NEW Basic Assignment #1: Rule of Thirds and Golden Mean
Printed From: Dyxum.com
Category: Dyxum Photographs
Forum Name: Photographic Assignments
Forum Description: Photographic assignments to improve your skills and abilities
URL: https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=57082
Printed Date: 23 March 2023 at 08:39
Topic: NEW Basic Assignment #1: Rule of Thirds and Golden Mean
Posted By: pegelli
Subject: NEW Basic Assignment #1: Rule of Thirds and Golden Mean
Date Posted: 01 January 2010 at 12:25
|
Assignment #1: Rule of thirds and Golden Mean
This assignment is about two compositional methods, Rule Of Thirds and Golden Mean. They are proven to be a good starting point to gain composition skills. But they are nowhere near the end of the search for the perfect picture, so don't stick to them always. The real point of this task is to look for a pre-defined composition in the environment around you. I suggest you read http://photoinf.com/Golden_Mean/ - this great source about these composition principles. If you are confident that you know about them enough, you may skip this stage. You will shoot a picture using the Rule of Thirds or Golden Mean, or a combination of both. No studio shots/no interfering with the subjects. You must not change the natural layout of the scene. Only cropping in one direction is allowed.
------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Replies:
Posted By: easypete
Date Posted: 03 January 2010 at 20:48
|
Rule of thirds:
A850 70-300G@180mm ISO200 f/5.6 1/320s 
Golden Ratio: Honestly, I'm having trouble with this one. I've read more than one article that states at first finding the golden ratio in pictures is more of an analysis after the pictures are taken. The picture below is the only frame I took that I thought of the golden ratio while framing it. Starting at the pointsetta rotating counter-clockwise moving up through my dad (on the right). A850 70-300@70mm ISO200 f/5.0 1/80s w/ HVL-F58AM flash (bounced). 
------------- a850/a100 - 50f1.4/24-70CZ/70-300G/70-400G/Sony 100f2.8 Macro/Cosina 100f3.5 Macro/500f8/Sigma10-20f4-5.6/1.4x tele/2x tele |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 03 January 2010 at 22:03
|
A Royal pass I would say for the first picture. Nice play with DOF, placement of the two similar headstones and some slightly diagonal lines maki9ng all for a very pleasing composition.
The second is less obvious, but as you point out is a reasonable golden ratio example, where the position of the tilted flah head together with the arms of your father and the girl can even be a hint to the Nautilus spiral. Well done on both counts. The assignment is Rule of Thirds or Golden Ratio so thanks for trying and submitting both. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Pathway
Date Posted: 03 January 2010 at 23:09
|
Ok,
First off - thanks for setting up these assignments - I really want to expand my photography in 2010, I have the kit - now I need to learn! Two attempts to follow the rule of thirds here - no crop at all but some levels/brightness/contrast to try and improve the pics a little (a bit flat straight out of the camera) Landscape: I placed the far lake bank on the top third and tried to use the ice to create the bottom splitting the image into 3 areas 
Portrait - similar placement of the lake bank but tried to include some foreground on another 'grid point' with the log and the duck! 
Thanks for consideration Olly |
Posted By: maewpa
Date Posted: 04 January 2010 at 03:13
|
Wow, the Assignment #1 entries are a lot better than they were back when I did it!
Composition on the second shot is really neat, Olly. Actually, I think it would be even better with less sky, ignoring thirds there, but I'll leave the analysis to pegelli  ).
Hope comments are okay. Didn't mean to judge; just struck me how good the first efforts were. (Edit: Oops, that's judging isn't it?  Well, I think you know what I mean.)------------- Paul aka maewpa |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 04 January 2010 at 11:31
|
@maewpa:
May I remind you of two important rules of the NEW assignments:
So if the submission now look better than you did before no reason not to try again 
Also leaving comments (like you did) is fine, and even encouraged to keep this part of the forum as lively as possible. @Pathway: Agree with Paul they're nice shots. I'll comment on them later in more detail when I have had a little more time to "absorb" them. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Pathway
Date Posted: 04 January 2010 at 21:02
|
Thanks - looking forward to any comments/criticism/advice
Paul - thanks for the comments. I think you may be right about the 2nd pic (about the sky) but I really aimed to capture a 'rule of thirds' pic without needing to make ANY crop (even if it is allowed in one direction!) Anyone else....C&C strongly encouraged - I want to learn and am open to all comments - good & bad Olly |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 04 January 2010 at 22:09
|
@Pathway. The first is nice and a clear pass for ROT based on the two horizontal lines. Also like the colors. I know it's difficult to change the scenes but somehow I'm missing one or two "eye catcher" objects at the ROT points and therefore the picture still lacks some depth. Also the bird right in the middle at the top doesn't help in that regard.
