Jump to content

Beautiful Landscapes Ruined by Crooked Horizons! WHY?!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Where did you read here there was a rule about slanted or off angled compositions?

What Moving On quoted, and . . .

In the end, a watery horizon must be level, and can (should) be corrected in post.

One of the reasons I continue to love making photos is that no one gets to tell me what “must” be done.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________

 

On occasion, a tilted horizon has bothered me. Next time I see one, though, due to this thread, I’m going to silently applaud the photographer who did it . . . just . . . because . . . :rolleyes:

  • Like 2
We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an example of my image from this weeks Post-Processing-Challenge. The lower image has the ocean horizon rotated by just 2 degrees. Perhaps it's just me, but that 2 degrees is unacceptable!

 

On the other hand, I like both Suprio's and Sandy's photos (although, for Sandy's, I think that if the person were standing up straight in a tilted environment, it would help re-enforce Suprio's comment. Some Photoshop work would be required.).

623310711_PPCmodified.thumb.jpg.aead61e43d47d4312925afbe9a7b5f79.jpg

Edited by Glenn McCreery
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an example of my image from this weeks Post-Processing-Challenge. The lower image has the ocean horizon rotated by just 2 degrees. Perhaps it's just me, but that 2 degrees is unacceptable!

I don't know, to be honest, if I would have rotated Glenn's photo when I worked on it for the post-proecessing challenge had the horizon appeared as it does in his second example. My main concern was bringing out the textures of and focusing attention on the central rock, creating more mood with some lighting changes that I felt the content was pointing toward, and adding to the sense of depth of the scene by highlighting the waves in the background and vignetting the foreground a bit.

We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, Supriyo, I didn't know that image of the girl and slanted horizon was yours so I hope you'll excuse my being so harsh. Been reading all the comments and I must've missed you mentioning it.

 

Obviously I didn't get your intended impression of the girl image because the slant to me is way too pronounced and disorienting to the point of distraction. The centered subject draws focus as coming across too rigid and mechanical far from the look of exuberance, freedom and energy (think starburst pattern). As a former cartoonist I usually conveyed that feeling placing a human figure moving at a slightly off angle forming a wedge like composition from left to right as if the girl is jumping out of the frame like someone shot out of cannon. Straight on shots at severe oblique angles come across as mistakes.

 

It's getting more difficult to find photos in a google search that allows a simple URL link that just shows the photo instead of the entire bloated web page. But here are some examples of off angle shots of kids jumping into the water from land or dock I think conveys eccentricity, freedom and energy...

 

https://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photo-kids-jumping-off-dock-beautiful-mountain-lake-little-boy-little-girl-having-fun-summer-vacation-image66494866

 

Family | Magnificent 7

 

Those shots can still be taken from behind as in yours and keep the off angle wedge shaped composition.

 

Tim, no need to be sorry. You were speaking your mind and I wish you continue to do so. I understand your description of energy in an individual to be having a more 3D pose, in contrast to mine, which looks more vertical. I get that. Your examples I think explains what you had in mind. BTW, your second example has the horizon tilted, and I think that adds to the dynamism of the shot, but you may disagree.

 

The way I look at my shot, is that the energy and exuberance are not just centered in the girl's pose, but the overall ambience as well. There is a big role of the blue sky signifying a free atmosphere, the diffused afternoon light imparting relaxation. I think the girl's hair flying around in the sky backdrop makes up for some of the rigidity that you were referring to. To me, the slant horizon in this shot signifies eccentricity and lack of inhibition, but I understand that it seems distracting to you (in hindsight I think, if the horizon was straight, the girl's pose would have appeared more rigid due to the angle of the shot). I am not trying to convince you of my shot or anything, but I like that you have a different POV and you expressed that. So to complement this discussion, here's mine. Sorry if I steered the conversation in the thread to my photo. Feel free to get back to what you were discussing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an example of my image from this weeks Post-Processing-Challenge. The lower image has the ocean horizon rotated by just 2 degrees. Perhaps it's just me, but that 2 degrees is unacceptable!

