Some of these are, as others have commented, guidelines meant to be broken. Others are solid insights into technical limitations leveling the playing field (Phase One being equal to a phone after compression and resizing when displayed on a phone).
I have to say that the one regarding the rule of thirds was... wrong. Thats always been a rule to break, and square isn't even close to a new format. Shooting 120 film in 6x6 is, and was, common. Its what the Apollo Astronauts took with them. Its also my favorite format.
Having been doing photos as a hobby and professionally for almost 50 years, before and after social media, including a degree in fine arts along the way, I can assure everyone that the idea that these ideas were formalized rules is absurd. They were design principles, yes. But they were also cliches. They were basic ideas taught in photo 101 classes, used by students until they learned enough to know when to use them and when to break them in order to be more creative and fulfill their own visions.
Most things regarding photography mentioned in the article are still important and relevant. There's no death of landscape orientation, just that our primary displays for looking at photos mostly posted on social media are portrait. However the rule of thirds still applies regardless of whether you use a mobile phone or a DSLR.
Anyone can pick up a mobile phone and take a photo or a video, but the fundamental rules of photography and videography still apply if you want to do things seriously and properly. The article talks about manipulation
Yes its easier to pick up a mobile phone and take a good photo compared to picking up a DSLR. But that doesn't mean the fundamentals aren't important in making both of those devices take incredible photos.
Lastly, the article acts like decades ago photographers weren't taking photos with their DSLR's all dialed and dropping them into photoshop to retouch photos.
When cameras became more affordable to the middle class did painters furrow their brows in disapproval at the unwashed masses breaking the rules with a carefree click of the shutter?
At the time it was debatable whether or not photographs were really art, because the photographer need do nothing more than release the shutter. There was probably some protectionism involved, as photography put a lot of portrait artists out of work.
Rules are meant to be broken. There is a saying - the gist of it being - know the rules to break them.
I hate vertical photos and videos too. I hate square photos and videos as well. But if the consumption is vertical (or square), you want to produce as needed.
I was wishing I could make vertical videos back in 1997. I love square photos. I was experimenting with various print formats to create something that seemed to come from an alternate timeline and came to the conclusion I could cut an inch off a 4x6 print and get a 4x5 print and that turned out to be… the Instagram aspect ratio. Thing is I like 4x5 portrait and landscape and Instagram doesn’t like the later.
Some of these are, as others have commented, guidelines meant to be broken. Others are solid insights into technical limitations leveling the playing field (Phase One being equal to a phone after compression and resizing when displayed on a phone).
I have to say that the one regarding the rule of thirds was... wrong. Thats always been a rule to break, and square isn't even close to a new format. Shooting 120 film in 6x6 is, and was, common. Its what the Apollo Astronauts took with them. Its also my favorite format.
Having been doing photos as a hobby and professionally for almost 50 years, before and after social media, including a degree in fine arts along the way, I can assure everyone that the idea that these ideas were formalized rules is absurd. They were design principles, yes. But they were also cliches. They were basic ideas taught in photo 101 classes, used by students until they learned enough to know when to use them and when to break them in order to be more creative and fulfill their own visions.
Yeah, the photo.net forums would have had a field day with this before the turn of the century.
I don't think I really agree with this article.
Most things regarding photography mentioned in the article are still important and relevant. There's no death of landscape orientation, just that our primary displays for looking at photos mostly posted on social media are portrait. However the rule of thirds still applies regardless of whether you use a mobile phone or a DSLR.
Anyone can pick up a mobile phone and take a photo or a video, but the fundamental rules of photography and videography still apply if you want to do things seriously and properly. The article talks about manipulation
Yes its easier to pick up a mobile phone and take a good photo compared to picking up a DSLR. But that doesn't mean the fundamentals aren't important in making both of those devices take incredible photos.
Lastly, the article acts like decades ago photographers weren't taking photos with their DSLR's all dialed and dropping them into photoshop to retouch photos.
When cameras became more affordable to the middle class did painters furrow their brows in disapproval at the unwashed masses breaking the rules with a carefree click of the shutter?
In effect, yes.
It took a supreme court case to declare that photography includes some amount of artistic expression, without which it wouldn't be eligible for copyright: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrow-Giles_Lithographic_Co._...
At the time it was debatable whether or not photographs were really art, because the photographer need do nothing more than release the shutter. There was probably some protectionism involved, as photography put a lot of portrait artists out of work.
Rules are meant to be broken. There is a saying - the gist of it being - know the rules to break them.
I hate vertical photos and videos too. I hate square photos and videos as well. But if the consumption is vertical (or square), you want to produce as needed.
I was wishing I could make vertical videos back in 1997. I love square photos. I was experimenting with various print formats to create something that seemed to come from an alternate timeline and came to the conclusion I could cut an inch off a 4x6 print and get a 4x5 print and that turned out to be… the Instagram aspect ratio. Thing is I like 4x5 portrait and landscape and Instagram doesn’t like the later.
I often use the rule of thirds in square prints.
fstoppers was and is full of shit