the rebel!!! My students frequently would respond to me, after they had received only passing marks on a paper, "I passed, right?" My response would be swift with "why would you want to be average? That's what everyone else is doing?" Some of them got it. Bill
But… why adhere to any set aspect ratio at all… that’s just another pre-set given ‘rule’ - just crop wherever the most beneficial composition results -
That’s a whole different debate and I agree, cropping each photo for content and itself is fine. The only problem arises when one wants to group images as a body of work around a theme. Random crops can look messy and unfocused. Each to their own in this regard.
Peter, actually, there's one aspect ratio which is a bit privileged: it is the 1:1 square, isn't it? because that simple form has some purity = satisfying harmony to it. So, rather than cropping to something slightly off, e.g. 1:1.173, it will probably look better to find a way to fit the scene into a 1:1 crop? All the other aspect ratios seem more robust against slight changes to them, of course.
@@Alister_Benn yes, agreed - and also when one intends to display the print in a standard size frame/window-matting the aspect ratios turn into a given requirement to adhere to - … though, more often than not I find myself only reluctantly giving in to such occasional requirement -:)
@@tubularificationed ah..yes… agreed again; the 1:1 is indeed a favourite of mine, too … and, contrary to my above reply to expressivephotogrpahy, only rarely find myself reluctant to use it -:) - yes, also, to your point of it being in most cases aesthetically more suitable to have a precise 1:1 than to allow a minimal difference in width to height, which can easily end up looking like a sloppy oversight or mistake - … similarly to an only minutely-off- slanted horizon -
I think of the rule of thirds as simply something that can be interesting and is worth trying at times, but in no way do I think of it as a true "rule."
Hello, Alister! For me, the first picture has a Fibonacci spiral with the center in the rock at the top left. In the second picture I see both the Fibonacci spiral (center at the rainbow) and the rule of thirds applied. Because from the first moment I didn't see the water line, but the cloud line in the third. Rule of Thirds, Golden Mean, Fibonacci Spiral... Whatever the rule, you have to know the rules in order to be able to break them at the right moment. Or have internalized them so much that you don't even think about them when taking the photo. And this stage seems to be yours, on which I can only congratulate you. Best regards from Austria Fritz
Learn how to tell “your” story with a photograph. Make the image your own, and make it work. Rules are great as guides but that’s all they are (and this is from someone who built a book case using the golden ratio and accidentally found the biggest book they had fitted on the bottom shelf and used that as evidence that rules must be obeyed - no they don’t!)
The current version of ROT is an urban legend that included the gold spots from the golden ratio from the early days of DSLR era. Also, stop using ROT is for camera owners doing what master photographer, Fan Ho had once said "placing a subject at a gold spot and hope for the best", without knowing why. That is, dividing the frame into vertical or horizontal thirds only instead of halves to create more interesting, and visually pleasing composition. As well, it is a variant of the rule of odds. Furthermore, I cannot even find ROT was mentioned in many photography books, such as Kodak publications back then. Thus, just as long as we remember the so called rules and laws aren't the ones from science, but merely someone uses such a word to describe some known techniques. Think of it similar to one's own house RULES created by the parents that every family member most likely breaks them, instead of a law equal to Newton's law of motion! 🙂
The rule of third isn't a rule ! It's just a guideline to avoid beginners to do it completely wrong Always applying a rule of third to all images just lets to just nice boring photos
And don't get us started on the (in)famous Golden Ratio 🙂 Yet another arbitrary concept. - will there be Golden Ratios in a Leonardo da Vinci painting? yes, sure. - will there be Golden Ratios in a photo of a dog's poop? yes, sure 😉
Hello Alister! Since I came from the "question everything" generation of the late 60's and early 70's, I have often questioned lately the redundancy and repetitiveness of many of the TH-cam photographers I have followed since I picked up photography as a hobby after I retired from my career in marketing 2 years ago. Being new to this art form, I used the videos I found on TH-cam as my teacher in the beginning. Now 2 years into the world of photography, I had already begun to question many of the things that were being said on these videos. The same things from the same people that result in the same images being produced by all. Then I found your channel. I have followed it now for over a year, and it has been a breath of creative fresh air that I've needed for the budding creator I've discovered within. Today's video has motivated me to make a decision about how to continue growing on my journey. I may never be able to attend a workshop or travel to exotic locations around the world, but I can at least afford to purchase your e-books and immerse myself in them, while also turning off some of the videos from the "rule of thirds" crowd to explore my own creativity a little more deeply. Thank you!
