When to or When to not use rule of thirds?

Are there instances when it's best to not use the rule of thirds? I've realized how it can improve photographs but I was just wondering if there are any times to avoid it. Thanks.

Architectural shots would be one. In all honesty, I don't pay much attention to rules. I just shoot what looks good to me, then when I go edit, I may make adjustments.

I'm using the rule of three as a rough guideline but at times it's not possible to use it without paying a price composition wise. Then I'm using the rule of "what looks ok". If you work with reflection, halves can be used too. It depends entirely upon the shot. The rule of three is used a lot but there are more options.

I'm with Blacktop here. When I approach the subject (a building or a view, for example) I walk a little left and right until it looks "right", then I look through the viewfinder and, again, compose until it looks "right". I don't think about rules, I just know when the composition is "right". And by "right" I mean what my own personal feeling tells me.

It is all very subjective and there is no rule when the rule of thirds should or should not be applied.

The rule of thirds should always be a STARTING point. Then go from there to get the shot looking good. Remember there are four points in the rule of thirds for the subject.

Don Kuykendall said:

The rule of thirds should always be a STARTING point. Then go from there to get the shot looking good. Remember there are four points in the rule of thirds for the subject.

Click to expand...

See, this is the reason I don't bother with it. One can way over think it. HAVING SAID THAT! I agree that it should be a starting point. However in the end it all comes down to personal preference.

Thirds come into play more often than we think. It is a natural division that looks right.

I'd wager that the average shot that looks good is framed in a way that places the main subject on a third line or intersection or the subject divides the image in a thirdly way.

The same rules apply to photography that apply to all other visual arts when it comes to composition. On average whenever a composition irks you, something is wrong. Good compositions are automatically pleasing even when we might not consciously realize why they please us.

But rules are also there to be broken.

Good compositions are automatically pleasing even when we might not consciously realize why they please us.

Click to expand...

This.

Rule of thirds is a guideline use it at your descretion, if we all took exactly the same photo the exactly same way it would be boring. Experiment and do what you enjoy.

Blacktop said:

See, this is the reason I don't bother with it. One can way over think it. HAVING SAID THAT! I agree that it should be a starting point. However in the end it all comes down to personal preference.

Click to expand...

My take on the subject comes from seeing hundreds of thousands of consumer photographs when I was in photofinishing. This was also in the days of film cameras where the focusing screen was dead center. every face would be dead center of the frame with totally blank space above the head and cutoff body below. Drove me crazy. I was constantly telling people to focus and recompose. I still see people shooting that way on facebook all the time.

Probably 75% of the shots I do will look better with the main subject on or very near one of the four rule points. Many of us that have been shooting for decades don't really think about composition rules to much now because it is muscle memory by now. But the rule is extremely important for newer shooters to learn good habits.

Much composing is indeed on automatic pilot. When I'm shooting landscapes or other static shots I'm framing in thirds. In the beginning it took some effort to pay attention to that (and leveled horizons) but after a while you do without giving it much thought. Other shots are harder to frame and often dead center when shooting. When I reframe in LR I mostly have the thirds enabled as guides but seldom really pay attention to it. It becomes a bit like feeling when it is right. Some shots that's easy, others I cycle through all available formats and in the end can only get it as I desire when using free format.

But there are times you have to throw the thirds overboard and settle for something else. If you have high contrast shots, thirds will not work if that results in a too large portion of the darks (or lights) overpowering the shot. Then you have to find a composition that brings balance to those.

The "rule" of thirds, like pretty much any rule in photography is just a guide. There are really no set rules or situations where you should or should not use it. For the most part though, placing the subject in the dead center of the frame does make the composition look static. It is best to have your subject sit at the intersection of a horizontal and vertical third but there are times when this just will not work. When taking one quarter or half portraits of people, it is best to have the eyes around the top third. If you are taking a portrait of someone where most or their entire body is showing, especially in profile or semi-profile, in most cases it is better to place the midline of their body along the left or fight third.

