 Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
The Golden Ratio 1.61803399??? OK, I've googled this, but seem to only find mathematical explanations. I use PSPX, and was checking out all the scripts that came with it last night (didn't realize they were there before). I ran across a script that puts the rule of thirds guide up on the screen, and then found one that was called Golden Ratio. It looks like the rule of thirds but with the lines doubled. I can't find an explanation to this online as to how it relates to photography, so can anyone here explain to me (in non-mathematical layman's terms) how this ratio applies to photography?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
I found this e-Book that gives a pretty clear explanation of the Golden Ratio. Enjoy, Chris A. Vedros
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
Thanks, Chris, I'll check it out.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
Thanks, Chris, I'll check it out.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Oliver Anderson |
Its funny because I posed the Rule of Thirds to my lovely girlfriend and she told me it applies to everything not just photography...Really I said and with that she proceded to explain that on MY payday I get 1/3 and she gets 2/3...I decided to quite there. Oh yeah she said BEBE has a sale this weekend. YIPPEEE
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
I'd pose my own Rule of Thirds to her for consideration.... you remember how your parents used to threaten they'd beat you half to death if you did such and such...(maybe not, maybe that's just a Southern thing)... anyway, I'd change the halfway to two thirds....Wait, no, I'm not a proponent of domestic or spousal abuse. I'd propose when she cleaned 2/3 of my house, cooked 2/3 of my food, etc....LOLOL (boy, I'm sure to hear from the women's rights advocates, now...it's a JOKE, people...)
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bob Chance |
Lucky you! When I did such and such, I was threatened to death, period. No fractions, no percentages. Just instant death. Well, I'm happy to say, I'm still here so I must not have been too bad. I was however, on many occassions as a boy, told to go play in the street with a stick of TNT. Now that was fun!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
Chris, thanks for the link. I checked it out and found this regarding what is considered an attractiver person: "Take a measurement from you feet to your torso, then from your torso to the top of your head. The second measurement on an attrative body will be a ratio of 1.618 to the first measurement. Measure the width of your mouth at rest then measure the width of your nose, the ratio on an attractive face will be...1.618." Now I know what I'm missing!!! LOL
|
|
|
|
||
|
Oliver Anderson |
Carly Simon was screwed at birth... Good news is I checked myself and am perfect....now I know why the lady's love me...its because of my 1.618
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jagadeesh Andrew Owens |
Wow, Oliver...I guess size really DOESN'T matter...LOLOL
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi Sipho, Today’s standard film and paper print formats are predated by art. Supposedly, Pythagoras discovered the “Golden Ratio” and it is the basis for many rectangular designs used in ancient buildings such as the Parthenon. However, this was predated by the Egyptians as they used the concept in their architecture. This ratio (shape) is still considered to be pleasing, not being too square, nor too fat or thin. The ratio is approximately 3 to 5. I won’t bore you with the math that derives it. As to photography: Art predates photography and the size canvases you find in the museums are often quite close to the golden rectangle. You might like to know that modern print format sizes are generally based on early film sizes that are no longer in use. The early formats were based on common window glass sizes. The most common format was called a full glass plate negative the size was 6.5 x 8.5 inches. This was a common glass used in doors by cabinet makers. Photographers often cut the glass plate to save money. Popular was the half plate 4. x 5.5 inches and the quarter plate 3.125 x 4.125 inches. Today’s wallet of 2.5 x 3.5 is a sixteenth plate. Now early Dutch paper makers worked with a paper mold that was 44 inches wide. This length was based on an average arm’s reach. Next they trimmed off the edges and devised cuts with width and length that maximized the product with reduced waste. Out of this came most of the many of the common print sizes we use today. Thomas Edison invented the motion picture system. He needed a narrow film strip with sprocket holes on the edge. George Eastman was the film supplier together they decided on a width of 35mm as this maximizes the number of rolls that could be slit from a wide master film roll. The fist still 35mm was produced by Ernst Leitz. The Leica image format was 24x36mm. The 36mm length was double Edison’s image length. Alan Marcus ammarcus@earthlink.net
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||