having cleared that up.

now and then I run across an old neg/pos from the old days of gelatin-silver, and find an image which is terribly composed by current standards, but it works well despite that.

a few examples:

waterfal
the falls seem almost hidden, they also burst forth with almost explosive power, and two people are focussed on it.  any other way of showing this would turn into just another waterfal
photographer LaPush
main subject is the photographer, no wait it is the tree ... no its the scale of the tree.  it would not say all of that in the same shot composed any other way.  and this tree is nothing short of a huge force! the background was left a washed out element.  there are only a couple elements in the image, and all the values in the image work.
ducks
it was a grab shot because the ducks are leaving the area rapidly, and i wanted them on the grass without any other distractions.  I thought I had missed the opportunuty, but examining the finished work, it had a a tension consistant with the energy of the ducks.  it also has great motion towards the upper left.

in my opinion, somebody has to shoot this stuff and put in front of the interested public.

I like to break the rule of centering the subject ... I used, in the old days, a 6x6cm camera a lot, and you get so you see in square format virtually everytime you are using that camera.  it was a hindrance at first, and I had to force myself to be mindful that a rectangle is what you seek.  I also tended to center the subject in the center of the viewfinder because it can be placed off center when you print the image in a rectangle.  I began to like squares and centered subjects ... and I still do.

I think people are wanting to see some new perspectives, and a lot of them I meet actually listen to their heart, and do not judge a photo by rules, they like it, or they do not.  that is my kind of viewer.