DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> What is Golden Ratio?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 28, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/02/2011 03:43:28 AM · #1
I've read Wikipedia but would like to see samples of photography. Who can help with a link?
11/02/2011 03:54:56 AM · #2
This has some good visual cues.
//www.miqel.com/fractals_math_patterns/visual-math-phi-golden.html
11/02/2011 03:59:54 AM · #3
And a starter explanation in regard to photos
11/02/2011 04:02:29 AM · #4
Thanks.
11/02/2011 04:10:00 AM · #5
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

And a starter explanation in regard to photos

This is a great site. Thank you
11/02/2011 07:54:00 AM · #6
There seems to be a striking similarity to the principle of Rule of Thirds as it related to positioning subjects of interest at the intersecting nodes?
11/02/2011 08:48:18 AM · #7
Originally posted by gcoulson:

There seems to be a striking similarity to the principle of Rule of Thirds as it related to positioning subjects of interest at the intersecting nodes?


A little different. What I do is draw a diagonal from one corner of the frame to the other. From an opposing corner draw a line that intersects the diagonal at a right angle. That's your spot.
11/02/2011 09:53:05 AM · #8
Originally posted by gcoulson:

There seems to be a striking similarity to the principle of Rule of Thirds as it related to positioning subjects of interest at the intersecting nodes?


Rule of Thirds is designed as a working approximation of the Golden Ratio. As far as DPC voters are concerned, they are pretty much indistinguishable I think. The "golden ratio" would encourage us to actually take more complex images than "rule of thirds", to make images laid out in a spiraling manner according to the Fibonacci sequence, but I doubt we will see much of that.

R.
11/02/2011 10:01:32 AM · #9
Golden Mean Photography


11/02/2011 10:43:11 AM · #10
//www.ultimate-photo-tips.com/photography-rule-of-thirds.html

Scroll to bottom of page for overlay of ROT lines on Golden Mean lines.

Message edited by author 2011-11-02 10:43:44.
11/02/2011 10:49:38 AM · #11
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by gcoulson:

There seems to be a striking similarity to the principle of Rule of Thirds as it related to positioning subjects of interest at the intersecting nodes?


Rule of Thirds is designed as a working approximation of the Golden Ratio. As far as DPC voters are concerned, they are pretty much indistinguishable I think. The "golden ratio" would encourage us to actually take more complex images than "rule of thirds", to make images laid out in a spiraling manner according to the Fibonacci sequence, but I doubt we will see much of that.

R.


that requires to much time to set up your shot. one can only hope to have an image fit the sweeping arc discovered in post, if not, its the rule of thirds!
11/02/2011 12:37:12 PM · #12
It's tennis's serve-and-volley theory applied to photography. Yes it works, but it's still as boring as bat shit in both contexts. Soon every player (and every picture) is essentially indistinguishable from every other, and we're reduced to emitting those awful and irrelevant grunts and screams to make a mark.

The lumpen, leaden Rule of Thirds is overwhelmingly employed by photographers in the same way as a lamp post is used by drunks; for support rather than for illumination.

Take a stand: abandon this formulaic nonsense now. Just say "No!".
11/02/2011 02:57:21 PM · #13
Originally posted by ubique:

It's tennis's serve-and-volley theory applied to photography. Yes it works, but it's still as boring as bat shit in both contexts. Soon every player (and every picture) is essentially indistinguishable from every other, and we're reduced to emitting those awful and irrelevant grunts and screams to make a mark.

The lumpen, leaden Rule of Thirds is overwhelmingly employed by photographers in the same way as a lamp post is used by drunks; for support rather than for illumination.

Take a stand: abandon this formulaic nonsense now. Just say "No!".

+1

I take great pride in learning rules thoroughly.......when you do that, you can figure out the most effective way to circumvent them!

