Of course there are no rules. You may take pictures anyway you like. Hoewver, many people find images that are composed according to the golden section pleasing.
If a line is devided into two parts - a and b - and the relation between "a" and "b" is: a/b = b/a+b. Then the line is devided according to the golden section. I believe the "rule of thirds" is some kind of a "poor mans golden section". It's not quite the same. http://www.ewersarchitecture.com/golden_section.htm http://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/phi2DGeomTrig.html#ph i2D I have once read that scientist have shown, that what most people regard as a "pretty face", is actually "constucted" from pentagons, which are "in the golden section family". In nature many things are "constructed" from pentagons as well. When photographing I use this relation all the time - no matter if I wnat to or not. This "rule" is in fact embeded in my spine after half a century of taking pictures. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: frank theriault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. maj 2005 04:51 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: Rule of thirds? Was Re: PESO: Smoke 'Em If You Got 'Em On 5/11/05, UncaMikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> From what I have read on PDML, I think I may be headed for some sort of > mental breakdown, If you're here, the breakdown has likely already happened. > being a big fan of both the Theriaultian and the > Belinkoffian modes of seeing. Is my brain about to explode? No. It will implode (which pretty much amounts to the same thing in terms of post-event brain-functionality). <vbg> cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
