Golden Ratio Grid. Powerful technique but rarely discussed?

[andrewsugi]

Since I started learning photography "seriously" (don't worry, it's not a monk-kind-of serious ) 2 months ago, almost every person that I talked to told me about the "Rule of Third" and how helpful it is for taking awesome still pictures. Even after I started surfing the internet, most photography websites that I visited suggested it as a have-to-be-used rule in taking photos. The guideline helps me a lot, especially when I took my photos with my iPhone 6.

But then, when I bought my OM-D E-M10 Mark II and started tweaking its settings to seek for grid guidelines, I found something weird. The rule-of-third grid in the Olympus camera don't exactly divided into three same-width sections. Instead, I got a grid which has smaller section in its center and larger sections at its right and left. At that time, I thought that maybe Olympus has its own unique Rule of Third. And I let it slide... until today.

Today, I have found that my Olympus' rule of third isn't exactly a Rule of Third. It is a Golden Ratio/Divine Proportion grid. I found it when I became curious this morning and searched about it.

A forum even said that Golden Ratio rule is Rule of Third in "Steroid" (lol!) and others said Rule of Third is just a simplification of this golden rule.

This makes me wonder. If the golden rule is an even better rule, why isn't it more talked than the third? Why isn't the golden rule (grid only) set as a basic technique and replaced the third just like what Olympus did on my camera?

Opinion, guys?

The Rule of Third Grid




The Golden Ratio Grid




Difference between Golden Ratio Grid and Rule of Third Grid

[JohnRostron]

These rules are not rules. They are just guidelines and can be freely broken if the composition demands it. No-one is going to be measuring your images to see if they conform. Even if they did, most viewers would not be able to distinguish between an image composed with the rule of thirds and one based on the golden section. So, do what feels right for You!

John

[Shadowman]

Hi Andrew,

The golden mean is talked about however it is a bit more difficult; at least for me, to visualize while looking through the viewfinder. I probably intuitively visualize it but typically only apply it in post processing. Regarding the "rule of thirds", it also doesn't always fit the pattern of most of my captures. I sometimes try to position the eye at one of the cross points but sometimes it throws the rest of the composition out of proportion.

[Mike Buckley]

John mentioned that the Golden Ratio is more difficult to see. That's partly because it is very often applied to a portion of the image, whereas the Rule of Thirds is usually applied to the entire image. In that regard, I'm surprised that a camera manufacturer would provide the grid for the Golden Ratio and not one for the Rule of Thirds.

[Didace]

If the golden rule is an even better rule...

What makes you say it's a better "rule"?

[andrewsugi]

These rules are not rules. They are just guidelines and can be freely broken if the composition demands it. No-one is going to be measuring your images to see if they conform. Even if they did, most viewers would not be able to distinguish between an image composed with the rule of thirds and one based on the golden section. So, do what feels right for You!

John

Yes, I agree with you that these rules should not limit your judgement when taking photos.

I just want to mention this because I think there is a lack of discussion of this golden ratio rule compared to the rule of third. Some forum discussions in other websites give me some strong arguments how this golden rule can help to make your pictures look more natural and more pleasing than other kind of guidelines because that's how the nature has used it and how many famous artists used it.

[andrewsugi]

What makes you say it's a better "rule"?

I said it is better just because there are some strong arguments in other websites that said the rule of third is just a simplification of the Golden Ratio rule and the rule is an advance version of the third. It explains how the rule has been used in other kind of arts and has existed in nature also.

This is one of the websites that explains about it: http://digital-photography-school.co...s-on-steroids/

[Shadowman]

My previous version of Adobe Elements (12) had the golden mean as one of the crop overlays, later version (14) removed it; I missed having it available and I'm glad it is still available in my current version of Lightroom (4.4).

[rpcrowe]

I do use the "Rule of Thirds" but, interpret that "Rule" so freely that there is really no difference between these ratios or other "Rules" in my shooting or even in my post processing. I tend to eyeball these "Rules" rather than apply a grid to my imagery either in shooting or in post processing!

