The rule of thirds is arbitrary bullshit. The photo on the left isn't "worse" than the one on the right.
>>3858443a thread died for this
>>3858445Yes, that is how imageboards an forums work. If you care so much about threads on page 10, bump them. Otherwise they deserve to die.
>>3858448>cringeIs it summer already?
>>3858443Sure if you don’t know how to use it >>3858446>page 10>not using the catalogDo newfags really?
>>3858449cringe dslr user
>>3858446>page 10you have to go back
Quality composition discussion.Also the rule of thirds one is moderately better because the clouds are centered, the pillar one being the center breaks with this which is just as important as the pillar itself.
>>3858451mirrorless has the overlay, but most DSLR don't have a rule of thirds overlay.
>>3858475Just press the i key to cycle through them moron, I used it to align the horizon all the time. Are you the same idiot who claimed the D5300 didn't have histograms?
I like the left side better too. I think rule of thirds is more applicable regarding details within a subject, portraits for example. Golden ration may work better for landscape.
rule of thirds also applies to the whole columns and rows (the subject on the left photo is in the center third column in this case)both images follow the rule of thirds, but the left is the one that does it correctly.Right is the mongobongo version most people think the rule describes.Actually a good thread. Rule of thirds is heavily misunderstood by the visually illiterate and unwashed masses.
>>3858443>arbitrary bullshitplease detail your algorithm which outputs a metric by what constitutes a good photo versus bad.
>>3858475>needs an overlay
>>3858479I mean in the viewfinder. I thought live view was a meme, you seriously do that?
>>3858501>I thought live view was a memeIt is but some faggots do it just because they can.Both images are naf but the right one is a little less naf than the left
>>3858501It's actually an amazing tool, specially coupled with a swivel screen.
>>3858443right is better because you don't have that big cliff/boulder fighting for your attention like on the left.
>>3858443Applying 'rule of thirds' to everything would be as limiting as placing every subject to center. Plenty good photos match one or other or neither.The centered stone dildo looks like background for a missing subject. I myself often have that trouble when I try to snap a landscape. Try vertical composition if you want to make it the center subject.
In general you should avoid putting gigantic phallic subjects in the middle of of your frame. Left is what I see when I look down and see my crinkly brown dick standing proud.But yes, the rule of thirds is a meme and so are all "composition" tricks. 99% of it is just dad photography tier shit to get idiots to think about the entire frame. The reality is the vast majority of composition happens well within the frame, rather than in relation to its edges. It's the interplay of light and shadow. It's the layering of information and subjects. It's foreground, midground, background. It's atmospheric perspective and color theory and contrast and texture and more than you could learn in ten lifetimes.It is not which intersection of thirds you decided to place the only thing that's worth looking at in your photo.
>>3858565Don’t forget the microcontrast
>>3858445This.>>3858450>not using the catalogPage 1 is the landing page for lurkers and posters.>>3858443Both examples are correct. Please educate yourself, because rule of turd is BASIC https://fstoppers.com/architecture/ultimate-guide-composition-part-one-just-say-nokeh-31359
>>3858497>please detail your algorithm which outputs a metric by what constitutes a good photo versus bad.Absolutely BASED measure theory chad
>>3858443Both pics suck but the right one has too much dark and empty on the side
The rule of thirds is connected to the common patterns of eye movement when a human brain is looking to establish depth of field and content. Its not "arbitrary" in any way. Artists and scientists have been aware of it for centuries and aesthetic science, psychologists and neuroscientists have all agreed and written at length about how it directly relates to common brain activities when confronted with a framed image.
>>3858580I too draw the conclusion that both shots are bad.>>3858565>The reality is the vast majority of composition happens well within the frame, rather than in relation to its edgesYes, and yet, if you follow the right image purely along the edges, it becomes obvious how poorly the left image is framed. The left frame doesn't have one edge at endings and transitions, cuts off the stripes in the sky, and puts the focus on the foreground, the bottom left corner, instead of well inside the frame. Considering the right shot now there's one that's almost framed within the frame.Yet with the one on the right, I wonder, what is the counterpoint to the phallus boulder? Why does the shot have so much weight to the left, while nothing really matters on the right? Oh yes, the sky only and thus disturbing void in the right.However, giving the boulder empty space on the right is better than centering it or placing it on the right side of the frame. With the shadow on the left and the light edge on the right, the boulder "looks to the right".So how would I improve the shot? I'd want another subject in the direction of the boulder's gaze. The sun and the fleecy clouds on the right center could easily make that, still well off the edge of the image in my opinion, not on the edge, and they need to be prominent and send the viewer on a path through the image, the crown of clouds, the phallus, a clue or a vignette bottom right corner. Since the phallus is part of the subject, I'd have a key light on it, too, not on the horizon in the center of the frame. Even a landscape shot has an action, "tells a story". That would be mine to it.
>>3858494"visually illiterate and unwashed masses"And the award for most pretentious asshole goes to..
>>3858634>So how would I improve the shot?just add white borders to it and it will become art. Or at least that's what isi believes.
>>3858443>The rule of thirds is bullshit>Posts 2 photos that follow the rule of thirdsJesus Christ you're dumb.
>>3858443The rule of thirds is a guideline, not an absolute requirement.People will like your instagram thots/chads without you zealously placing the left breast in one third and the other in the other third.
>>3858443Do you have autism?Photography "rules" aren't strict requirements, they're just guidelines.
>>3858443It's not obligatory to follow it but more likely than not, it will deliver good results.
>>3858720It's more like if you can't come up with a better composition, falling back on the rule of thirds will yield something acceptable
It’s a rule for new fags and you can tell some of them have no personal ideas of their own because I know more than a few people who shoot rule of 1/3rds only. You immediately spot someone pretending they’re talented or have the vision when they shoot exclusively like that. It’s a fine rule but it’s not a rule id live and die by. It’s cookie cutter rule shit made up so your professor and people teaching courses can sound professional and smart.
>>3858494>rule of thirds also applies to the whole columns and rows (the subject on the left photo is in the center third column in this case)>both images follow the rule of thirds, but the left is the one that does it correctly.>Right is the mongobongo version most people think the rule describes.explain it further for my mongobongo brain then because the one on the right is what ive been taught
>>3858443>The photo on the lest isn't "worse" than the one on the right.It is, and not because of rule of thirds.The clouds look like dogshit on the left but look nice on the right because you get to see more of their pattern without such an abrupt ending due to poor framing.Rule of thirds is just a guideline in genera. Centering a subject in a photo is literally fine but you have to keep in mind other elements or you'll wind up with trash like the left in your example. If you can't understand that, you'll be forever taking shit photographs.
>>3858567t. overcorrected kid
>>3858443>The photo on the left isn't "worse" than the one on the right.You're right. They both have tilted horizons, so they are both equally trash.
>>3858450If they were on the brink of falling off of page 10 it's because they didn't get enough bumps to survive or were close to bump limit you dumb reddit fuck. Learn how an imageboard works and look up what an archive is before acting retarded online.
>>3858443what kind of rule of thirds you think you follow with a tilted horizon line?
>>3859761The lines of thirds shouldn't go through the subject, but should rather edge it (i think, someone clarify coz im a noob)
>>3861057Composition rules are guidelines about what often looks good. Not recipes with exact measures.