5 ms·

Absolutely not. Unless you have a strong mathematical reason to expect it to show up, instances of the golden ratio is largely numerology bullshit.

aardvarkr 4y ago
^citation required
- crazygringo 4y ago
  Here are some articles on why the golden ratio having supposed aesthetic properties is a myth: https://eusci.org.uk/2020/07/29/myth-busting-the-golden-ratio/ https://eusci.org.uk/2020/07/29/myth-busting-the-golden-rati... https://plus.maths.org/content/myths-maths-golden-ratio https://plus.maths.org/content/myths-maths-golden-ratio https://www.fastcompany.com/3044877/the-golden-ratio-designs-biggest-myth https://www.fastcompany.com/3044877/the-golden-ratio-designs... So it's more like, citation required for any scientific evidence it does have unique aesthetic properties. At the end of the day, it's just a myth that keeps getting repeated, not much different from anything else in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions (Which also mentions the golden ratio in one of its bullet points.)
  - finnh 4y ago
    This reminds me of film "analysis" that shows how the director keeps creating wonderful triangles between three points of tension, and our eye naturally finds such triangles pleasing. Neglecting that any three points make a triangle, so this is basically just saying "a frame with three things in it".
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      On one level there’s some intellectual wanking about triangles, then as you point out any shot with thee things will have a triangle. I wonder, though, ignoring any attempts to over-analyze, if three is a nice number of things to have in a shot. The viewer can only focus on so many things after all. Three is also a sort of especially unspecial number. Zero things is sort of special in the sense that there’s no concentration of focus (shot of a landscape that just establishes the environment). If the focus is on one thing, then that’s really drawing a ton of attention to that thing (camera zooms in on the murder weapon and lingers). Two things can often be focused on the contrast between them (the villain towers over the hero). Three is the lowest number that doesn’t have a ton of baggage.
      - alar44 4y ago
        Odd numbers of things in a shot is a rule of thumb in framing.
        bee_rider 4y ago
        Interesting! Why’s that?
        alar44 4y ago
        Well, as with anything related to aesthetics, it looks good.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago
        Even numbers of things have a tension between the center of the group and the center of one of the things.
carlob 4y ago
Especially so in an exponent...

aardvarkr 4y ago

^citation required

crazygringo 4y ago
Here are some articles on why the golden ratio having supposed aesthetic properties is a myth: https://eusci.org.uk/2020/07/29/myth-busting-the-golden-ratio/ https://eusci.org.uk/2020/07/29/myth-busting-the-golden-rati... https://plus.maths.org/content/myths-maths-golden-ratio https://plus.maths.org/content/myths-maths-golden-ratio https://www.fastcompany.com/3044877/the-golden-ratio-designs-biggest-myth https://www.fastcompany.com/3044877/the-golden-ratio-designs... So it's more like, citation required for any scientific evidence it does have unique aesthetic properties. At the end of the day, it's just a myth that keeps getting repeated, not much different from anything else in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions (Which also mentions the golden ratio in one of its bullet points.)
- finnh 4y ago
  This reminds me of film "analysis" that shows how the director keeps creating wonderful triangles between three points of tension, and our eye naturally finds such triangles pleasing. Neglecting that any three points make a triangle, so this is basically just saying "a frame with three things in it".
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    On one level there’s some intellectual wanking about triangles, then as you point out any shot with thee things will have a triangle. I wonder, though, ignoring any attempts to over-analyze, if three is a nice number of things to have in a shot. The viewer can only focus on so many things after all. Three is also a sort of especially unspecial number. Zero things is sort of special in the sense that there’s no concentration of focus (shot of a landscape that just establishes the environment). If the focus is on one thing, then that’s really drawing a ton of attention to that thing (camera zooms in on the murder weapon and lingers). Two things can often be focused on the contrast between them (the villain towers over the hero). Three is the lowest number that doesn’t have a ton of baggage.
    - alar44 4y ago
      Odd numbers of things in a shot is a rule of thumb in framing.
      - bee_rider 4y ago
        Interesting! Why’s that?
        alar44 4y ago
        Well, as with anything related to aesthetics, it looks good.
      - Schroedingersat 4y ago
        Even numbers of things have a tension between the center of the group and the center of one of the things.

carlob 4y ago

Especially so in an exponent...