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it......8~)
11/02/2011 03:00:33 PM · #14
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by ubique:

It's tennis's serve-and-volley theory applied to photography. Yes it works, but it's still as boring as bat shit in both contexts. Soon every player (and every picture) is essentially indistinguishable from every other, and we're reduced to emitting those awful and irrelevant grunts and screams to make a mark.

The lumpen, leaden Rule of Thirds is overwhelmingly employed by photographers in the same way as a lamp post is used by drunks; for support rather than for illumination.

Take a stand: abandon this formulaic nonsense now. Just say "No!".

+1

I take great pride in learning rules thoroughly.......when you do that, you can figure out the most effective way to circumvent them!

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it......8~)


screw artistic principles! just center up all your shots, and make all your horizons dead center- you can't go wrong with that!

11/02/2011 03:18:48 PM · #15
Originally posted by ubique:

It's tennis's serve-and-volley theory applied to photography. Yes it works, but it's still as boring as bat shit in both contexts. Soon every player (and every picture) is essentially indistinguishable from every other, and we're reduced to emitting those awful and irrelevant grunts and screams to make a mark.

The lumpen, leaden Rule of Thirds is overwhelmingly employed by photographers in the same way as a lamp post is used by drunks; for support rather than for illumination.

Take a stand: abandon this formulaic nonsense now. Just say "No!".


Here's the thing of it, Paul: it's pretty much always a Bad Thing when a poet, say, sets out to write a line and, upon completing it, says to himself "That sounds pretty good, but it needs another stressed syllable or it doesn't qualify as trochaic tetrameter, and the poem's flawed!" BUT, on the other hand, when we read the poem after the fact, and we say to ourselves "I really like that line, it flows exceptionally well in this context!" then we may be moved to SCAN the line, to analyse the prosody of it, and find out thereby what makes it work. It's generally a poor poet who writes with a prosody handbook open on his desk, but prosody is still a useful tool for understanding how a poem works.

In the same sense (not to belabor the point), these "rules" are maybe a bad way of CREATING an image, but they do serve pretty well to analyze why some compositions work exceptionally well, and others not so well. And that's as it should be, because this whole "golden mean", for example, is embedded in nature's very architecture, and it's no surprise that images built around those bones tend to resonate in our hearts.

And, for what it's worth, I just looked at your profile page, and a cursory overview of your "posthumous bling" thumbnails shows a powerful tendency towards organization around golden mean skeletal structure in your own work. I'm 100% positive you don't do this consciously (I'm sure *I* don't, either), but it's there nevertheless.

So I think it's a good idea that we, every now and then, make these "rules" the subject of challenges, because there are principles in operation here that we, as artists, ought to be aware of.

That's MY take on it, anyway, and this despite that I tend to HATE rules...

R.
11/02/2011 03:41:28 PM · #16
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by ubique:

It's tennis's serve-and-volley theory applied to photography. Yes it works, but it's still as boring as bat shit in both contexts. Soon every player (and every picture) is essentially indistinguishable from every other, and we're reduced to emitting those awful and irrelevant grunts and screams to make a mark.

The lumpen, leaden Rule of Thirds is overwhelmingly employed by photographers in the same way as a lamp post is used by drunks; for support rather than for illumination.

Take a stand: abandon this formulaic nonsense now. Just say "No!".


Here's the thing of it, Paul: it's pretty much always a Bad Thing when a poet, say, sets out to write a line and, upon completing it, says to himself "That sounds pretty good, but it needs another stressed syllable or it doesn't qualify as trochaic tetrameter, and the poem's flawed!" BUT, on the other hand, when we read the poem after the fact, and we say to ourselves "I really like that line, it flows exceptionally well in this context!" then we may be moved to SCAN the line, to analyse the prosody of it, and find out thereby what makes it work. It's generally a poor poet who writes with a prosody handbook open on his desk, but prosody is still a useful tool for understanding how a poem works.

