Portraiture and the Rule of Thirds

OK...I hope this is the appropriate section for this question.

I've taken probably close to one hundred 'portrait' style photos of my kids by now, and by that I mean seated, upright, turned at a slight angle towards the camera. I've notice that, by and large, the rule of thirds (i.e. the subject horizontally placed at either the left or right third of the field of view) doesn't really seem to apply in this case. I do have a few that did turn out well, but I think this is the case because the subject usually had turned away from the camera, giving the shot a more candid feel.

So, would the more experienced out there agree that for this kind of portraiture, one would almost always want the subject horizontally centered, with the eyes vertically aligned at the third *only* if the rest of the head (including hair, hat, etc.) were also visible???

Looking forward to guidance!

Whatever works for the image but generally speaking centered heads with the eyes on the 50% horizon line make for dull portraits. There are always exceptions and knowing when those exceptions work are key but don't fear cropping into heads. When you are learning try and put the eyes on or near the 1/3-2/3rds lines. I tend to push things out even farther if the situation is right.

Heres a few of mine that I think work.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

don't forget that the rule of thirds is more like a guideline. but you can also accept it as a "rule" and rules are meant to be broken but do not enter the entire head in a photo which creates a huge headroom...unless you make that head on the bottom third of the photo and wanted that headroom. I'd say check out flickr or something like it and see the photos there in portrait orientation. good luck and have fun!

Airfrog:

Excellent photos! I particularly like #4, yet, I may need to go look up "portrait" again....I would not have thought that #4 counted as a portrait...it strikes me more of a candid, er, shot, whatever that might be called.

Regardless, I appreciate and admire the photos and will ponder your points.


Semper Pirate.

Freddie a portrait can be candid don't you think?

The "rule" is also meant to give some "look space" in the direction the subject is facing.

Conversely, breaking the rule can create some tension in an otherwise static frame.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #7898337
Freddie a portrait can be candid don't you think?

Well, for the sake of friendly argument -- yes, I suppose it can be. But since 'portrait' means 'portrayal', I think that the coffee cup covering her face precludes an accurate, or full, portrayal of the woman...

Bloody hell...your pix are great - I couldn't do as well. I've already taken on board the 4/5ths suggestion. Thanks for the shots -- they do help, immensely.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #7898381
The "rule" is also meant to give some "look space" in the direction the subject is facing.

Conversely, breaking the rule can create some tension in an otherwise static frame.

Exactly or can help convey a passing of time as in this example. I think this symbolizes her nursing is part of life that is now behind her.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #7898538
Exactly or can help convey a passing of time as in this example. I think this symbolizes her nursing is part of life that is now behind her.

Brilliant...

I've never really considered the reverse frame as such.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #7898555
Brilliant...

I've never really considered the reverse frame as such.

ditto. amazing photo

airfrogusmc wrote in post #7898538
Exactly or can help convey a passing of time as in this example. I think this symbolizes her nursing is part of life that is now behind her.

I have read about this concept, but never really paid attention to it. What a great idea. I love your shots, too, btw.

just the amzing rule of thirds eh?

I find the application of the Rule of Thirds to be very pleasing to the eye. Great examples posted above.

I got into a photography discussion with a woman at the office a while back who wouldn't know a DSLR from a disposable film camera. This was sparked by a photo I have of my daughter at my desk that I composed in ROT fashion, but all she could do was argue how horribly off-center it was. I told her that was the point, and she absolutely refused to even consider the notion that this method of composition has been used to great success for hundreds of years in paintings and, more recently, photography. Numerous links to web pages describing/explaining the concept with examples fell on deaf ears.

While fully acknowledging to her that many, many pictures, and even whole categories/types of pictures, are just fine when centered, she couldn't imagine how off-center could ever look good. It was frustrating.

ToddR wrote in post #7920128
I find the application of the Rule of Thirds to be very pleasing to the eye. Great examples posted above.

I got into a photography discussion with a woman at the office a while back who wouldn't know a DSLR from a disposable film camera. This was sparked by a photo I have of my daughter at my desk that I composed in ROT fashion, but all she could do was argue how horribly off-center it was. I told her that was the point, and she absolutely refused to even consider the notion that this method of composition has been used to great success for hundreds of years in paintings and, more recently, photography. Numerous links to web pages describing/explaining the concept with examples fell on deaf ears.

While fully acknowledging to her that many, many pictures, and even whole categories/types of pictures, are just fine when centered, she couldn't imagine how off-center could ever look good. It was frustrating.

I'd start clipping magazine images and just drop a boxful of them on her desk.

Wonder if her head would explode if you were to find good examples of subliminal advertisting as well!

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #7920261
I'd start clipping magazine images and just drop a boxful of them on her desk.

Wonder if her head would explode if you were to find good examples of subliminal advertisting as well!

Yeah, maybe I should ask her if she believes advertisers get producers to place their products into television programs.