The second gives me more doubt, I think the horizon is a bit too low for ROT (I consider the ice/shrubs boundary the natural horizon that I expect at 1/3 from the top) and there's too many similar other elements (mainly ducks and other waterfowl) competing for attention vs. the two you put at the bottom two ROT points. I do like the line the log gives (but that's another assignment) So I would recommend you now first try some other assignments and then come back with a second go at ROT, but now with stronger objects/points in the composition vs. mainly lines. Hope this helps. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Pathway
Date Posted: 04 January 2010 at 22:39
Great advice 
I totally understand the C&C about both shots and will have another at another time and, as you say, will try some others Definitely of help Oliver |
Posted By: maewpa
Date Posted: 06 January 2010 at 03:28
Pieter, how did you know? I started last weekend... since I'm not participating in One Prime, I need something to keep me focused! I was just doing it for myself, but may be more fun to join in. 
Okay, this is cropped, but it was shot at 420mm and I had no more length available... so it was cropped "at conception" and the crop made is roughly proportional all round (although clearly with bigger crops from the sides). Further in my defence, it was shot with this assignment in mind.... 
But because we shouldn't try to bend the rules too much...... here, obviously, I have tried to place the head on the thirds intersection point (in so far as a live subject likely to fly away would let me) as well as the whole left side of the foreground subject, letting the head turn draw the eye back into the rest of the subject. Also shot with this assignment in mind. 
I can post the uncropped versions of both if necessary... like I said, I wasn't expecting to be submitting them. ------------- Paul aka maewpa |
pegelli wrote:Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 06 January 2010 at 22:05
|
Paul, both end-result pictures are good examples of ROT and how they make the compositions more attractive. The boat is well placed and moves you right into the frame and the stork is also placed such that you you get led by the body line to it's eye.
Since I do enjoy your shots and how you translate the assignment I'm going to take the cheap cop-out and say "no pass", because to pass you need to meet the rules, i.e only crop in one dimension and I'm sure there are frame filling opportunities in your area to show us more examples that do meet the rules. Btw. I appreciate you fessing up the crop, as that is impossible to spot after the fact. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: muyaszed
Date Posted: 07 January 2010 at 04:57
Hi all, this is my first post in the forum, take this opportunity to give some introduction. I'm from Malaysia and currently using A100 with some minolta lenses and flash since 2008. Like to take photography a bit serioustjis year. Enuf for that now below is my submission. C&C are welcome
thanks |
Posted By: maewpa
Date Posted: 07 January 2010 at 12:07
|
@ pegelli... fair enough Pieter!
@muyazed.... Welcome to Dyxum! I'll leave Pieter (pegelli) to comment on the photos. ------------- Paul aka maewpa |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 07 January 2010 at 21:22
|
@muyaszed: first of all welcome to dyxum. Quite brave to start your posting career in the assignments because we're not easy here.
In the first picture I see some aspects of ROT, by the line of "nuts" going between two ROT points. However there are quite a few competing elements that disturb this which makes the overall composition a bit messy while also the shot looks flat and overexposed. Not enough for a pass I would say. The second is slightly better in overall picture quality, but still a bit overexposed. However other than the 3 zones from top to bottom with dark - light - dark there is no other clear ROT element in there so for me also not a pass. Hope this C&C helps and points you into the direction of better exposed pictures (using the full scale from black to white) as well as more clear usage of the ROT lines and points. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: muyaszed
Date Posted: 07 January 2010 at 23:00
Thanks for the C&C, this is what i need. For me this is the best way to learn fast. All comments are noted. I will submit again. Thanks again |
Posted By: kubuthor
Date Posted: 10 January 2010 at 14:16
|
Hello, my attempts are from Friday - I tried to use snowy areas (as it was falling much more than I can ever remember) to help the geometry of pictures and, of course, to get the main subject in the right point... Thanks for your opinions... And one more thanks for your work on assignments!
1/ 
2/ 
(second one was cropped to 4/3 from its right side) ------------- My English... sorry, but... couldn´t we speak Czech? :) A700; Dynax 5; 5D; 18-70; 50/1,7; 100-200/4,5... Minolta AL-F, Olympus Trip 35, Smena, Flexaret, Corina... |
Posted By: pcarmalt
Date Posted: 10 January 2010 at 18:57
I had passed the old Assigment 1 but am happy to resubmit with a new photo. Huge icicle hanging from the underside of my roof. Glad nobody was walking under it when it fell! Tried to use rule of thirds for these two.
 
Pic 1 - Sigma 17-35 @ 17mm, 1/30, f16, ISO 200 Pic 2 - Sony 100 Macro, 1/125, f4, ISO 200 Cheers Phil ------------- A900 CZ24-70 70-300G CZ85 CZ135 S50/1.4 M135/2.8 Other stuff: A55, NEX-5, F42AM, F20AM, Kenko 1.4x, Luma Loop |
Posted By: jkp1
Date Posted: 10 January 2010 at 23:31
Just very simple ones..
A700 v. Minolta 28-75/f2.8 ------------- Unused stuff in stock: A700, 24-105, 28-135, Sony A100, beercan, 100-200, Sony 70-200f2.8 + teleconverter |
Posted By: goldsmid
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 04:15
Here is my attempt at this first assignment.
Shot with a850, 75mm, f2.8, flash, no cropping Did I pass? ------------- a850, KM 28-75, Sony 70-300 G, Sony 100mm Macro, Sigma 15-35 |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 09:07
|
@ kubuthor: Both pictures are ROT, but your second one is getting you the "pass" Simple lines and placement of the cat, not alot of further distractions. The first is a bit more messy with too many different subjects and lines (windows/trees/guy shoveling snow to outside the frame,...). As general C&C I find your B&W conversions a bit grey and drab. I think they need a bit more true black for punch and then a curve to lift midtones to create a bit more "luminosity" in them.
