Rule of Thirds -- when to break it?

[Benco]

Break it when it works... otherwise don't!

Break it when it doesn't work.

 

[jake337]

I try to think about balance when framing an image. The balance of light/dark tones, colors, shapes and how that balance guides the eye to the subject or away from it.

 

[amolitor]

Most of the "rules" photographers inflict on one another boil down to "get the subject out of the center" which is usually a good idea. But it's not about getting it out of the middle, it's about balancing things. Since things balance around some point, like the fulcrum of a lever, and that point naturally falls in the middle, you wind up sticking the things opposite one another across the middle.

This is all about balancing things. This is why symmetrical elements WILL work in the middle, at least sometimes - they are balanced in and of themselves.

 

[cgipson1]

Break it when it works... otherwise don't!

Break it when it doesn't work.

AS IN Break it when BREAKING it works! DONT break it when Breaking it Doesn't work.... Sheesh!

 

[Benco]

Break it when it works... otherwise don't!

Break it when it doesn't work.

AS IN Break it when BREAKING it works! DONT break it when Breaking it Doesn't work.... Sheesh!

Goes without saying, if breaking it doesn't work then you can't break it. QED.

 

[skieur]

Most of the "rules" photographers inflict on one another boil down to "get the subject out of the center" which is usually a good idea. But it's not about getting it out of the middle, it's about balancing things. Since things balance around some point, like the fulcrum of a lever, and that point naturally falls in the middle, you wind up sticking the things opposite one another across the middle.

This is all about balancing things. This is why symmetrical elements WILL work in the middle, at least sometimes - they are balanced in and of themselves.

Lack of balance creates visual interest and emphasis by the photographer or by an artist. Even many symmetrical elements work better off centre.

 

[peter27]

I see a lot of 2,500 + posters on here who still have that problem.

Lots of posters here like to talk the talk but when it comes to walking the walk....

 

[ShooterJ]

I think tirediron nailed it earlier. There are so many ways to compose and no one "right" way... if it works, looks and feels right, go with it.

 

[cptkid]

always

 

[amolitor]

The rule of thirds is one of these photographic rules that takes the general shape:

Stick the subject here in the frame

and these are all very very modern. Prior to photography, these problems didn't really exist. When you're making a painting, drawing, etching, everything in the frame is "the subject" and the problems are all how to arrange all the things in the frame, and what to add, and what to leave out. Only when photography turns up do we see the distinction of "the subject" and "everything else in the frame" which leads, more or less in the 1970s, plus or minus a couple decades, to helpful dopes writing books and articles about where to stick the subject.

 

[peter27]

The rule of thirds is one of these photographic rules that takes the general shape:

Stick the subject here in the frame

and these are all very very modern. Prior to photography, these problems didn't really exist. When you're making a painting, drawing, etching, everything in the frame is "the subject" and the problems are all how to arrange all the things in the frame, and what to add, and what to leave out. Only when photography turns up do we see the distinction of "the subject" and "everything else in the frame" which leads, more or less in the 1970s, plus or minus a couple decades, to helpful dopes writing books and articles about where to stick the subject.

Yes, I sometimes get told my photos have no real subject (and therefore no point of interest). I never quite know what to say or how to counter this ignorance, and normally end up smiling and thanking the person(s) concerned for their thoughts.

 

[kathyt]

It just depends. I think there has to be some fundamental element of composition within your image to create interest. It doesn't have to be rule of thirds though.

 

[Steve5D]

If I'm shooting for myself, as opposed to for a client, I break every rule there is, just because I want to, and just because I can.

Don't confine yourself with rules...

 

[cynicaster]

I've found that the terminology "rule of thirds" lends a misleading level of precision to the technique, as in, it seems to suggest that you need to have something exactly at a third away from the edge for it to be applied correctly. In practice, for me, insofar as the general philosophy yields any benefit (which I believe it does in the right situations), I've found it's more of a rule-of-not-placing-the-subject-smack-dab-in-the-center, but I guess that's a bit of a mouthful.

Either way, the more time goes by, the more I find myself completely ignoring the rule of thirds and just going with what looks good to me.

 

[TCampbell]

Follow the rule most of the time.

If you're taking a shot which is meant to show symmetry, break it. For example... (it's a cliche - sorry) taking the photo looking down the railroad tracks (or down a long hallway, or down a long road (don't get run over by a car while taking) are all photos where you probably want to show symmetry with respect to the center line -- in which case you wouldn't use a horizontal rule of thirds but you might use a vertical rule of thirds.