Thank you, that means a great deal. I truly appreciate the comment and your purchases.
I agree, with the exception of Alister and a few others, I have become bored with TH-cam photography content creators, they are mostly in lockstep with each other. I've noticed a pattern that when tackles a subject the others quickly follow. All the images are starting to look the same.
Thanx again, Alister! Real nice pano, in deed! I‘ve been watching your content for some 2 years now and I‘m playing around with aspect ratios since then. Meanwhile I regard this tool as the most powerful in processing. For example I never used the 4/5 vertical ratio ever before… (unnecessary to say I was a total amateur then and still am…). Kind regards Martin
First rule of composition: Make it look right
Second rule of composition: See first rule
Good piece, Alister.As always. Thank you.
I wrote a chapter on composition for a UK-published book, The Digital SLR Expert - Landscapes in 2008. I wrote the whole chapter, picked images for illustration, and never mentioned the "rule of thirds" once. The editor contacted me, asking why I didn't mention this rule. I said that I don't use it. At their insistence, I wrote a brief paragraph explaining it. And added a cautionary note against following any rules when composing photographs.
Excellent, I totally agree! Too much photography is looking like different people took just slightly different variants of the same photos. Rules KILL creativity!
Thank you! The people who seem desperate to be told what is right are wearing me down!! 😂
+1 for "question everything"
Alister, Thank you so much for this. I have found the Rule of Thirds something of a straight jacket and I’ve tired of being criticized for not following them. Sometimes I do, but not always. I am glad I know about them, but I know I should feel good about not following them, so thank you for that.
Wonderful, thanks for this. I agree with you. Photography teachers need to teach this instead of the rule of thirds.
Totally agree!
Great video Alister. Brendan Van Son said a couple of years ago that he goes by the rule of 'Does it look good' and that's what I try to stick too these days. In my camera club I'm organising a 'Break The Rules' competition whereby we submit images and you get docked points for following the standard compositional rules. Should be interesting to see what everyone comes up with.
Here Here … well said!!!
I totally agree with you. I only use those rules as a reference point, then I do whatever intuitively feels right.
Spot on. 👍 Slavish devotion to the golden ratio/spiral is another that doesn't make sense, although less commonly met. "One rule to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them," indeed! 🤣
I think restrictions can be very beneficial when first learning something. Painting, music, photography etc. are such overwhelmingly vast subjects that it helps to restrict what you are "allowed" to do, until your understanding of the subject has grown enough to develop your own style.
Thank you for sharing this. It resonates.
Hi Alister, I couldn't agree more. If photography is an art, it's dictated by feeling not rules. Making an image is an instinctive process not an engineering one. Ticking boxes is not art. Cheers.
Greetings from Alberta Canada. As a hobbyist who loves photography and deliberately avoids sharing on social media, I tend to do my own thing vis a vis composition and cropping. So I agree that we shouldn't be slaves to any rules but our own sensibilities of what looks good. One point where I respectfully diverge from your practice is that I never crop in-camera. I retain all the pixels in the photo as shot because it gives me the flexibility to recompose after the fact. I find the ability to rethink the composition a few days, weeks or even months after the original shot date incredibly rewarding. Love your channel, Cheers!
I’ve always felt like the rule of thirds was the first compositional rule that a lot of photographers “found” once asking “how can I improve?” It’s a great first step for understanding composition and the importance of it, but it’s also easy to fall into the trap of assuming it’s a requirement. I know I did for a long time! It’s only been recently that I decided to stop even checking as much for it, but it took a good amount of experience to get there and break out of that set thinking
Exactly my thought. In the beginning it helped me to look better and read the image. Now I abandoned it because most of the time I ended up with a picture that didn't comply to the rule of thirds and still pleased me.