@ pcarmalt: For you also the second one gets you the pass, very simple and effective using 1 ROT line and two points (top and bottom of the icicle). The first has the same intentions but I find the composition too messy, especially the stands at the mid-bottom on your driveway are quite a distraction and kind of destroy the clear ROT character. @ jkp1: you say very simple ones, I say it doesn't have to be any more for a pass, well spotted and I like both variants. Placement of subjects and lines is well done. @goldsmid: also a pass for you, nice composition, headlamp well placed so it gets the attention you want to draw to it. Also like the "warm" tone you got in the picture and the detail and texture you managed to maintain in the dark parts of the smokebox. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: kubuthor
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 10:01
Pegelli, thanks for pass and your words... my BW conversions seem fine to me, but on the LCD of 15´ notebook... so, there is, I think the trouble... maybe (hopefully) in the future I´ll invest in some beter monitor, because you are not the first to tell me this...  ------------- My English... sorry, but... couldn´t we speak Czech? :) A700; Dynax 5; 5D; 18-70; 50/1,7; 100-200/4,5... Minolta AL-F, Olympus Trip 35, Smena, Flexaret, Corina... |
Posted By: p_man
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 14:20
|
@goldsmid - I like that photo a lot, I agree that the golden glow is very nice, but to my eye the headlamp is too close to the edge of the frame. The bulb itself is right at the ROT intersection, but I think the whole lamp needs to be considered the subject. Also, the other light that is cut off by the edge of the frame is a little distracting.
I'm only mentioning because I think the photo is worthy of a print. Before that though, I would clone out the second light, and re-crop (if possible) to bring the headlamp a little more central. That would also give the engine a little more space to "look" into. Welcome to Dyxum. ------------- p_man a200 | Sony 18-70 kit | Min50/f1.7 | Minolta 70-210/f4 | Promaster100-400/f4.5-6.7 | Sigma EF-530 DG ST C&C always welcome |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 14:30
Watch out, if he can recrop he has violated the rules for the assignment, you can crop in 1 direction, but since this is the standard 3:2 aspect ration it should not have had any crop. Btw, I agree the headlamp is close to the border, but in my mind not too close. probably a matter of taste. The second light is a good spot, I didn't notice that the few times I looked at the picture, which shows the power of ROT drawing and maintaining interest where it's supposed to be. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: p_man
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 14:36
|
Well, maybe he can crop a little off the opposite corner. I saw the second light right away because there is a leading line in the reflector on the headlamp that point right at it. It's interesting how differently the same photo can be experienced by different people. ------------- p_man a200 | Sony 18-70 kit | Min50/f1.7 | Minolta 70-210/f4 | Promaster100-400/f4.5-6.7 | Sigma EF-530 DG ST C&C always welcome |
Posted By: goldsmid
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 14:43
Here is another shoot that I took with the headlamp more to center of the ROT. I used the same processing settings and no cropping. PLease let m eknow your thoughts on this one versus the other. It still includes the other light in the corner, but it is not cut off. I wonder if the light in the corner provide yet another leading point or if it is a distration?
Thanks! ------------- a850, KM 28-75, Sony 70-300 G, Sony 100mm Macro, Sigma 15-35 |
Posted By: p_man
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 15:05
|
I like this second one better. I would still clone out the second line as it creates a leading line out of the frame. I also might take some off of the bottom. I don't know why but it just feels a little too tall.
If we continue this, we should probably take it to a new thread instead of cluttering up this assignment thread. ------------- p_man a200 | Sony 18-70 kit | Min50/f1.7 | Minolta 70-210/f4 | Promaster100-400/f4.5-6.7 | Sigma EF-530 DG ST C&C always welcome |
Posted By: alphatini
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 15:17
|
i made some tries for the rules of third. Probably won't work at first but i'll go any way.
35mm F1.7 Iso 1600 1/40 sec. I haven't "played" with noise correction or other PP. Only one little crop.  ------------- |
Posted By: maewpa
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 16:12
|
@ goldsmid... I like the new one better. I think it is much stronger like that!. It's exactly what I thought of when I first saw the original. For me, the light is providing me with a leading point out of the picture to your name... but pegelli is generally more perceptive at these things than me - and he's a choo-choo fan and there may be something I don;t see. Plus, you asked him.
Pieter, I can see you are busy so please feel free to take your time responding or just say "pass" or "fail" - I am unlikely to move on to #2 until next weekend. This is really good fun; and good discipline, which I really need. I decided not to put the horizon on the third line because uncropped it would be too much uninteresting sky and I liked the water hyacinth to break up the foreground. However, I think the third line is fairly well marked and keeps our eyes in the more interesting part of the picture. 
This time the third runs through the bird lighted by the setting sun, the head is off the third but I think that helps to pull us across to the other bird and therefore it is a good example. I won't change now, but the question is, should the imaginary third line have run through the tail, or would that (as I thought) leave too much dead space behind the bird? And of course there is a just too much space on the left to allow a pass. Oh... might I fail? 
