The Parthenon is often cited as an example of the practical application of the golden ratio for aesthetic purposes, while Leonardo da Vinci is suggested as having believed that the human body is divinely proportioned, but neither of them hold any water. The more that you look at the golden ratio, the more it becomes obvious that there is no supportable evidence to suggest why it should be favoured over any other ratio or proportion as an aesthetic high point.

And when the proportions allow this to be done, it should be a source of pleasure because of its past evolutionary associations with finding food or a mate.’ (You can read about it here, here, and here.)ĭoes that sound a little far-fetched to you? A little as if someone is trying too hard, looking for too many answers and making too many approximations? Maybe. Bejan: ‘Animal vision should be configured in a way that seeing and scanning should be the fastest and the easiest. This amounts, roughly, to the golden ratio. Supposedly the most efficient form for doing this is a rectangle that is approximately one-and-half times as wide as it is tall.

In the case of the golden ratio, it stems from an animal’s need to scan the horizon and quickly apprise it of information. However, Prof Adrian Bejan, of Duke’s Pratt School of Engineering, has posited a theory pertaining to our preference for the golden ratio that is rooted in his research around the idea of ‘flow,’ and how nature’s designs evolve to enable ever-increasing efficiency of movement. If something is supposed to represent aesthetic perfection and no other reason supports the theory other than its repeated appearance in nature, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I’m inclined to suggest that its mythic qualities enhance its attraction.

And it would seem that much of the mysticism surrounding the aesthetic properties of the golden ratio are divined from its natural occurrences.Įven if you do find the golden ratio attractive, finding an explanation for its appeal, beyond the vague assertion that its prevalence in nature gives it some kind of mystical property, is hard to find. The question is, then, why (or indeed why not) do we find the proportion delivered by an obscure mathematical theory aesthetically appealing? Looking for the golden ratio #įor a start, the golden ratio tends to crop up with surprising frequency within the natural world: from leaf and seed arrangements to aluminium alloy crystal structures. By using it as a compositional tool akin to the rule of thirds, it gives you a subject-placement guide that, in theory, presents you with an especially beautifully composed image. Does a diagram help?Īnd if you keep subdividing your divinely proportioned frame according to the golden ratio, it can be used as a compositional aid. You get there by dividing a line (c) into parts (a) and (b) where (a) divided by (b) is equal to (c) divided by (a). A rectangle that conforms to the golden ratio would have shorter sides equivalent to 1 and longer sides equivalent to 1.618. As a ratio, it would be expressed as 1:1.618. Phi, a bit like Pi, is an irrational number. The golden ratio is a mathematical principle that you might also hear referred to as the golden mean, the golden section, the golden spiral, divine proportion, or Phi.

Measure face goldenratio