In the same sense (not to belabor the point), these "rules" are maybe a bad way of CREATING an image, but they do serve pretty well to analyze why some compositions work exceptionally well, and others not so well. And that's as it should be, because this whole "golden mean", for example, is embedded in nature's very architecture, and it's no surprise that images built around those bones tend to resonate in our hearts.

And, for what it's worth, I just looked at your profile page, and a cursory overview of your "posthumous bling" thumbnails shows a powerful tendency towards organization around golden mean skeletal structure in your own work. I'm 100% positive you don't do this consciously (I'm sure *I* don't, either), but it's there nevertheless.

So I think it's a good idea that we, every now and then, make these "rules" the subject of challenges, because there are principles in operation here that we, as artists, ought to be aware of.

That's MY take on it, anyway, and this despite that I tend to HATE rules...

R.


It's important to distinguish between Golden Mean and "Rule of Thirds". Golden Mean might qualify as prosody, but Rule of Thirds is like rhyming without meter.
11/02/2011 03:51:43 PM · #17
Oh boy... This challenge could be interesting for me... I have no clue what to do. And this is a pretty wide open challenge in my opinion.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.......
11/02/2011 04:22:15 PM · #18
Yeah, this could get interesting. Hopefully, Golden Ratio voters will follow the Golden Rule: Vote unto others as you would have them vote unto you. Otherwise my score may not get above 1.61803398874989.
11/02/2011 04:33:18 PM · #19
oh is this a challenge? lol I thought it was just another artistic argumentation thread.
11/03/2011 12:30:30 AM · #20
Originally posted by Bear_Music:



... And, for what it's worth, I just looked at your profile page, and a cursory overview of your "posthumous bling" thumbnails shows a powerful tendency towards organization around golden mean skeletal structure in your own work. I'm 100% positive you don't do this consciously (I'm sure *I* don't, either), but it's there nevertheless...

R.


It's true Robert, I confess. I think the truth of the matter is that the 'rules' of photography are analogous to the proverbial view of children; they should be seen but not heard.
11/03/2011 09:27:42 AM · #21
Photoshop Elements 10 has added a golden ratio cropping tool overlay. (Free trial available.)

At first I railed against the tool, as it did not allow rectangles of other proportions other than golden rectangles. (1:1.618) My camera image proportion is 2:3, so cropping for a golden rectangle caused me to think outside the box, so to speak. It forced me to work with a longer or taller rectangle than the proportion to which I'm accustomed. That's a good thing.

I am not declaring ALL entries must be of golden rectangles, but the golden ratio composition guideline is "magical" when employed inside a properly proportioned rectangle. By "magical" I mean it becomes easy to compose the key elements in the scene in a harmonious manner. The results are eye-pleasing... at least to me.

My entry has been submitted. This experience with golden ratio composition will lead me to use this tool in future work.

Make photos more interesting or energetic using new Rule of Thirds and Golden Ratio crop guides in Photoshop Elements 10.

Message edited by author 2011-11-03 09:46:42.
11/03/2011 08:32:36 PM · #22
For those that use LightRoom when you crop a photo you can go to view and it is something like crop grid type or view... I can't remember exactly but you can choose to have a golden ratio or golden spiral as your grid to help with composing.
11/03/2011 08:42:50 PM · #23
Originally posted by posthumous:

oh is this a challenge? lol I thought it was just another artistic argumentation thread.

LOL - I just now noticed that as well.

Well pffft. "Golden Ratio", "Right Angles", etc. I come here to avoid math and geometry. :/

...but as a voter, I will be using these:
11/04/2011 08:25:28 AM · #24
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:


LOL - I just now noticed that as well.

Well pffft. "Golden Ratio", "Right Angles", etc. I come here to avoid math and geometry. :/

...but as a voter, I will be using these:


Here here!!
11/04/2011 09:08:02 AM · #25
I am using this one in Photoshop... I still can not believe it is not by default in CS5 :-(

Goldencrop - available on sourceforge
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 06:02:37 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 06:02:37 AM EDT.