 ------------- Paul aka maewpa |
Posted By: Odysseas
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 17:58
|
I am new to the forum in that I have been a reader not a player, but now it's time to participate. I am submitting three to see if I am consistant in my understanding of the ROT.
First: Ducks In Space - I kept subjects 1/3 from top and bottom but surrounded by the "universe". 
Second: Rural Winter - I kept barn 1/3 from left and middle 1/3 up/down 
Third: Little Bird - Kept subject 1/3 from left and middle 1/3 up/down 
------------- KM 7D Tamron 70-300 Minolta 35-70 |
Posted By: unkabin
Date Posted: 11 January 2010 at 18:11
|
Okay, this seems like fun. Time to start my dyxum photography course. Thank you for doing this.
Day's End  ------------- "No hobby should either seek or need rational justification. To wish to do it is reason enough." --Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 7D, Min 50 1.7, Min 24-85, Min 35-105, Min 18-70, Metz MZ-4 |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 12 January 2010 at 07:21
|
Bear with me please, kinda busy but should be able to get your verdicts and C&C over the coming 2 days or so. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 12 January 2010 at 22:28
|
@goldsmid: like the second one also, lamp might be placed slightly better for ROT, but the other lamp behind is definitely a larger distraction (and needs to be cloned out) and somehow I like the cut off smokebox shutters less than in version 1. However both are a clear pass for me.
@alphatini: the lady on the left is clearly ROT, but I constantly get drawn to the rightmost person (because that's the lightest area of the frame) and since he's placed way outside ROT your main subject doesnt hold the interest so pls. try again. Btw, I like yor conversion and the candid soft atmosphere. @maewpa: paul, you make very nice photographs but neither are clear ROT in my mind. In the tower the line is indeed 1/3 from the side but top nor bottom ends on a ROT point, and actually no one subject is placed near one of the 4 points. Also in the second there are two birds, but together quite centrally placed, especially in the vertical (most strong) direction of your frame. So currently neither are passes, even though as pictures I like both quite well. @Odysseas: normally we ask you to post max 2 pictures, but your third will get you your pass so I will forgive you this time. I think the first is too central in the horizontal direction (kind of like maewpa's shot in the vertical direction). The second has some vague ROT lines, but nothing happening near the ROT points, but the third is nice and the ROT placement immediately draws you to the beak and eye of the bird and keeps the attention there. The branch on the lower third line delivers good support for this. @unkabin: the watch and spectacle glass are ROT, however neither hold attention due to the light coming off the waterglass light spot in the middle, as my eye gets drawn to the brightest spot. So for you also a request to try again. Hope this is clear and helpful for everybody, if not let me know and we can for sure discuss further. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: maewpa
Date Posted: 13 January 2010 at 03:51
|
What good points, Pieter. The way I would have naturally cropped them would have dealt with the points that you raise, but I would not have been thinking about trying to intersect points. I am trying this with difficult and not-obvious subjects and you are catching out my lack of precise preparation for a shot every time! This is really a valuable learning experience for me. Thanks.
@unkabin... Welcome to the remedial class! We are "special", not "slow". ------------- Paul aka maewpa |
Posted By: wolfgerb
Date Posted: 16 January 2010 at 17:31
|
I tried various versions with this one. I like this one best, with the trees not sitting on the right line
of ROT but fillling out the space made up by the ROT lines.  ------------- NEX 7 + Kit Lens, Sigma E 30/2.7, Sigma E 19/2.8, Sony 85/2.8 ,Min 20/2.8, Min 28/2, Min 35/2, Min 50/1.4, Tamron 28-75/2.8 and Lensbabies |
Posted By: alphatini
Date Posted: 17 January 2010 at 01:37
|
Thanks for comments on my first attempt Pegelli...
i'll go for a second try. Very bad light here today, photo taken around noon. Kind of B&W world... no conversion. Way to cold to carry the camera so i took only few shots during our ski ride. here is another try for the ROT... Minolta 28F2.8 
------------- |
Posted By: alphatini
Date Posted: 17 January 2010 at 06:38
|
#2.2
Almost the same  ------------- |
Posted By: onritsu
Date Posted: 17 January 2010 at 09:17
Here is my 1st attempt at understanding the ROT im not sure i get the nautilus shell effect but i think i give a foreground, middle and back please let me know if this is what ROT means, thank you !
 ------------- A300 | Sony 18-70 | 50/1.8 | "beercan" | KM 28-75/2.8 | http://www.flickr.com/photos/onritsuimages/ - My Flickr |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 17 January 2010 at 09:55
|
@ alphatini
Unfortunately both shots are so lacking in features that the ROT is not rendered clearly enough. You may have to find an indoors subject if thats what the weather is like where you live! You should move the second one into the High Key assignment and not tell pegelli. Just kidding.
|
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 17 January 2010 at 10:36
so much for trying to keep order here 
@wolfgerb: nice picture and a pass for ROT. Objects don't need to be placed on ROT points all the time, it's all a matter of finding a good composition using the ROT lines, points and areas (which you did). I also like the vibrant colors and the stark yellow-blue contrast. @alphatini: agree with brettania, but with the second one the dog almost got you there, but in the end it's too insignificant in the total scene. Also like the toning of the second much better than the first, which I find too drab/muddy. @ onritsu : I think there are too many other lines and objects in the picture that are not abiding ROT that it overwhelms the faint hint as you describe it, so pls. try again. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: onritsu
Date Posted: 18 January 2010 at 08:35
Ok attempt #2 after i re-read the rule of thirds, i was totally off on my first attempt, thank you for the comments pegelli.