Great video! 👍 My six-year-old loves taking photos, and overflows with exuberance and joy when she does. (It's a great reminder that photography should be fun!) If she's ever interested in growing her photography, your content (including e-books!) has given me a different framework for giving her advice...especially advice that focuses more on the enjoyment of the art. And I appreciate that very much!!
This cannot be emphasized enough. I believe that it is very difficult to be creative when we are inundated with rules. This is very helpful in that it reemphasizes a very important point.
This is something I read only the other day in Guy Tals book. But you told me to turn off the grid on my live view. It’s incredibly liberating. Thank you for these videos!
Totally agree with your point. I tend to crop to include interest and remove distractions or non complimentary items.
Exactly ❤️
As a pro photographer myself, I can honestly say that I don’t do “what the pros do.” I do what I do.
I'm a newer photographer and I agree!! I don't like the rule of thirds and decided to scrap it from the beginning. 😁
Much agreed... this should be much more about balancing the content in a way that makes sense to you personally rather than a standard recipe. It's like cooking!
I found this a refreshing discussion. I just go by what looks good to me. Sometimes, the rule of thirds works; often, it doesn't. I will say this, though -- I have frequently found that someone new to photography who is one of those "symmetrical" people, the rule of thirds gives them a way to break their mindset that everything must be centered, which I think is an even more restrictive way of approaching things. I have seen people literally walk away from a shot because it cannot be centered. They seem to need "permission" to learn asymmetry, and I have seen their faces light up when they find out about the rule of thirds. So, I do think it has its benefits.
I fully, fully agree. Why are they even called rules? Guidelines at best. And guidelines to be broken. Another of these "rules" is to NOT divide the photo across the middle. I see Mads doing this often in his videos and his choice to me, is perfect. Loving your videos!
awesome, thanks so very much
I read it now as rules, as in ruler, a marked length. Not rules as in a standard regulation or something.
Agree!
“Rules, subject must be clear”. A rock face with texture, contrast, pleasing color, luminosity and geometry. But does it have a subject? A local camera club monthly competition feedback has me second guessing this and others photos I have made.
This is why camera club judges should be avoided at all cost!!
Was the video at 2:08 where you are talking about the time spent in the field, taken at the Birks of Aberfeldy? That rock looks very familiar. I would love to see the results.
Thank you for another thought provoking video.
Yes, it is actually - beautiful place, very close to where I grew up.
@@Alister_Benn thank you.
Cheers Alister, it’s Sean in Atlanta! I really enjoy your videos but I especially liked this one because, as a self-taught photographer primarily from TH-cam, I started adhering to “rules” like the Rule of Thirds. But as I grew from trial and error, I discovered the one rule I had to follow was to be true to myself! The person I try very hard to impress with my style of photography is the guy who stares back at me from the mirror! If that guy isn’t happy with my photos, what’s the point?
Good subject and thought provoking video! I believe you can either nurture creativity by doing what you believe in, or you can stifle creativity by listening and doing what other people tell you to do!
Sean
Hi, Allister. The biggest thing for me is 65 x 24. I should look at that more. All of the "rules" can be a guide only. They all willl allow the artistic reason why a photo or painting or drawing is pleasing to the eye, provides an emotion. You are in a round about way teling people rules are meant to be broken, but only once you understand the aesthetics of particular "rules" do for an image. 65 x 24 worked better on the seascape than the original 16 x 9 beacause it worked better on leading lines, another "rule., Neither aspect ratio relied on the thirds, but they definately relieid on leading lines, one much stronger than the other. Thanks for your tip.
Hello Alister¡ I agree with you. Rules are designed to make things precise, predictable and repeatable, and this is the opposite of photography. In fact if there is a more typical "rules are meant to be broken" this is a disaster, twice over.
Photography will be good or bad, depending on the relationship you have with your referent, be it subjects or elements.
