Origin of the Rule of Thirds (Historical Research)

[mattdm]

Ever wonder where the common "rule of thirds" came from? There's been a lot of speculation, but the entire Internet seemed to not really know. A very common theory is that it's a simplification of the golden ratio. That seems plausible enough, but, y'know, as they say on Wikipedia, citation needed. I did some research and found a 1797 book (at the Harvard library) which appears to be the original source — some musings on art and composition by painter, engraver, and author John Thomas Smith.

Here's the article on photo-SE (which is awesome, by the way) with the extended quote from the original:

What is the "Rule of Thirds"? - Photography - Stack Exchange

Smith doesn't appear to be aware of the golden ratio (which wasn't named that yet anyway — that name came about in the next century). It may be that if he had been, he would have ditched his rule in favor of that. Or maybe he would have argued. Who knows! But in any case, he seems to have invented it simply by considering paintings he knew about and other writers on art (none of which seem to have mentioned the golden ration by any name). In fact, the writer he quotes directly, Sir Joshua Reynolds, goes to some pains to note that he is just observing general tendencies of the masters, not measuring exact proportions.

Interesting, huh? (Well, I think so.)

[Thunder_o_b]

Interesting read, thanks for posting.

[zenandzen]

I agree it is interesting.
I saw a documentary a good while ago and forget the title but it may have been made by 'The Discovery Channel' or 'National Geographic', sorry.

The bit that stayed with me was the 'magic' number.

1.68

The Golden Ratio.

It may have also played a part in the creating the "rule of thirds" we have come to know.

Golden ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That proportion occurs in nature and 'Fractals' are based on this theory too.

Theories aside, things do have a right(correct) look to them for me when I notice that proportion in use.
But that's just my opinion there.
I'm sure there's lots more I have since forgotten.

Who was it that said "...divide and conquer"?

[LeeR]

It is interesting to speculate on the origins of the rule and its relation to mathematical constants, but I am far more interested in how it is being used and abused these days. Honestly, you would think it was a religion to some. We have actually had forum members take other people's images and lay a grid over them, pointing out how they could have moved the subject a bit to put it right on the third: ridiculous! It's reminiscent of Andy Warhol's famous statement, "To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail." I suppose if that's all you know about composition then you're going to swing that hammer for all it's worth, but no self-respecting artist consults the rule of thirds to design their composition. Instead, they rely on a finely tuned sense of what 'feels' right. If you want to use the rule as a reminder to keep your subject out of the center of the frame, then go for it. But I believe that in time you will come to find that the best composition is often near, but not on, "the rule of thirds."

[BryanC]

Originally Posted by LeeR

It is interesting to speculate on the origins of the rule and its relation to mathematical constants, but I am far more interested in how it is being used and abused these days. Honestly, you would think it was a religion to some. We have actually had forum members take other people's images and lay a grid over them, pointing out how they could have moved the subject a bit to put it right on the third: ridiculous! It's reminiscent of Andy Warhol's famous statement, "To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail." I suppose if that's all you know about composition then you're going to swing that hammer for all it's worth, but no self-respecting artist consults the rule of thirds to design their composition. Instead, they rely on a finely tuned sense of what 'feels' right. If you want to use the rule as a reminder to keep your subject out of the center of the frame, then go for it. But I believe that in time you will come to find that the best composition is often near, but not on, "the rule of thirds."

I agree with the general point of your comment. "The Rule of Thirds" is a nice guide to follow, and explains why certain compositions are eye appealing. 'Forcing' a composition to fit the rule misses the whole point, in my opinion. A centered subject or a composition that completely disregards the "Thirds" rule can be very interesting and appeal to the eye, also. It just depends on the particular image. Whatever 'works'.

[Thunder_o_b]

The rule of thirds is like any other rule in design. There are times that you are better served breaking it, I do quite often. But for those new to image creation (painting included) you have to have a firm grasp of the rules, and why they are the rules before you brake them.

There are some that approach this particular rule with an overly large amount of zeal, while over looking other aspects of a given picture. Makes one think that the rule of thirds is the only aspect of the image that they understand.

[jml79]

I just wish camera makers would use it as a rule to place some nice cross focus points. I may not follow the rule religiously but there is a greater chance that something will be close to it instead of a crap load of sensors bundled around the centre. I only need one sensor in the middle.