In my view we hear too much about the “rules” that photographers are supposed to abide by to create that perfect picture. Below are some of these rules that I have read about and heard discussed on YouTube and elsewhere and some thoughts about what these rules can and can’t teach us, and how, if at all, we can use them to create a great and memorable image:
1) Rule of thirds, golden section etc.
2) You must always have “leading lines”
3) There must always be one single most important part of an image
4) Avoid white and black parts of an image because they can contain no detail
5) Crop to a fixed and established ratio
6) Always have a foreground in a landscape photo
7) Never put a horizon in the middle of the image
8) Always put a vignette in a photo
In addition, many photographers believe that cropping ought not to be done after the event, that the correct crop should be decided at the moment of capture.
In my view, these can all be photographic chains and leashes, holding back real instictive judgement, (although the moment you realize that they are not rules and can be ignored, they can then have their uses.)/
Don’t be restricted by any of these rules, and only use them if they support your instinct: there might be a reason why you only want to have a small slither of sky at the top of your photo; black and white areas of an image can be very powerful; the point of your image might be to juxtapose two different ideas; you might not have any need for a foreground. - after all, panoramas don’t generally contain foregrounds, and certain other images will have their own reason for not having them.
1) We are wrong if we try to compose an image and use the rule of thirds as our first port of call, and only reject it if is obviously unsuitable for the image. Photoshop now has grid lines of rule of thirds, golden section, golden sprial, triangle and diagonal. I have seen people get so excited that a particular image fits to one of these, but the truth is that almost any image can be thought of as following one of these grids.
2) Nothing is worse than a foreground put there for the sake of it - a foreground needs to comment on or add to the image, and in general it should also be visually connected to the rest of the image. So in general your photo will have leading lines because that is visually right - but that is something to be noted after the event, not at the moment of capture.
3) The juxtaposition of two different or even opposing ideas into an image can produce an effect much more than the sum of the two ideas. It can suggest or challenge, amuse or comment. So don’t feel that there must be one single focus for your picture and then ensure that this focus is brighter than the rest of the image, so that the eye is immediately led there. Of course this is true of many great images, but not all!
4) Some photographers feel it is a fundamental axiom of their art to ensure that there is detail in all areas of their image. They feel apoplexy every time the forbidden blue or red bits appear whilst editing in Lightroom or Photoshop - warning, warning, your photo is in danger of ruin! It might be, but then again, blocks of white or dark material can so effectively offset other areas of a photo and lead the eye to detailed areas; they can be a vital part of the structure of the image. So, don’t always have that feature of the histogram on, and use black and white areas if that feels right.
5) There is indeed a lot of convenience in having set cropping ratios in images, but don’t forget that there is no special visual magic in a 4/5, 5/7 or 16/9. They are conventions and can be useful if you need to have a group of images, for example , which need to be displayed together; or a particular medium/social media site might demand a certain ratio. The golden section (1.618) has a particular appeal to the eye because the ratio of the smaller side to the larger is the same as the ratio of the larger side to the sum of both sides, but usually the dynamics of the image itself make their own demands which override these kinds of consideration. So, free yourself up and stop thinking: “would this be better as a 5/7 or a 2/3” - it is fine to be none of these. It is like paper, where we are conditioned into expecting an A4 ratio, because it is all over the place. Or in music there are certain fixed structures such as ternary (ABA) or rondo (ABACA), but a composer doesn’t start off with a preconceived idea of a structure and then put material into that structure: the musical ideas and inner dynamics of the piece will suggest their own form.
6) See discussion in 3) above
7) Although good photographers know that the default positioning of the horizon in an image is a third or two thirds from the top of the image (rule of thirds), and that this will often look best, there are so many reasons why you might want it somewhere else; having a horizon in the middle is often best when symmetry is a feature of the image. When the main subject is placed in the middle (rather than right or left), this can be effective for similar reasons.
8) When I first heard a photographer whom I really admire say that he put a vignette on his landscape images by default, I thought: “why?”. I thought of a vignette as a special effect that might occasionally have its place. What I hadn’t realized is that a vignette effect, when done subtly and discretely in terms of amount, exact placement and degree of feathering, does not look like a vignette at all, and can transform an image. So I became a frequent user of this technique, but am determined not to overdo it or use it for no good reason.