 ------------- A300 | Sony 18-70 | 50/1.8 | "beercan" | KM 28-75/2.8 | http://www.flickr.com/photos/onritsuimages/ - My Flickr |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 18 January 2010 at 21:47
|
@onritsu: I think this a pass for ROT. The horizon, the boy in total and his head are all well placed on the appropriate lines or points getting the attention where I think you want it. As a picture I think the light is a bit flat and not having a real subject the boy is looking leave me (as viewer) a bit more to desire, however not a bad effort. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: unkabin
Date Posted: 19 January 2010 at 03:26
Okay, take two. Thanks for the C&C on my wristwatch shot. I agree, the highlight is distracting. Here are two more attempts, shot today, both with 7D and 50mm 1.7 lens, shot at 1.7 and 2.0, respectively.
 ------------- "No hobby should either seek or need rational justification. To wish to do it is reason enough." --Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 7D, Min 50 1.7, Min 24-85, Min 35-105, Min 18-70, Metz MZ-4 |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 19 January 2010 at 07:18
|
@unkabin, you got a pass on the first one, main subject in the right/top ROT, supporting subject in the left top ROT connected with a line ~ 1/3 from the top. Overall composition is still a bit messy with a busy background and the spokes of the handweel serving as lines to take you out of the picture.
In the second I see what you wanted to do, but it has a big distraction smack cental with the garage door in the back. Seeing your 3 pictures here now makes me think you might want to come back here later after having done some other assignments and see if you can work on your backgrounds. I think you're trying to play with narrow dof and that's great, but try to find something with less distractions and/or lines/structures that support your main subject. Hope this helps ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 22 January 2010 at 21:58
I know the rules state that I must not use old photos so I understand that I am not able to get a pass from this. I would just like to know if I'm going in the right direction.
|
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 22 January 2010 at 22:34
| Ideally the tower should be slightly more to the left (so it straddles the line of thirds) and be better lit to make it stand out more. |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 22 January 2010 at 23:03
|
@ Sharpedge, in addition to brettania's comment I also think the bridge deck line is too central for a clear ROT idea. In my mind ROT is as much about putting emphasis on ROT points or lines as it is about avoiding strong central elements that distract from that. Hope this helps. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 23 January 2010 at 01:20
A "rough n' ready" combining comments from above...
|
Posted By: alphatini
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 02:31
almost the first day of "good light" in 2010, but pretty cold this morning ...
 ------------- |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 05:45
|
@alphatini: Beautiful scenery, Etiene. You've nailed the horizon at the lower 1/3 line and the subject is well placed at the bottom-left intersection. It seems that it might have been better placed at the upper-left intersection, but I don't know what you might have been avoiding below the frame. I'll be interested in hearing other comments. Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 09:09
|
Agree with Brian on the beautiful scenery and for me the ROT comes out clear enough for a pass (and we have passed similar pictures in the NEW assignments before). However I think his comment is fair, if you use a ROT line as well as ROT point in a composition there is usually more dynamic and tesnion if that one point is not on the line used but one the other one. So maybe now first do some other assignments and then come back here and practice some more ROT keeping the placement of subjects vs. the lines in mind. Good luck ! ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 12:16
Attempt number two
And Three 
|
Posted By: MiPr
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 12:55
|
Sharpedge, neither of your last two shots has 3:2 proportions. Could you please disclose some details how did you take these shots? What camera? Are they cropped? (in which case - could you please post originals?)
------------- I'm noise-blind. And noise-about-noise-deaf too ... | BTW, topic87334.html - Dyxum Weekly Exhibitions don't grow on trees ... |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 13:36
Both were taken with a Sony A350 shooting raw and jpeg. The first was taken with a 70-300G lens @ 110mm and F/5 and cropped a little on the bottom. The second was taken with CZ24-70 @ 67mm at F/2.8 I just realised that when I saved the images for web I changes the size to (800 by *** keeping the aspect ratio) to try and reduce the file size. Original .Raw file was 14 MB. Both were shot with the intention of filling up the 1st third of the frame with the trunk and then trying to get the horizon about 1 third up from the bottom. Original Jpegs as follows:
|
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 24 January 2010 at 20:39
|
Neither shot works for me in terms of ROT, I am sorry to say. What you have done is fill in one third of the shot, but the other two-thirds has no interest at all. Your tools have been focus and control of DOF rather than ROT.
