I am waiting for myself to do this by instinct.


No I don't do this ;)

http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/15080.htm

something tells me that two vikings on this piece fall right on those golden intersections. Gimme a sec, I'll find more.

Nevermind, I should be doing other things :)


Edited by Saboteur - 27 October 2008 at 1:04am

Aww, so close. I thought the two vikings that weren't bissected would be the ones hit by them dang lines :D

See, I'm confused 'cause I've been taught both phi ratio and thirds, and I'm not really sure which is more powerful slash more right. I've been told they invoke a sense of harmony for a reason that noone really knows...

I tend to look for thirds, though, and I believe the ! viking and the lead viking are both within pixels of thirds intersections... iono. Not sure which one to belieeeeve!


Edited by Saboteur - 27 October 2008 at 12:16pm

The rule of thirds if for someone who creates compositions without a ruler...

What kind of sucker would ever do that?!  Srsly.

I think (and forgive me if I'm mistaken) the rule of thirds is of more use in the very literal intersections on canvas sort of way but phi is much more useful subtly, as in cases like the following:

http://www.pixeljoint.com/pixelart/7064.htm

Friggin NDchristie. Bastard probably knew what he was doing, too. Her body is near-perfectly 1.618 to 1.

I'd heard somewhere phi was also used in the proportions of Michelangelo's David, but I'm really not sure where or how.

Michelagelo's David is totally made in the proportions. And you know that Da Vincies pic:



That's the golden ratio there. :)

Oh, and it's also called Fibonaccies constant. :) I like to call phi that way. :)


Edited by zlajonja - 27 October 2008 at 11:24pm

why its everything related to the penis.

The golden ratio was known a long time before the Renaissance. The ancient Greeks studied it, and the Parthenon was built with it in mind. The Ancient Egyptians knew of it, also.

To say that the Rule of Thirds is a "very bastardized form of the Golden Ratio" is a bit harsh. For most photography sites I've seen, it views them as two separate things. And as far as I'm concerned, the difference between the two ratios (2/3-.61803= .04864) is rather small.
But I do think that people tend to use this ratio without realizing, just because it looks nice.

I know what you mean but the the best artistic foundation for the ratio is within a rectangular space. I do not think you should go looking for it however because if you look hard enough and subdivide shapes into enough pieces you can find just about any ratio you are looking for. If you subdivide any space long enough you loose accuracy enough to find the desired ratio. Don't go looking for the Golden Ratio. In artistic application the most fundamental use is within the canvas. It can be extended into other areas like anatomy. Finding it in nature is coincidence at best. There is also substantial evidence that Egyptians did not use it to construct the pyramids and also it is debatable that it was used in the Parthenon. What I'm saying is that if you ignore enough small details and subdivide space enough you can convince yourself that you have found it in everything. I place no emphasis on any unfounded mystic property of the number Phi.

I know what you mean. Certain shapes have different effects on different people. As a culture that extensively uses 45 and 90 degree angles they seem to cause immediate recognition and feel "right" in the eye. This is probably because we have looked at them as ideals for a long time. If you go looking for the golden ratio for a long time your mind may think of it as an ideal shape or ratio and then close approximations will feel "right".