Is the rule of thirds real?

It's real in the sense that you can use it, and in the sense that it's the easiest way to keep beginners from centering their subject or their horizon.

It's not real in the sense that following it makes for a good photo, or even good composition.

>>3027831
>centering their subject
isnt inherently bad

>>3027836

No, I never said it was. But it's a common rookie mistake, and getting them to think about how not to do that is the first step down the long road of learning about composition.

>>3027827
It's a forced meme that's become outdated along with shit like 'sunny 16'

Centered subjects are great when their entire surroundings are well-composed and supportive, not distracting but with their own value.

>>3027827
it's not real in any way. None of the composition memes are.

If you place an object at a rule-of-thirds spot, it's not at any of the golden-triangle spots. It's also not at any of the golden-ratio spots.
Even just those 3 bullshit memes will give you almost the entire screen to place a subject and pretend it has anything at all to do with math.

There's more bullshit imaginary composition spots than there are auto-focus points on your camera body. So just pick ANY spot and if you win any competition, pretend you wasted time pretending to do traditional composition (actually doing complete pseudoscience)

>>3027936
It's a rough approximation for the golden ratio. Nobody is going to be running 1:1.6 through their head when trying to compose. And unless your subject is a line or dot, You can't really place it at a 1/3 spot. But what >>3027831 said. It's an easy to explain guideline to keep beginners from centering everything.

>friend gets first "real" job after college
>buys fancy expensive DSLR with even expensive lens
>every photo of his wife is centered

File: Nietzsche187a.jpg (14KB, 220x298px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x298px

>>3027827
No. It doesn't exist. The words you typed don't exist. That photo you posted doesn't exist. Nothing matters because nothing likely exists.

Yes but it can create some extremely banal compositions if people just think "oh I'll shoot whatever I want but keep it on the grid lines so all my shots will come out amazing".

>>3027867
What's wrong with sunny 16?

>>3027962

>/lit/izen here

>Implying that's what nee-chuh believes

>>3028069

>has to announce he's from /lit/
>thinks that gives what he says any credence

wew lad.

File: images.duckduckgo.com.jpg (107KB, 500x360px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 500x360px

>>3027827
I don't know

>>3027827
You can center a shot or you can off center it but what I always like to have is balance. This is simply where each thing is placed, how big/small they are, how far apart they are from each other and how much negative space is or isn't there. With some practice or study of design you get a feel for what subtly makes a composition more engaging and pleasing to the eye.

>>3028133
This. Disregard the composition "rules"

>>3027827
Nope, it's only a myth and completely imaginary. Doesn't exist at all. Like dragons and isis.

>>3027957
Now, the "golden ratio" - that's some shit that doesn't exist. It doesn't show up in art or nature any more than any other ratio, and no serious designer uses it, 'cause there's absolutely no reason to think that humans unconsciously like shapes related to the golden ratio any more than they like any other shapes. It's a pure meme.

>>3027957
She wouldn't fit in frame otherwise.

>>3028270
>there's no reason to think that humans unconscious use bullshit composition ratios
Too true, literally NONE of them are real except "avoid having shit on the very edge borders"

And that one is because of biology, the human eye has very low resolution peripheral vision. It's useful for spotting quick movements or things, but nothing a human looks at for pleasure will ever be using peripheral vision.
Photographs are supposed to resemble the human visual experience, so they also should avoid the periphery.
Rule of thirds is just the way bad teachers get people to avoid having shit centered while also avoiding shit being on the periphery and making people uncomfortable.

>>3028389
>Rule of thirds is just the way bad teachers get people to avoid having shit centered while also avoiding shit being on the periphery and making people uncomfortable

So how do "good" teachers do this?

>>3027827
how can it be real if our eyes aren't real

>>3028389

You're full of shit.

>>3027962
fwiw that's not what Nietzsche claimed.

>>3028724
It's funny how people retarded enough to think rule-of-thirds exists can't write more than one sentence.

Don't worry, I'm not mad, I just pity you.

>>3028615
Tell them that subjects being on the edge is uncomfortable for viewers, which means only do it when it's intentional and you want the image to be uncomfortable (like a horror movie where the blind spot of the border means you can't see important out-of-frame space near the subject)

As soon as you include bullshit pseudo-math to a pretend composition (third / fibonacci / 'golden' Anything) then the reason Why things are located where they are is non-existent.

There's no actual human reason for the composition, numbers are purely arbitrary. There's no reason why 1/3 would be better than 1/2 and better than 1/4 and better than 4/7ths.

Whereas tips like major-minor (if there are two people in frame, use an angle where one is larger than the other so your eye isn't ping-pong bouncing back-and-forth non-stop without knowing where to focus) can be remembered for the actual Reason why they are done, rather than the fake math number.

Invoking rule-of-thirds is like rolling a number of dice then picking a horoscope to read. "Dice = mathematical statistics! Now we're Rigorous!!"
There's zero empirical basis that the grid points have ANY real meaning whatsoever to perception. They exist purely to better bullshit audiences in critiques.

>>3028871

I already wrote my piece on it, fucktard.

Your own reasoning is specious and you seem to enjoy the look of your own writing more than you do being taken seriously.

>>3028891
>tfw everyone will know you're a 19 year old enrolled at community college for art because your life is a complete failure
>oh, say "specious" because there's no actual argument against what the guy said
You seem to enjoy gobbling the "piece" of a large hairy polishman as his balls bounce off your chin.

more like the rule of memes

>>3028876
Yeah. That'll get a review of "he knows his stuff, but is a shitty teacher."

>>3029188

I'm a 31 year old complete failure. Get it right.

And there's no real argument to be made. The guy is full of shit, or are you absolutely ready to defend submoronic statements like "Photographs are supposed to resemble the human visual experience, so they also should avoid the periphery."?

>>3029775
>literally true statement
>needs to be "Defended"
Another perma-filtered memelord trip who bathes once a week