For me it is a try again. |
Posted By: alphatini
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 01:28
|
@alphatini: Beautiful scenery, Etiene. You've nailed the horizon at the lower 1/3 line and the subject is well placed at the bottom-left intersection. It seems that it might have been better placed at the upper-left intersection, but I don't know what you might have been avoiding below the frame. I'll be interested in hearing other comments. Cheers... Brian
Thanks Brian, that hill is one of the highest point in the area, and there is an old cement base in front on that dwarfed tree. (probably been a radio antenna there before) Agree with Brian on the beautiful scenery and for me the ROT comes out clear enough for a pass (and we have passed similar pictures in the NEW assignments before). However I think his comment is fair, if you use a ROT line as well as ROT point in a composition there is usually more dynamic and tension if that one point is not on the line used but one the other one. So maybe now first do some other assignments and then come back here and practice some more ROT keeping the placement of subjects vs. the lines in mind . Good luck ! Thanks Pegelli. for sure i'll come back with a new ROT essay in a near future. Also, i want to make most of the assignments with prime lens, but i cheated my self a bit on that last one ( SAL1855) ------------- |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 18:59
I know this is not the sharpest picture I have taken but it's the principle I need to nail first. . This idea behind this was to fill the lower third of the frame with the tops of the building. The flag pole going up the right hand third with the flag itself nicely in the top third of the frame. One last stab at this before I move on to give other a chance to post.
|
Posted By: Berean
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 20:24
A rapid attempt at ROT to simply get a foot on the first rung of the ladder. Not a great shot, but I've tried to put the boat where it should be, and use a lead-in line. BW conversion as the day was so dull.
|
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 21:20
@Sharpedge: For the ROT the main subject should be placed at the intersection of the 1/3 lines. With the flag as the main subject it is placed high and to the right of the upper-right intersection. Here is you photo with the lines superimposed.
Please have another go at this assignment with the intersections in mind. Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 21:35
@Berean: Well done, Ian (and welcome to Dyxum). The boat is just a shade high of the top third line, but your use of the leading line makes that slight difference work in your favor. Nice composition. Now, on to your next assignment  . Cheers... Brian------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: lomitamike
Date Posted: 25 January 2010 at 21:56
|
My attempt at golden mean.
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/">  ------------- A900, A850, A6000, Canon S95, SAL 70-400, 70-200, 35/1.4, 50/1.4. KM 85D, 28-75D, 17-35D,100macroD. Mino 28/2, 35-70. Rok14/2.8. Many flashes, Phottix Odin. E16-50, 18-200LE, 50/1.8, Rokfish 8mm |
Posted By: apcurtis
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 10:07
My go at ROT. hope its ok Alan |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 11:25
|
@ lomitamike
I'm not really a golden mean expert but consulted another member who said that the ratio 1:1.618 should be key. He commented: "1. The overall ratio of the shot is 1:1.5 (681x1024) "2. The bottom of the cliff is around 632 pixels in from the left (multiplied by 1.618 and you are close to the 1024 of the overall length) "3. I can't find any other major features that are about 420 pixels in from the top or bottom (420x1.618 = 681)." Importantly he doesn't see enough of 1.618 to make him think 'Golden mean' - perhaps you could explain where you see the ratios working? |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 14:26
@apcurtis: Welcome to Dyxum, Alan! I'm glad to see you jumping into assignments with your first post! For the ROT, the subject of the photo should be at the intersection of the lines dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Assuming that you intend one of the pilings to be the subject, none are at the intersections.
Please have another go at this one. Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: apcurtis
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 17:47
|
oh ok i see now, thanks.
how about this one? 
|
Posted By: lomitamike
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 18:39
|
brettania True it may not be the correct 1:1.6 . Exactly getting 1:1.6 is rare in any photo. My attempt was to capture a semi-circular line starting from the from the green foreground circling around to the top of the cliff all the way around where the cliff ends at the sea. You could even use the land circling around. I thought this composition created a snail shell like, semi-circular line through the photo. I guess my requirements to meet the golden ratio are a little loose. Trying to capture the golden ratio is a challenging composition. Mike ------------- A900, A850, A6000, Canon S95, SAL 70-400, 70-200, 35/1.4, 50/1.4. KM 85D, 28-75D, 17-35D,100macroD. Mino 28/2, 35-70. Rok14/2.8. Many flashes, Phottix Odin. E16-50, 18-200LE, 50/1.8, Rokfish 8mm |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 19:02
Here is another. It was early and cold last Sun morning with the mist burning away rather quickly. Pitty I was on the wrong side of the sun.
|
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 26 January 2010 at 21:52
Mike -- you have obviously put some thought into the whole Golden Mean method, which is indeed challenging, and your shot has caused some debate in the admin forum. I will give you a pass, but you might like to revisit this assignment in the future with an easier ROT type of pic. But for now you can move to your next chosen task! |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 27 January 2010 at 07:58
|
@ apcurtis
Your second shot is dated 3 Dec last year and this thread wasn't started until Jan 2010, so it is not eligible. (Rule #2: "- no mining, shots must be specifically taken for the assignment") |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 27 January 2010 at 08:48
|
@ Sharpedge
Close enough for a pass -- although if you take the carriageway as "the line" then it is a bit lower than ideal and the tower could be a touch further to the left. Off you go to the next one. |
Posted By: Sharpedge
Date Posted: 27 January 2010 at 10:08
|
@ brettania
Thanks for the pass. I will come back to this assignment after I've done a few of the others as I clearly need the practice. |
Posted By: apcurtis
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 13:06
ooops sorry about that. how about this one took yesterday.
