What "rules" do you often break, if any?

Thanks to all who responded!

There's a convention that, for landscape photography, one should focus at the so-called 'hyperfocal distance' whereby everything from half that distance to infinity will be in acceptable focus. However, there's a gentleman who breaks that convention by suggesting to focus at infinity, see:

www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/DOFR.html

Worth a quick read to get Merklinger's point, although he can be a bit loquacious ...

Now - we all know that modern lenses, even if they have an infinity mark, are not particularly good at focusing exactly at infinity -unlike older film camera lenses that usually have an accurate hard stop at infinity. Like, for example, my M42 Zeiss 20mm f/4 Flektogon.

So it is that, personally, I'll focus on something far, like the trees at end my street - some 1200 feet from where I usually stand. With the Zeiss lens at say f/8 the actual aperture diameter is 20/8=2.5mm and scene items bigger than that will be "resolved", especially distant stuff - but even nearby grass will remain obviously grass.

For much, much greater detail, see here:

www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/TIAOOFe.pdf

😐

I go with most of my photos with "shoot first, compose later (by cropping)". But then most of my photos (ca. 80%) are action: concert shots and animals (birds), where main purpose is to capture moment or in worst case at least some acceptable shots of subject. Once this is achieved I try to think about composition. With landscapes it is bit easier to compose and follow rules.
One thing I try to follow it getting horizon level and also when shooting architecture I try to leave space for at least some perspective correction to get rid or reduce leaning verticals.

One thing I need to turn more attention is image balance, more often than not I tend to leave horizon in center and get these "boring as $hit" photos...

I haven't found any good resource about that but it seems to me that golden ratio works best if image aspect ratio is also close to golden rectangle, i.e. about 1:1.6. I shoot m43 with aspect ratio of 4:3 being closer to square and when I set my camera's grid to golden ratio then it seems to be too centered, so I usually rely on thirds.

Heard that, the tricky bit in landscape is getting wet feet or falling off something major while you're trying to achieve it.

FWIW: I tend to compose simply in 16:9 screen and look at the full RAW later for other possibilities.
You get at least one layout you can trust; and, with today's pixel counts there should be more.
No grid lines used here, to me they tend to cut me off from my subject.
Plenty of time later for PP., Shootin' time available ? Not so much.

Ron.

i follow the rules of a tradie. if it looks right it must be right 🤔 studying technical drawing for 3 years and working in the building industry for 45 years you get to know whats right and whats wrong with perspective. i judged a local end of year photography club competition 2 months ago, and i can tell you the clubs have gone backwards massively when composing images is concerned, the problem with today is no one wants honest C&C everyone gets a merit and the members wonder why there club is at the bottom of the list in interclub comps. im not into the negative space trend from 15 years ago or if it looks bad its art 🤔

I don't tend to be a stickler for rules but there are some basic ones you need to start with, such as exposure. It's just as important to know when it's the right time to break the rules.

I believe the rule of thirds is quite important as a good starting point. It does tend to make photos more dynamic than just sticking everything in the middle of the frame every time. You can change it to suit the situation though. Any rule of composition can be over done. You see so many photos where people just haven't given any thought to composition or framing or leaving out distracting elements etc.

As mentioned above, I sometimes struggle to avoid framing in too tightly. I guess this comes from over 25 years of using colour slide film where you couldn't really crop afterwards.

I like my Panasonic DMC-LX1 because it has a native 16:9 sensor - cropping only the sides to get other aspect ratios - see here for an animation:

www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx1

It's 8.4 MB is more than enough for me.

Interestingly, my monitor aspect ratio is 1:1.6 (1920x1200 px) quite close to The Ratio!

That's probably a better arrangement than mine; stumbling over an extra top and bottom of a shot later, can make you second guess your choices !
That said, so far the system works. Most of my stuff ends up at 16:9 to suit my larger displays, 1:1 would run second.
Not shy about custom dimensions if I think the subject warrants it, but.

Ron.

Someone once said, F8 and be there. That was a Rule for Street Photography I believe. I don't use any rules in particular. For Cameraphone Photography with its tiny Sensor, It's easy to get everything sharp, which may or may not be the Desired outcome.