The rule of thirds, this term was invented in 1797 by John Thomas Smith, a small-time engraver and painter who misinterpreted the artist Sir Joshua Reynolds, who simply pointed out that if an image has two distinct areas with different levels of brightness, one should dominate the other.
Smith wrote analogously to this rule of thirds asking Sir Joshua for permission to call it so, but unfortunately no one told him that he did not have permission to call it so.
Reference: His book: 50 Paths to Creativity by Michael Freeman.
Hi Alister! Just came across your channel for the first time. I don't know how many years I've used my camera with the rule of thirds grid overlaying my screen. It has definitely stifled my creativity. Starting today I'm removing it and trying new things.
Also, I have the GFX 50R and just came across the ultra wide aspect ratio. I'm trying it with a 24mm (19mm FF equiv) lens. It looks so incredible.
Awesome, delighted to hear that
Great video. As the saying goes: rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise. You can apply perfect geometry to a composition and it may look contrived or sterile. Some compositions may be disturbing and challenging and that may be the intent of the artist.
Thanks so much for this inspiring content 🙏 yes, I do use the rule of 3rd too often, but somehow without even noticing it. When I watched you changing the aspect ratios, I somehow wanted to place things in balance for a certain need of harmony. Of course, sometimes specially the negative space is, what actually tells the story.
Well, it started me to think outside the box, to have courage to play around with the perspectives of aspect ratio. Thanks so much!
Love that! thanks so much for the great feedback and insight
As others have said, us older folk which have retired and taken up photography .......full time, probably started the journey on YT. I, and I am sure others got to a point around two years where the learning curve had plateaued. Then of course comes the difficult next step. Your channel is I would say exclusive as far as providing this inspiration to think for our selves, create photos that we like regardless of how. It's funny because I subscribed quite some time ago but to be honest didn't really get it. But now it's the way to move forward. So thanks for posting.
I know I pedal a pretty obscure concept, it takes time to grasp, and it isn’t for everyone. It takes effort and a strong desire to step away from the 🐑🐑🐑 it is worth it though ❤️
Hi Alister, like you I compose in the camera more by feel than by using any specific compositional rules. To me, too many subjects I want to shoot don't fit the compositional rules in a nice, tidy manner.
Hi Alister. Great points. I do think the ‘rules’ (which are more like general guidelines) are good to know and have an understanding as to why they may result in pleasant images in some situations, but they should not interfere with the photographer’s creative process. Thanks for your insight!
On another topic, I look forward to hearing you speak at the Lightchasers Nature Photography Conference in May.
Thanks for that, can't wait to get over to Canada,,,
Compositional rules (and it's not just RoT) are useful for beginners because they get them away from putting everything dead centre! It's like learning to play music from a score - it's not creative, you're following the arranger's instructions, but it generally sounds better than guesswork. But as you get more experienced you introduce your own magic sauce into the mix and that may mean deviating from the "rules".
But RoT in particular is only an approximation of the golden ratio and as such it only works in traditional aspect ratios like 3x2 or 4x3. The golden ratio for a 16x9 or 3x1 pano is very different to a third. So you need to understand the underlying rules of composition (which are based on studies and knowing what pleases an audience - and for a professional, pleasing the client is more important than pleasing yourself!) and not blindly follow them. So there is a place for these classical "rules of composition". But if you are "creating art" for your own satisfaction all rules go out of the window. You can do whatever feels good to you. (Although, like our tyro musician, knowing how to use the rules means you'll at least know when and why you are breaking them!).
I'd like to be able to make a short comment attached to a photo in the field, in order to guide my processing later. Most of the time I shoot full frame and stop zooming in just short of what I think is the best crop. A reminder from the field would help me recall the thought process.
Another point is, why don't the camera manufacturers allow more aspect ratios? My Z6ii won' t do 5:4, but the Z7ii will. It seems mean to withhold the option unless you pay more for a "professional" rig.
Wonderful video. Photography is art why should rules apply, it take creative away.
The images you showed do not look right when using the rule of thirds. Wonderful images as is.
So interesting seeing others views.
