In the days of film, the square format used to be more popular, particularly since 6x6 medium format cameras were around. Nowadays, no digital camera has a native 1:1 aspect ratio, and as such, the square format has fallen out of popularity quite a bit. That being said, it is a tremendously interesting and different way to compose and digest images, and this helpful video tutorial will give you some useful advice on creating interesting photos using it.
Coming to you from aows, this great video tutorial will show you some helpful tips for creating compelling square images. I have always had a soft spot for 1:1 photos, particularly since I find the symmetry of them so pleasing, but they can be surprisingly difficult to compose. One thing to keep in mind when creating them is that if you are using a full frame camera, which has a 3:2 aspect ratio, you immediately lose a third of the image's resolution when you crop it square. On a medium format camera with a 4:3 sensor, the penalty is not as bad (though still significant), at a fourth. Nonetheless, with the higher resolutions of many of today's modern cameras, that can still leave you plenty of resolution to play with as needed. Check out the video above for the full rundown.
Some good points, once he actually starts talking about it. But he missed a key feature of square format, that's demonstrated in that first photo: economy of composition, or to use a writing term, pithy composition. In that first photo, you can see how cropping to square cuts out extraneous and repetitive compositional elements on both the right and the left sides. There is no need at all for those two, almost identical "hills." One suffices in each case, and gets to the point much quicker. Efficiency of composition. Of course, to borrow from writing again, Winston Churchill allegedly wrote once "If I had more time I would have written you a shorter letter." It is harder to distill things down to their essence.
"Penalty" might be a harsh word to describe cropping pixels... If the image works better in a different crop, it's not a penalty to crop. I get what you're saying though. This is why I always roll my eyes when folks say you only need so many megapixels and why high-resolution sensors are useful.
It's more of a monetary penalty. You're paying for all those pixels you never use, if you crop most of the time. That's why I'd like a 4:3 "full frame" camera, as I very, very rarely use all of a 3:2 aspect ratio. But, I also don't want to spend the extra money for a media format camera.