|
Posted By: JasperVL
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 15:35
|
Time to take the plunge for me as well...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaspervl/4304848920/"> 
(A100 28-75@60mm ISO200 f/2.8 1/60s) And a big thank you for these assignments. I am learning a lot both from the photographic efforts and the constructive comments! Kind regards, Jasper |
Posted By: brettania
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 15:50
|
@apcurtis
That's a pass. The manufacturer's name on the label is bisected by lines of thirds. The cork, however, is a bit of a distraction (minor at that), and may have been better on its side. On to your next one of choice. (After celebrating with a wee dram.) |
Posted By: Dudger
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 20:17
|
Hiya - heres my attept at rule of thirds - (and possibly Golden Mean By accident)
Today was the first time i was going to be anywhere scenic since getting the camera, so i figured id try this assignment. Picture 1 is my official attempt - but whilst checking that using 'Scene mode' would give me decent results in the bad weather i snapped what i have posted as picture 2. I had read the description of golden mean as posted in the challenge - and think picture 2 has accidentally done it (I actually prefer Picture 2) Hand held a330 with 35~105 lens - no cropping all criticism welcome, tho remember im as new as it gets :) (Boy id love to pass) Picture 1 
Picture 2  ------------- Dave A330 - SAL16~105 - Min100-300 APO - Min50/1.7 - 5600HSD |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 21:02
|
@JasperVL: Welcome to Dyxum, Jasper! The tree on the right hits the mark while the tree on the left misses. Given that both are silhouettes, it's difficult to determine which is the subject, they do, in fact, compete with each other for the viewer's attention. If you would, please provide another photo with a less ambiguous subject.
Cheers... Brian 
P.S. Looks like a mild winter in the Netherlands this year ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 21:19
|
Hiya back, Dudger! Welcome to Dyxum. Your castle has missed the intersections of the lines in both images (both, it seems, high and to the right). What you might do is take a shot and place one of the focus spots in the viewfinder squarely on a small (easily remembered) subject. Process the photo and superimpose the ROT lines. Determine where the subject is WRT the intersections and then you will know about where to put the subject WRT the focus point in the viewfinder to correspond with the ROT. Looking forward to your next effort.
Cheers... Brian 
 ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: Dudger
Date Posted: 28 January 2010 at 22:12
|
Thanks Brian
Not only did i think the castle centred the RHS vertical third - i also thought the beach line and average mountainscape hit the horizontals - DOH Must try harder ;) ------------- Dave A330 - SAL16~105 - Min100-300 APO - Min50/1.7 - 5600HSD |
Posted By: JasperVL
Date Posted: 29 January 2010 at 13:00
Hi Brian, Thank you for taking the time to evaluate the photo, greatly appreciated! Mmmm, I see I am quite off the mark. I was trying to get the "heads" of the trees in the correct places. I see what you mean with the competition between the two focal points. Guess maybe it just wasn't a suitable subject. I do have some pictures with only one tree, but to me those were a bit on the boring side. The photo was taken at the Spanish coast, right before I headed back into the dutch winter (25 to 30 C difference ). 
|
Posted By: outback88
Date Posted: 30 January 2010 at 23:35
|
From last night, l thought the cows on the hill 1/3rd, trees & valley 1/3rd, final sunset sky 1/3rd. 
|
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 31 January 2010 at 00:40
@outback88: Hi, Steve! The horizon is well placed on the line for the upper third. The hill is a bit low, but close. What you didn't mention in your explanation is that the setting sun is close to the intersection of the upper-right third lines or that the cows were close to the intersection of the lower-left lines. The point of the ROT is not simply to have 1/3 of the frame filled with pasture/valley/sky/etc., but to draw attention to the subject by placing it at the intersection of the lines.
Please try again and place the subject at one of the points of intersection. Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: outback88
Date Posted: 31 January 2010 at 03:10
| @bms44974 - thank you honourable member for having a "Captain" at my ROT - l'll be back, with a betterer one. |
Posted By: muyaszed
Date Posted: 31 January 2010 at 12:32
|
Hi all, just got the time for the second try. C&C are welcome
Pic 1 
Pic 2 
|
Posted By: KoBra64
Date Posted: 31 January 2010 at 13:33
|
Hi, here are two pics to be judged for this assignment, first shot near the Leekstermeer and the second of the center where I live, Oostwold. Both no cropping.
1 
2 
|
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 31 January 2010 at 21:59
|
@ muyaszed: I find the first too "messy", it has some subjects placed for ROT but my eye keeps getting drawn to the car in front center. So that's not a pass.
