Rules, Rules, Rules...

[Michael_2010]

... to heck with rules!

Recently I ordered a couple of digital landscape books and I couldn't help but notice that in many of the example photographs the horizon dissected the frame at mid-point. It wasn't in just one or two examples either. It was throughout the book. The photos were still beautiful. Made me wonder if too much emphasis is being put on that particular element of composition.

What say you???

[IABoomer]

I think it's going to depend on how strong the elements are above and below the horizon line as to if it works or not. If you're taking a shot of an open field with a little rolling hillside, the open sky might be too bland to weigh equally in the image, so shifting the horizon up and focusing more on the land would be good.

Now, if you're shooting something like a river running through a valley between a couple mountains, then the peaks of the mountains above and the detail of the river below might combine to make an centered horizon irrelevant.

[dcclark]

Is the emphasis on symmetry? Then I'd center the horizon, too. Is it about the foreground? Put the horizon high up. Is it about the sky or something silhouetted on the sky? Put the horizon low.

That's my general advice. It might help to look at the photos again with that in mind.

[Michael_2010]

I ordered three books about digital landscapes and none of them are within reach at this moment. So, I am not positive this was the book that had the most centered horizon examples. All three books did to one degree or another. But, take a look at the "Click to Look Inside" feature for this book and tell me what you think about the placement of the horizon in so many of the examples.

Amazon.com: The Digital SLR Expert Landscapes (9780715329405): Various: Gateway

[RecurrentNerve]

While it's called 'The Rule of Thirds' it's really more of a guideline. If you think a shot looks better with half-sky/half-ground, go for it. Better still, make use of your memory card and shoot one half and half, one two thirds sky and one two thirds ground, then decide later!

There's an article on DPS somewhere about 'breaking the rules'... ah, here it is.

[OsmosisStudios]

Rules were made to be broken, no? As long as it looks good, then what does it matter?

[Michael_2010]

Personally, I don't think it is that important. It is just a good guideline to use as a starting point and probably works more often than not. However, almost any time a photograph is critiqued on this forum the first thing people mention is a crooked horizon and the second has to do with the Rule of 3rds as if it was gospel.

I agree, if it works then it works and that is all any of us are really after in the first place.

[Chaotic Beds]

Indeed, it's just a guideline, and doesn't always result in better pictures. It depends.

Also, the horizontal lines might not follow the (guideline) of thirds, but what about any vertical elements? It could be a lone tree near one of the 'thirds' lines, or a waterfall that fills the left 2/3rds, etc.

[SusanH1970]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Rules were made to be broken, no? As long as it looks good, then what does it matter?

Agreed. My personal theory is, learn to follow the rules...then once you have them mastered, learn to break them so they work.

[JohnT]

I think the rules are a guide and might really apply if your a professional and things have to be precise, but for those that look at photography strictly as a hobby and or art form than most rules mean little to them.