**1**

### #2

Posted 20 March 2017 - 01:10 AM

I can give a partial answer to the portion"So what is the effect of using the golden ratio..."

Humans tend to prefer images that can be broken Into simple proportions. Simple and borIng would be tiles all of the same size. A = B. A little more subtle would be B = 1/2 A. C = 1/2 B. More subtle, B = sqr root 2A. Golden section is still simple, but very subtle. A + B is to A as A is to B. This and other ratios are found frequently in natural forms, and a lot of art has been built with sizes & shapes.

In the example vid, there are a series of circles whose size is related to a simple golden ratio construction.

But after that, there isn't much related to golden section construction. The designer had in mind a whale silhouette, and formed it by using only arc made from circles. It is sort of harmonic, in that every portion of the outline is made from chords from the few basic circles. But there is no clear rule for the construction.

iMac 27" Retina, c. 2015: OS X 10.11.5: 3.3 GHz I c-5: 8 Gb AMD Radeon R9 M290 2048 Mb

### #3

Posted 21 March 2017 - 12:34 AM

This is how the A0 paper system is laid out...One large piece of paper, in portrait mode, cut in two half way down along its waistline as it were.

The cut page is now rotated 90 degrees left or right and cut again in the same way. Repeat this and all the little pieces will have the same proportions.

A0 uses a ratio of 50:50 nice balanced and very symmetrical. Old TV sets had almost square shaped screens (4:3).

The golden ratio uses Fibonacci numbers instead, giving us a ratio of 1:168. New TV sets use rectangular shaped screens (16:9).

Which do you think is nicer...?

So the effect is more pleasing to the eye. Why? Because that is replicated in the natural and design world.

So think of the rectangles and circles produce with the this template as pastry cutters. Each one is the same shape as the rest. Only the size differs and if you lined them up, with the biggest on the left...then you would end up with a curved but jagged ramp.

HTH

peter

http://www.pinterest.com/peter2111

### #4

Posted 21 March 2017 - 12:44 AM

A0 uses a ratio of 50:50 nice balanced and very symmetrical. Old TV sets had almost square shaped screens (4:3).

The golden ratio uses Fibonacci numbers instead, giving us a ratio of 1:168. New TV sets use rectangular shaped screens (16:9).

Finger trouble, Peter? The ratio for A-series paper sizes is 1:√2 (or approximately 1:1.414) and the Fibonacci ratio is 1:1.618 (cf. the HDTV ratio of 16:9, which works out at 1:1.778). An A0 sheet of paper is 1189 mm × 841 mm, giving it an area of one square metre.

Alfred

*Affinity Designer (release build 1.5.2.58)** • Affinity Photo (release build 1.5.1.54*

*)*

*• 4th gen Core i3 CPU**•**Windows 10 Home*

### #5

Posted 21 March 2017 - 02:33 PM

Finger trouble, Peter? The ratio for A-series paper sizes is 1:√2 (or approximately 1:1.414) and the Fibonacci ratio is 1:1.618 (cf. the HDTV ratio of 16:9, which works out at 1:1.778). An A0 sheet of paper is 1189 mm × 841 mm, giving it an area of one square metre.

I have to admit that maths (with an s on the end) is not my strong point. However, I do hope that johnd finds things easier to grasp now.

Yup...it was late.

http://www.pinterest.com/peter2111

### #6

Posted 22 March 2017 - 11:00 AM

I was also looking for something like this and found this golden-ratio-design-examples hope it helps.

### #7

Posted 22 March 2017 - 11:23 AM

This is how the A0 paper system is laid out...One large piece of paper, in portrait mode, cut in two half way down along its waistline as it were.

The cut page is now rotated 90 degrees left or right and cut again in the same way. Repeat this and all the little pieces will have the same proportions.

A0 uses a ratio of 50:50 nice balanced and very symmetrical. Old TV sets had almost square shaped screens (4:3).

The golden ratio uses Fibonacci numbers instead, giving us a ratio of 1:168. New TV sets use rectangular shaped screens (16:9).

Which do you think is nicer...?

So the effect is more pleasing to the eye. Why? Because that is replicated in the natural and design world.

So think of the rectangles and circles produce with the this template as pastry cutters. Each one is the same shape as the rest. Only the size differs and if you lined them up, with the biggest on the left...then you would end up with a curved but jagged ramp.

HTH

peter

to me theses pictures mostly look like randomly drawn circles without much relation to golden ratios

could be my lack of understanding but their position and size does not really match, just pick the pink box on the apple logo and the green circles, does not match up at all as far as I can see lol

or the twitter one, there is no ratio at all

could be the size of the circles but could just as well be the surface-volume or circumference ....this just seems like designers wanting to introduce pseudo science to impress (or confuse) others

I just find it amusing (until I may notice that it was actually my fault )

- Alfred likes this

#### 1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users