The second is better, but I keep wondering what puts most emphasis on the needle and theatre (which are placed at a ROT point), the leading line along the shore or the ROT placement as such. What do you think yourself? @ KoBra64: 2 very nice landscape pictures but no glaring ROT in there for me. In the first the main subject I get drawn to is the line of the fence but that's all over the place and vertically somewhat central. In the second the Church is well placed for ROT but overwhelmed by the much darker and contrasty sweeping fence line in front, which finally draws my eye towards the statue rather than the church. So pls. try again for ROT ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: muyaszed
Date Posted: 01 February 2010 at 00:15
Well, my intention was to purposely put the needle and theater at the ROT and did not notice that the leading line could also applied on this picture. Hmmm since this assignment is purely for ROT, I would like to try another shot. Thanks for the comment. Going to try and get a picture with purely an ROT element. |
Posted By: unkabin
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 06:51
|
I shot this one the day I shot my first effort at this assignment (the watch and reading glasses). I was intentionally shooting for the ROT assignment, but somehow I didn't see this one. Looks like ROT to me.
I corrected the perspective to straighten the verticle lines, but I didn't otherwise crop. 
And the original, just to show it.  ------------- "No hobby should either seek or need rational justification. To wish to do it is reason enough." --Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 7D, Min 50 1.7, Min 24-85, Min 35-105, Min 18-70, Metz MZ-4 |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 08:58
We allow minor straightening in the rules so a slight perspective correction is OK as well. The only thing I do not understand is why the original picture has 3 steps and 4 rings below the little hatch on the right silo, while the corrected picture only has 2 steps and 3 rings. So it seems you cropped a bit off the bottom however the aspect ratio of both pictures is the same, while still you didn't crop any vertical slice off, as the width at the bottom is the same  . Can you explain a bit more how you actually did the perspective correction? ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: unkabin
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 16:15
|
Yes, when I shifted the perspective to make the vertical lines parallel in pt lens, it changed changed the shape of the entire thing to a sort of trapezoid, thinner on the bottom, wider on the top. To keep the aspect ratio, I had to shrink the frame slightly.
Here is the after-shifting, before cropping back to rectangle. In order to lose the black on the sides, I had to shrink the frame. I could have lost some of the top, and kept the bottom, but either way, as long as I keep the original ratio, I'm losing a bit all around.  ------------- "No hobby should either seek or need rational justification. To wish to do it is reason enough." --Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 7D, Min 50 1.7, Min 24-85, Min 35-105, Min 18-70, Metz MZ-4 |
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 16:49
|
Taken a few weeks ago during my family outing in Dubai Creek Park. |
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 16:51
| photos are not showing. Can somebody help? |
Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 16:55
|
Ayasha, I think you're linking to a page, but you need to link to the *.jpg filename that is showing on that page. ------------- You can see the April Foolishness 2022 exhibition https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic141325_post1694580.html#1694580 - here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum |
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 17:18
|
Sorry for asking but how do i do that? The photo is in my facebook account.:( |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 17:22
I just sent you a private message (PM) on the topic. You might try the following: display the image on facebook (at the size you wish to use at Dyxum), right-click on the image and select Properties, copy the URL from properties into your Dyxum post between the {IMG} and {/IMG} tags (use square brackets instead of the curly ones here). ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 17:36
 http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs282.ash1/20969_107337749283696_100000224143488_206506_2342845_n.jpg
|
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 17:37
|
Posted By: p_man
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 17:46
|
Ayasha - I would say that the first one misses. The support pole does seem to be on the rule of thirds line, but the gondola is too far to the left and too high for the ROT intersection.
On the other hand, I think the second one is a nice example of ROT. The boat seems to be at the bottom left intersection. My only nitpics are that it seems a little unsharp (that could be from resizing) and I wish that the prow was facing into the frame. ------------- p_man a200 | Sony 18-70 kit | Min50/f1.7 | Minolta 70-210/f4 | Promaster100-400/f4.5-6.7 | Sigma EF-530 DG ST C&C always welcome |
Posted By: Ayasha
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 18:02
| thanks for the comments. try to do better next time. cheers. |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 18:06
|
@Ayasha: Paulo, Peter's (p_man) comments are spot on. Your second image qualifies as a "pass". Placing the boat at the lower-right intersection would have made a stronger composition. I'd encourage you to look into a different image hosting site as I think Peter is right about the sharpness and this may well be happening at the Facebook end. Welcome to Dyxum! You may proceed to your next assignment. Please keep in mind that we like to see recent photos taken "with the assignment in mind" and discourage "mining" of photos from your archives.
Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: bms44974
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 19:23
|
@unkabin: Thanks for the clarification, Vincent. IMO, the original shot qualified as a pass. The rules allow cropping in one direction and your post-straightening crop took some off of all four sides in order to maintain the original aspect ratio. The crop was small enough that the overall composition and placement of the tower were minimally affected and did improve the shot. Good luck with your next assignment. Cheers... Brian ------------- A7rIV; A7rII; A6500; A77; SEL2470Z; SEL90M28G; SEL100400GM; SELP1650; SAL70300G; CZ1680; LA-EA4 |
Posted By: unkabin
Date Posted: 02 February 2010 at 19:53
|
Thanks Brian and Pegelli. Now, if I can exercise a little creativity and stop shooting train tracks leading to nothing of interest, maybe I'll get a leading lines photo up for assignment two.
Thanks again for taking the time to do these. It's a great motivator as well as teaching tool. ------------- "No hobby should either seek or need rational justification. To wish to do it is reason enough." --Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac 7D, Min 50 1.7, Min 24-85, Min 35-105, Min 18-70, Metz MZ-4 |