The diagonal method: an improvement on the rule of thirds?

[vandergus]

Here's a site I found on my daily perusing of the internet. It's basically an alternative to the rule of thirds that is so widely taught as the most basic of compositional techniques. It would be interesting to hear other peoples' thoughts on the technique and how it may be better or worse than the traditional rule of thirds.

On the website, the author gives several examples of how the diagonal method applies to photographs, advertisements, sketches and all types of works of art. I think it would by interesting if, in addition to comments, people could post photos of their own with the diagonal method overlayed. Perhaps it's a photo that you really liked but could never put your figure on why and discover that you were using the diagonal method unconsciously. Or maybe it's a before and after of a crop that places the point of interest on a diagonal, strengthening the overall image. Anything you like, I just think examples really help in discussions like this.

Here's an example of mine.


Notice how all of the major elements fall on the diagonal lines (not necessarily the inersections), the face/eyes of the foreground person, the smore and the out of focus person in the background. Look at the same picture with the rule of thirds overlayed, it doesn't seem to be as cohesive.


Now, mind you, I had to look through a few photos before I could find a good example so it feels a bit like you're drawing the target around the arrow, but I think it's interesting all the same. Again, not all good photographs must follow the diagonal method, but I think it's a worthwhile exercise to take a look through you photos and see what you find.

[GarethHughes]

Intestesting theory, Will have to go and look though some photos of this.

[Crane]

really good stuff to know!

*bookmarks it*
*start drawing diagonals on Photoshop to test dome old shots*

[kencaleno]

Sorry, but that's not how it works-based on a 3:2 (perfect rectangle)-the diagonal goes from bottom left corner to top right corner,then a line drawn from the top left corner abuts this line at right angles,and if you do the same to each corner, you end up with the rule of thirds-This process was devised by the Greek mathematician,Pythagoras, and is known as the "Golden section"-simplified, it became known as the "Rule of thirds". regards, ken

[Nicole]

I had no idea you could change the crop overlay in Lightroom. That is pretty neat. Now I have all sorts of different ways to look at the composition.

[RoyL]

For all those that know my love/hate relationship with the Rule of Thirds, this is just one more compositional rule that can be used.

It is refered to as "Bakker's Saddle" and I think it is actually named after a photographer. It is often used by Professional Wedding Photographers. And it can produce much more pleasing results than the Thirds rule.

It does not replace or mean the Rule of Thirds is not right. Each iamge shoul dbe composed on its own merits and using whatever devices it requires to get that impact.

[wulf]

The rule of thirds grid isn't quite the same as the one derived from the Golden Ratio, although it is close. If you divide the edge of your photo for the rule of thirds, you end up with three sections - 1:1:1. If you divide it for the Golden Ratio, the sections are (roughly) 3:2:3 - the central one is a bit smaller.

I expect that the rule of thirds was probably developed by people who were familiar with work done on principles of the Golden Ratio (well established in art) but working on an easy approximation. If you find the various overlay grids restricting, you could pretty much boil it down to "Put your main point(s) of interest off centre by about the same amount from the vertical and horizontal axes but tend more towards the middle than the edge".

Again, you could probably boil the diagonal thing to "a strong diagonal line is a powerful design element". I do like playing with the grids though - I think it is an advantage to internalise the guides so that, when you actually get out taking pictures, your aesthetic sense is able to pick strong patterns naturally without having to resort to mechanistic formulae.

Wulf

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by kencaleno

Sorry, but that's not how it works-based on a 3:2 (perfect rectangle)-the diagonal goes from bottom left corner to top right corner,then a line drawn from the top left corner abuts this line at right angles,and if you do the same to each corner, you end up with the rule of thirds-This process was devised by the Greek mathematician,Pythagoras, and is known as the "Golden section"-simplified, it became known as the "Rule of thirds". regards, ken

It would seem to me that the system your describing isnt the same as the one posted by the OP. The system isnt "wrong", its just a different system.

[navcom]

The diagonal method is more precise, but the rule of thirds is easier to comprehend and get your brain around, especially for beginners. Many images set to the DM can also fall into the rule of thirds, albiet not as precise. In my mind, the rule of thirds is more likened to a grenade whereas the diagonal method is more likened to a rifle shot. Both are legit and are just tools in a large toolbox.

[vandergus]

Again, you could probably boil the diagonal thing to "a strong diagonal line is a powerful design element".

I agree, I think that's part of it. The author also mentions that for western cultures that read left to right, the upper left diagonal tends to be the most significant of the diagonals. I suppose it leads the viewer into the picture, so if something is lying on that diagonal it gives the eye a natural path to follow.

The diagonal method is more precise, but the rule of thirds is easier to comprehend and get your brain around, especially for beginners.

I think this also makes it much easier to consciously compose with the rule of thirds. It's much easier to mentally overlay a thirds grid in your viewfinder than it as a diagonals grid. I think the diagonal method is, in general more unconcious than the rule of thirds for this reason. As the discoverer of the method says, none of the artists had this method in mind when they were composing their works. He just happened to find that many fine works of art had the pattern in common.