I really try to stay away from putting the horizon across the center of the frame, opting for the top or bottom third depending on the image. But again, in some images it might work. I have seen very few images not work when it was applied but I have seen LOTS that have when it was not applied and should have been. If the crop was done out of the camera it can usually be fixed. If it was done in the camera you are pretty much out of luck unless you are VERY good at Photoshop

The Rule of Thirds might not always be the BEST way to compose a photo but I've never seen it ruin a photo and the vast, vast majority of photos would be improved by using this guideline. Rules of composition work because they create patterns and rhythms, both of which produce a sense of predictability which please and relax our brains. Along with composition, though, come rules (guidelines) regarding things like tonal and spatial balance, mood, texture and form versus negative space. This being the case, the Rule of Thirds should be considered but it's just one tool for composition like any other.

Here's one of my favorite videos that deals with composition and why it "works". The production values are a little crude but the information he puts across is spot... freaking... on. I return to this video frequently.

Academy of Photography: Composition Basics

....

I've watched that video some days ago and while he didn't go overboard with his examples, it's indeed very informative.

A nice page of this rule and some other sites going a little deeper. Rule Of Thirds Photography

As others said we tend to realize this sub-consciously. I find myself more focused on avoiding halves, reflection shots can be tricky in that regard. Sometimes quarters work good for accentuating sky or water.

Don Kuykendall said:

The rule of thirds should always be a STARTING point. Then go from there to get the shot looking good. Remember there are four points in the rule of thirds for the subject.

Click to expand...

I'm just the opposite. I go to the rule of thirds when the thing I saw in my viewfinder doesn't seem to be as appealing once I get it on my computer and I feel the need to do some salvage work.

I do a lot of photo browsing. I sit with my breakfast and look through the top shots of the day at 500px.com, I browse thru Instagram profiles from profiles with shots liked by photographers I follow, or just plug something I'm interested in shooting into an Image search and just look. I try and latch onto aspects of the shots I like and stick them in the portion of my brain that I dig into when I'm out looking for something to photograph - when my eyes are seeing and not just looking. I then frame in a way I like and I shoot.

Rules are made because there are natural ratios that tend to be pleasing to the eye. I actually prefer the Golden Ratio to the Rule of Thirds because it can be equally pleasing, and it doesn't look like you were shooting from a textbook the minute you see it. An interesting subject and attention to lines, leading and anchoring (i.e. get a solid vertical and/or horizontal), make for a solid composition 9 times out of 10 regardless of whether or not there's a "rule" supported by it because it's got a foundation to support the subject. When the photograph doesn't seem to work then chances are that it's lacking that foundation and you can sometimes salvage it by seeing if you can apply a composition rule to a crop in post that'll help you out. Composition should be second nature to a photographer. See your photograph before raising your camera, frame it and shoot it. Yes, rules might be applied but it will be done in a way that is absolutely organic, not forced onto the scene - and there's a good chance that rules will be broken.

Before diving into photography I spent the better part of my artistic life as a musician. I studied composition and theory, chord structure, you name it, and while it made me a better "musician" it stifled me creatively. Yes, I could write songs, and more often than not "fix" songs that others I was playing with had written. But I marveled at some of my bandmates' work, because they would bring in these things that I never could have written because, well, you just didn't do that in proper songwriting. Heck, one of them didn't even know what chords he was playing on the guitar and I'd have to figure it out to teach it to the piano player. Sometimes not knowing the rules and just simply knowing and doing what you like is head and shoulders above what the textbooks will teach you. If you struggle figuring it out on your own then learn the rules but don't become a slave to them.

I think the rule of thirds just barely opens the door to serious photographers. It's just a starting point as others have said. It gives you an idea of what to expect when shooting something that begs for more than a regular snapshot. Open the door and let the light in.

I'm all for breaking the rules and mad creativity and all that... I just think before most of us can do that (well) we need a firm and complete understanding of The Rules. Once you understand The Rules and can use them effectively THEN you can start breaking out of the shell and exploring how to break them and still produce powerful, evocative images. But if you can't explain your composition, if you can't explain WHY you did what you did, whether you're breaking The Rules or following them, then I don't feel you're really composing.

Yes, there are those who have a natural gift for composition but I believe we're speaking in generalities here and these people would very much be in the minority. I see photography students and working professionals every day of varying caliber and I assure you I see at least one-hundred students who think they can make great images without learning s--t about the rules of composition for every one that, by some freak of nature, actually can. You gotta learn to walk before you run and all that. And even those with a true natural gift for composing can still benefit greatly from understanding what The Rules are and how they are used.

In short; whether you're following The Rules or breaking them, it's all about having a true and accurate *understanding*.

....