h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I keep hearing people stating that the golden ratio is somehow inherently beautiful, despite there being no proof for this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio#Aesthetics

"Studies by psychologists/.../ have been, at best, inconclusive."

Personally, I don't prefer any rectangle to any other, in fact I think it's a bit mundane, but what about others here? Do you find yourself drawn to that particular shape, rather than others?

I thought studies of artwork (landscapes, etc) had showed that key features were significantly likely to be positioned at these points. I'll see what I can dig up.

I'm indifferent to the Golden Ratio, and will happily tell people who go on about it in relation to human anatomy that it's a load of foetid dingoes kidneys.

There are times that I've found the Golden Ratio to be quite interesting. And that chap Fibonacci was quite intriging too, but I've kinda lost touch with them recently.

So, do I like the Golden Ratio? Generally speaking, yes, but we don't really have much do to with each other anymore.


Geggs

I haven't heard the name of Fibonacci in decades! But on the whole, I prefer nice 'curves' over any arrangement of squared edges.

It's not entirely an arithmetic artifice.
The concept comes from the observation of nature:

http://www.maths.surrey.ac.uk/hosted-sites/R.Knott/Fibonacci/fibnat.html#plants


~jwf~

I don't know if I like it or not..as I don't recall seeing it, apart from in some text book involving an illustration of a spiralling shell.

I do know which paintings and all kinds of art I love. Some of them may have a bit of golden ratio in them I suppose.

It all sounds a bit pat really.

You can calculate anything you´re designing into Golden Rule proportions by just looking at our old friend Fibonacci.

I just can't help but wonder if it's merely indicative of mankind's desire to see patterns which aren't really there.

Yes I always prefer to see the patterns that really are there.

. The Golden Rule is not mathematically provable. It´s something that evolved naturally and we, being something Nature has designed, accept it as something familar.

"Yes I always prefer to see the patterns that really are there."

Me too. Except for really garish Paisleys.

Paisley is a lovely little village and not at all garish.

I'm no 'artitste', I'm just a tech-minded guy that likes much of what nature creates in its own good time and fashion.

Thank god we don't get them much round here.

It's African Dutch wax prints here. My kitchen curtains are of that design, with golden shooting stars across all the underlying pattern

When I trained as a Garden Designer, we were taught that it makes spaces seem more approachable somehow. Less artificial maybe, although gardens by definition are artificial human constructs.

Imagine one with oddly shaped bits of grass, paving, ponds, flower beds and hedges; even if they are all rectangular. And one that has the same number of elements but in ratio together. Your eye won't spend time subconsciously measuring the sides of things against other things - it just is acceptable at a basic level we don't even think about.

Other ways that you can feel slightly discomfited by lack of uniformity would be when you have picture frames hanging randomly on a wall, unless you're very clever and group them artistically. Your eye would be constantly re-arranging them by size and shape.

Most things are constructed according to this ratio, from sizes of paper to photographs, even door frames I'm told use this ratio - so we are so used to it but never really think to notice it.

Garden designers, photographers - croupiers too! When our arsitect designed roulette tables in a "trendy" shape our guests got cranky and we found the tables impossible to work at.

Well, the eye does seem to prefer things in thirds. Window panes, door panels etc. Not a hard & fast rule but it seems to be there.

Personally, I suspect the golden ratio is the ancients' way of feeling superior.
Thirds are good enough for me, the ratio 8:12 is just as good as 8:13.

The golden ratio in art is a bit silly I think, but it is a bit surprising how often it crops up in maths. I did my PhD in maths and, much to my amazement, because I used to be quite a golden ratio hater, it turned up in my work! The thesis was about spirals, so I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was.

/...we were taught that it makes spaces seem more approachable somehow.

Did they ever bother offer any proof?

"our guests got cranky and we found the tables impossible to work at."

Yeah, but how much of that was actually to do with the Golden Ratio and how much was simply that it was different?