Thank you
I believe there are guidelines to look at for photography, but no rules. Also art is subjective and photography is a form of art, so do what you want do what makes you happy and the people who, like your art will find you
I 100% agree.
Instead of rules as photographers say (well some) how about the tools of composition (Artists) there are many armatures that are used. Add to that colour mass, Hue, saturation, luminosity. Contrast points, and on they go. You can chuck in Gestalt theory but JMW Turner seemed to manage before it turned up. Your photo at the end. My eye goes straight to the contrast point (the rock) it points across the picture then to help you along the outrun of the tides helps you continue across the scene. I hope people take notice of what you are saying as too many people on youtube refer to Rof3rds, all it tells me is that they understand very little about composition. Look to the world of Art, they have been composing pictures for a lot longer than photographers.
I always create and crop by feel but sometimes it does coincidentally follow the rule of thirds. Funny you should mention the pano crop. I congratulated Adam on his pano crops of Northern Spain in his video last week! Good stuff! 👍😄⭐️
That first image looks like it's based on phi to me. The original is perfectly awesome! Thank you for your thoughts and experience! This was inspiring.
My pleasure!
I use it rule of thirds when needed, sometimes I do sometimes I don't.
I’d be interested in hearing/learning why you throw away the pixels and not crop in post? My brain says “don’t throw away the data.” I’m truly curious. Might make a good, future video. P.S. I’m grateful for your teaching style.
Basically it's the same as when I shoot 6x6 with my film Hasselblad, I enjoy the process of deciding what is in or out at the time in the field. It is part of my meditation, to crop in the field what feels right. I would advise most people to crop in post, but after 25 years of shooting, I feel confident to crop in the field.
My advice is look at endless photo books and painting and art in general, movies, the masters and creative photo projects through the history of photography. There are incredible lectures and docs on yt by top photographic artists. Fees your eyes and your own vision ensues through inspiration.
I wonder if Rule of Thirds (and the so called Fibonacci/golden spiral/etc) happened because we try to ...umm... "quantify" composition, more or less like we use zone system for achieving the desired exposure.
After learning photography for a few years, I think composition is tricky. Yes, we know those various composition guidelines (take note: guidelines, not rules). Yes, we know color theory principles (e.g how to mix colors, how colors affect our mood etc).
I think "The Rule of Thirds" only consider our eyes movements when looking at the photo, but ignoring how objects in the frame "interact" with each other. In lots of situations, I simply ignore that rule because I don't like the result :p
Thanks a lot for this. I fully agree with your position on this and am very happy each time a creative photographer deconstructs that "rule" and the usage made of it in the world of photography. For information there is an excellent video on the rule of third on the french channel "apprendre.photo" (not my chanel to be clear) the title is "La secte de la règle des tiers" (the sect of the rule of thirds) it takes a more scientific, factual approach that I found quite interesting.
Thanks for the link, I’ll check that out
AMEN!!!
Thanks brother
Photography Channels TH-cam DOESN'T WANT To Show You!
The Photographic Eye
Don't get tied up with the golden section either!
Strange... Recently I've come across a book about photography written in 1970s, and the author said the rule of thirds was a creepy, old-fashioned idea. I wonder why it was exhumated in the digital age. Maybe due to the fact at some point photography has become a hobby for masses, with some 'artists' having completely no idea what they want to see on their photographs...?
If you're going to find the right answers, you need to find the right question. "What are the reasons....?" The 'ruule' of thirds is a guideline, nothing more, but it comes from how humans perceive - not see - the world around them. It likely comes from the days of the printing press and has crried on through newspapers ever since - specifically broadsheets. It's often used today in the print industry in general, escpecially on the covers of magazines. Movie-makers use it with the placement of the action and TV uses it in framing of newscasters and the like.
How humans perceive photographs has been with us since caveman days, because our perceptions are based on how cavemen saw their world. While I find discussions like this interesting they don't go far enough, generally. What we need, I think, is a dialogue on how - perhaps on an umconscious level - humans unconsciously process what they see. In my opinion, photographers understanding how they perceive is possibly the biggest breakthrough from the rule of thirds.
