Re: Rule of Thirds?

Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

> Well, I give up. If you really feel you can't take pictures
> without the crutch of arbitrary rules

I don't and I haven't stated that anywhere.

> and the pointless imposition of pseudo-precision, [...]

I'm didn't ask how to use the rules, but what rule to choose.

You don't seem to grasp the difference and you conveniently snipped the 
part where I explained it. I won't repeat myself.

> - but you might want to think about a different hobby. Putting a
> guide on a focusing screen is silliness in the extreme.

"No trainers wheels on the childs bike! If he needs them, he shouldn't 
try to ride a bike at all."

> Like I said, rules of thumb are approximate, so if you do feel you
> need to be bound by these rules, then "roughly a third" is all you
> need (and either set of rules equates to roughly a third).

That's what I wrote two posts ago.

> If you can't judge "roughly a third" by eye, then you definitely
> need to take up another hobby.

"The child has a bad balance, he probably shouldn't try to learn to 
ride a bike".


That's not what you said? Well, join the club of misunderstood people. 
I've been a member for a while.