[dem]

This is one of the websites that explains about it: http://digital-photography-school.co...s-on-steroids/

What about the aspect ratio of the image itself? Note that all images on this site have "golden" aspect ratio of 1.618:1. For this particular crop, "golden grid" works best.

Is the same "golden grid" going to be the best solution for a typical 3:2 crop, 4:3 crop or a square crop? Probably not.

I think the rule of thirds is not a simplified or inferior version of "golden ratio" rule, it is just adapted to suit the 3:2 aspect ratio of the image.

Take a square crop as an example. Neither golden grid nor the rule of thirds work particularly well. You would normally put the subject closer to the edge (about 1:5?) to break the balance imposed by the square frame. Donald has posted many examples that demonstrate that. I wonder if he has got any comments.

[Didace]

I said it is better just because there are some strong arguments in other websites that said the rule of third is just a simplification of the Golden Ratio rule and the rule is an advance version of the third.

How do you think this information will help you make better photographs?

[Werner]

Golden Ratio and Rule of Thirds are tremendously valuable guidlines and I try to apply them quite often.
But there also exist lots of other composition guidlines (like diagonales, triangles, spirals a.s.o.) you may
want to consider.

[andrewsugi]

How do you think this information will help you make better photographs?

@Didace, I think your question is a bit out of the topic here. Maybe, I unclearly explained the topic and the question. So, I have updated my question above and I hope it will be clearer.

As what I have typed above, what I want to ask is why rule of third is not getting replaced by golden ratio rule just like what Olympus did in my camera if it is said to be better than the third?

If you want to know more about Golden Ratio rule and how to use it as your photo's composition, you can find it here: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/golden-ratio-photography/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[andrewsugi]

Golden Ratio and Rule of Thirds are tremendously valuable guidlines and I try to apply them quite often.
But there also exist lots of other composition guidlines (like diagonales, triangles, spirals a.s.o.) you may
want to consider.

Yes! Thank you! I have heard about them too. Thank you for reminding me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[andrewsugi]

My previous version of Adobe Elements (12) had the golden mean as one of the crop overlays, later version (14) removed it; I missed having it available and I'm glad it is still available in my current version of Lightroom (4.4).

I see. So not all software agree to use Golden Ratio grid as one of the guidelines option. Why do you think Olympus camera only have Golden Ratio grid instead of having both or Rule of Third grid only?

[andrewsugi]

What about the aspect ratio of the image itself? Note that all images on this site have "golden" aspect ratio of 1.618:1. For this particular crop, "golden grid" works best.

Is the same "golden grid" going to be the best solution for a typical 3:2 crop, 4:3 crop or a square crop? Probably not.

I think the rule of thirds is not a simplified or inferior version of "golden ratio" rule, it is just adapted to suit the 3:2 aspect ratio of the image.

Take a square crop as an example. Neither golden grid nor the rule of thirds work particularly well. You would normally put the subject closer to the edge (about 1:5?) to brake the balance imposed by the square frame. Donald has posted many examples that demonstrate that. I wonder if he has got any comments.

You have made a good point. I think I should have think about it before. Is this mean that the ratio only worked for certain ratio? Why then Olympus rules out the Rule of Third on its camera?

[Didace]

Is this mean that the ratio only worked for certain ratio?

No. It means that all of these "rules" are just guidelines to help steer you towards a pleasing composition.

[andrewsugi]

No. It means that all of these "rules" are just guidelines to help steer you towards a pleasing composition.

But 3:2 and 4:3 is only 1/1.5 and 16:9 is 1/1.78. All those aspect ratios are a bit off from 1/1.618. Doesn't it mean they will not make a golden ratio compotition?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike Buckley]

The aspect ratio is irrelevant when it comes to using the Golden Ratio. See this for an understanding of how some people apply it to various parts of an image, as opposed to the entire image. When it is applied to only part of the image, the number of potential aspect ratios is infinite.

[Shadowman]

I see. So not all software agree to use Golden Ratio grid as one of the guidelines option. Why do you think Olympus camera only have Golden Ratio grid instead of having both or Rule of Third grid only?

Probably for product/model differentiation, however not all Olympus cameras have this feature, my EPL-1 has four overlays but not the golden ratio grid.