There is a level where the rule of thirds makes a lot of sense.
Ever the rebel!!! My students frequently would respond to me, after they had received only passing marks on a paper, "I passed, right?" My response would be swift with "why would you want to be average? That's what everyone else is doing?" Some of them got it. Bill
Haha. Right! Average is easy!!
But… why adhere to any set aspect ratio at all… that’s just another pre-set given ‘rule’ - just crop wherever the most beneficial composition results -
That’s a whole different debate and I agree, cropping each photo for content and itself is fine. The only problem arises when one wants to group images as a body of work around a theme. Random crops can look messy and unfocused. Each to their own in this regard.
Peter, actually, there's one aspect ratio which is a bit privileged: it is the 1:1 square, isn't it? because that simple form has some purity = satisfying harmony to it. So, rather than cropping to something slightly off, e.g. 1:1.173, it will probably look better to find a way to fit the scene into a 1:1 crop?
All the other aspect ratios seem more robust against slight changes to them, of course.
@@Alister_Benn yes, agreed - and also when one intends to display the print in a standard size frame/window-matting the aspect ratios turn into a given requirement to adhere to - … though, more often than not I find myself only reluctantly giving in to such occasional requirement -:)
@@tubularificationed ah..yes… agreed again; the 1:1 is indeed a favourite of mine, too … and, contrary to my above reply to expressivephotogrpahy, only rarely find myself reluctant to use it -:) - yes, also, to your point of it being in most cases aesthetically more suitable to have a precise 1:1 than to allow a minimal difference in width to height, which can easily end up looking like a sloppy oversight or mistake - … similarly to an only minutely-off- slanted horizon -
I think of the rule of thirds as simply something that can be interesting and is worth trying at times, but in no way do I think of it as a true "rule."
Thanks for the input, it doesn’t even enter my mind these days and any adherence to it is unintentional and irrelevant
This saying comes to mind. Follow the heard and all you see are assholes! Make your own trail, you'll be glad you did. 😁
Hello, Alister!
For me, the first picture has a Fibonacci spiral with the center in the rock at the top left. In the second picture I see both the Fibonacci spiral (center at the rainbow) and the rule of thirds applied. Because from the first moment I didn't see the water line, but the cloud line in the third.
Rule of Thirds, Golden Mean, Fibonacci Spiral...
Whatever the rule, you have to know the rules in order to be able to break them at the right moment. Or have internalized them so much that you don't even think about them when taking the photo. And this stage seems to be yours, on which I can only congratulate you.
Best regards from Austria
Fritz
Learn how to tell “your” story with a photograph. Make the image your own, and make it work. Rules are great as guides but that’s all they are (and this is from someone who built a book case using the golden ratio and accidentally found the biggest book they had fitted on the bottom shelf and used that as evidence that rules must be obeyed - no they don’t!)
The current version of ROT is an urban legend that included the gold spots from the golden ratio from the early days of DSLR era.
Also, stop using ROT is for camera owners doing what master photographer, Fan Ho had once said "placing a subject at a gold spot and hope for the best", without knowing why. That is, dividing the frame into vertical or horizontal thirds only instead of halves to create more interesting, and visually pleasing composition. As well, it is a variant of the rule of odds.
Furthermore, I cannot even find ROT was mentioned in many photography books, such as Kodak publications back then. Thus, just as long as we remember the so called rules and laws aren't the ones from science, but merely someone uses such a word to describe some known techniques. Think of it similar to one's own house RULES created by the parents that every family member most likely breaks them, instead of a law equal to Newton's law of motion! 🙂
The rule of third isn't a rule !
It's just a guideline to avoid beginners to do it completely wrong
Always applying a rule of third to all images just lets to just nice boring photos
Define “absolutely wrong?”
And don't get us started on the (in)famous Golden Ratio 🙂
Yet another arbitrary concept.
- will there be Golden Ratios in a Leonardo da Vinci painting? yes, sure.
- will there be Golden Ratios in a photo of a dog's poop? yes, sure 😉
I think we’re on the same page ❤️