Rules are meant to be broken...

[John Allen]

aren't they?

One thing I've noticed since the megapixels keep going up on my cameras is that I get very lazy about composition, because I have so much leeway when it comes to cropping. That wasn't true when I took this photo with a 2.1mp camera in 2003. 2mp don't leave much room for cropping. I composed this shot in the viewfinder, but have now realized that I don't know why I put the horizon where I did. More than likely, it just felt right. The first photo is as it came out of the camera. The 2nd and 3rd are cropped to put the horizon on either the top or bottom 1/3rd line in an attempt to see whether following the rule of thirds would improve the photo. What do you think?

Original from camera - probably tweaked exposure in PP - downsized for viewing but uncropped

Cropped on bottom - width untouched

Cropped top and sides

All the same or is one better than the others?

 

[Brian Moore]

The middle one is more satisfying to me, John.

 

[Pete Askew]

Me too. The reduced lower area and improved flow helps me to know where to look I think.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Me too. It makes the upper and lower areas equally interesting. Nice image, by the way!

 

[Brian Moore]

Agree with Rob and should have mention it previously. Very nice image.

 

[John Allen]

Thanks everyone. It appears to be unanimous in favor of the one image that sticks strictly to the Rule of Thirds. Interesting. I use the RoT as a rough guideline for landscapes, but break it frequently. In fact, I think most of the shots where I deliberately don't follow the RoT turn out to be the most powerful.

 

[Rob MacKillop]

I think it works in this image because there are simply three points of interest. Add a fourth, and the whole universe becomes unstable...

 

[John Allen]

I think it works in this image because there are simply three points of interest. Add a fourth, and the whole universe becomes unstable...

I see what you mean, Rob. But aren't many, if not most landscapes three elements - foreground, horizon line, sky?

 

[Pete Askew]

True, but for me, in this instance, it is more about the flow of the eye through the image.