Does this follow the rule of 3's?

[Bobby]

I'm not new to photography, but I am trying to take better pictures. This picture was taken in October with a Fuji Finepix 2MP. Does it follow the basic rule of 3? Any and all advice is appreciated.

http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2372447230094243606KesVHJ

 

[nartreb]

Overall, my answer is no. The most dramatic transition is between the sky and the hills, and that occurs right across the middle of the frame. The body of water in the near distance is near the lower-1/3 line, but it doesn't stand out much.
Each of the peaks is near a vertical thirds line, but they aren't peaky enough to constitute focal points in the presence of so much sky - the "lines" in the picture are overwhelmingly horizontal.

If you crop about half the sky, you'll move the skyline up to the upper thirds-line, putting each peak on an intersection of thirds-lines.

I like that you included a shrub in the foreground to add depth, but I have to question both the position of the yellow shrub (too close to the vertical midline) and your choice of that shrub - one of the red ones would have been more colorful and interesting. You might also try standing closer to your chosen foreground shrub for even more of an impression of depth (as you did in image # 47 in that album).

 

[Mark Schaefer]

It is a nice view of the range. There are thirds in your horizontal elements, but less so in the vertical. Ideally in the rule of thirds there would be divisions of thirds in both horizontal and vertical, with a strong subject at on the of the junctions on the imaginary third dividing lines. If the yellow bush were a bit to the right and a little higher in the frame, it would follow the rule more closely.

However, that yellow tree is probably not a strong enough subject to hold one's attention. Don't be afraid to ask one or more of your companions to go and stand in the view. Perhaps show them in profile looking toward the mountains. Place them at one of the imaginary third junctions and you could have an interesting picture.

The sky is a bit weak, being near the hazy horizon on an Indian summer day. I noticed the prior photo in your gallery was a wider shot of the same scene and included more of the interesting blue sky. So either work in more of that blue sky, or if you do opt for the telephoto shot include less of the sky (the mountains and sky could be the upper third of the photo). Perhaps you could also find some stronger foreground elements further down the road. A taller tree in full foliage would be nice, and would provide a good reason to get more of the nice blue sky into the photo.

 

[LivesToHike]

I fairly much agree with the other replies.

It's a really nice view of the range. But the real question is for you is thus: what's your subject? Then, simplistically, frame it within the thirds vertically and/or horizontally. If it's the mountains then frame the range on the upper or lower third. I agree that a foreground subject can be used on the thirds as well. Try experimenting - you'll like it.

Enjoy,
--LTH

 

[Bobby]

I knew it wasn't a technical success, now I know why. Thanks for the input.

 

[darren]

Bobby,

I had pretty much the same comments as the others. I did a quick crop of your photo to show how it looks with the top of the ridge around the 1/3 line. I cropped closer to the big bush to show you how an object in the foreground can help anchor a shot. Not the best crop, but it can give you an idea of how you could have approached your original shot. You could get in closer to a good foreground object (manual zoom - your legs) and then still try to get the whole range in (instead of cropping it like I had to here).

- darren

 

[bikehikeskifish]

On the rule of thirds, the bush in the front left 1/3, do you aim for the top, center, bottom, ??? of the subject to be at the 1/3 crossing point? Given

123
456
789

How do you (ideally) locate the bush (subject) on the shared corner 4578?

BTW, Darren, nice crop. It really does improve my perception of that image, even though you lost the left 40% and part of the mountains. Lesson learned: Don't try to capture too much.

Tim

 

[bubba]

Ditto. Lesson learned. Nice posts.

 

[Bobby]

Wow Darren! The cropping changed the entire picture. I think my major mistakes have been forgeting about the vertical 1/3 lines. I should see if my new camera, Canon A540, can set a grid. Thanks for the tips.

 

[darren]

bikehikeskifish - I would probably put the center of the bush or maybe a little higher up the bush at the 1/3 point. As I cropped it, the bush is too close to the bottom of the frame and almost looks cut off. Yah, the red bush is actually a different bush, but as is it all looks like one big bush and it looks cut off. What you really want to do is to get in closer and get some detail in the bush.

Hope this makes sense.

- darren

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Yes it does, thank you. In general terms then, you prefer to get the center of the subject in that 1/3 intersection? When you have a human or animal subject then, do you aim for the face / eye at the 1/3 intersection? Or is it still the center of the subject?

On a positive note, my camera returned from repairs yesterday so I can take it on some of the shorter, rehab-style hikes and practice what I've been reading.

Tim

 

[darren]

If the human takes up a small portion of the frame, I would tend to put the center of the person at the 1/3 point.

Can't wait until I can go for a rehab hike...

- darren