Not to be argumentative, Glenn, but the lower image is a perfect example of tasteful slanting of the horizon. I feel the 2 degrees compliments the leading lines visual flow of the hills on the left that blends in as part of the distortion provided by wide angle scene. But the top one looks just as compelling.

 

This is exactly where just enough and not too much delivers the desired effect of when to apply a slightly off angle horizon.

 

Hey, an image is made up of light and dark shapes/positive and negative spaces and leading lines that visually combine to tell an interesting story or convey the unusual and mystical aspects of our world.

Edited by Tim_Lookingbill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I look at my shot, is that the energy and exuberance are not just centered in the girl's pose, but the overall ambience as well. There is a big role of the blue sky signifying a free atmosphere, the diffused afternoon light imparting relaxation. I think the girl's hair flying around in the sky backdrop makes up for some of the rigidity that you were referring to. To me, the slant horizon in this shot signifies eccentricity and lack of inhibition, but I understand that it seems distracting to you (in hindsight I think, if the horizon was straight, the girl's pose would have appeared more rigid due to the angle of the shot). I am not trying to convince you of my shot or anything, but I like that you have a different POV and you expressed that. So to complement this discussion, here's mine. Sorry if I steered the conversation in the thread to my photo. Feel free to get back to what you were discussing.

I totally understand your intent about the slanted horizon and you're not steering anything away from the OP in creating an interesting discussion on creative motivation with regards to the photographic process.

 

Just a thought but my POV on this is that every created image has the creator in the scene regardless if they're visually present or not. The creator's hand is always perceived by the viewer. In the photo in question I'm questioning where you are at in that image expressing eccentricity, freedom and energy.

 

I'm asking myself if that is a selfy of the girl setting the camera on the ground with a timed shutter release and the camera just fell over in the process or is Supriyo laying on the ground and just couldn't level the camera fast enough to get the shot. All in all I'm confused why it's that slanted.

Edited by Tim_Lookingbill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All in all I'm confused why it's that slanted.

That seems clear.

 

The question becomes whether the confusion is the responsibility of the photographer or the viewer. There are times when a photographer confusing the viewer is a great thing. Other times, not so much. And there are times when a viewer comes away appreciating being confused. Other times, again, not so much.

 

I've been told by mentors and critics that they were confused by a photo of mine and that helped me realize I hadn't committed to what I was doing enough and didn't make my photographic point clear enough. There have also been times I've been in the presence of viewers, both of my own photos and the photos of others, who simply didn't get it, which was no fault of the photographer.

 

Something I often do when I'm confused by a photo, especially if it's by someone whose work I know and appreciate, is consider whether the confusion may lie with me and not the photographer. That may propel me to be more open to different styles and to expand rather than reinforce my own taste. It can and has, for me, turned confusion into insight. On the other hand, sometimes, try as I might, I just determine the photo doesn't work for me.

 

Supriyo's photo works for me, and I don't have to over-interpret its meaning or the intent of the photographer to get there.

  • Like 2
We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supriyo's photo works for me, and I don't have to over-interpret its meaning or the intent of the photographer to get there.

You've already made your opinion clear, Fred, including your perception of what is deemed "over-interpretation" which in my opinion is derived from your misinterpretation of how I feel about Supriyo's image.

 

I welcome any further non-information as I interpret from you in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally understand your intent about the slanted horizon and you're not steering anything away from the OP in creating an interesting discussion on creative motivation with regards to the photographic process.

 

Just a thought but my POV on this is that every created image has the creator in the scene regardless if they're visually present or not. The creator's hand is always perceived by the viewer. In the photo in question I'm questioning where you are at in that image expressing eccentricity, freedom and energy.

 

I'm asking myself if that is a selfy of the girl setting the camera on the ground with a timed shutter release and the camera just fell over in the process or is Supriyo laying on the ground and just couldn't level the camera fast enough to get the shot. All in all I'm confused why it's that slanted.

 

Tim, interesting speculation. The slanted horizon was totally intended, and pre-calculated though. I was indeed lying on the grass and seeing the slanted horizon from my POV. My daughter was running around. Seeing her running in the backdrop of the slanted spectacle gave me the idea of the shot. So I grabbed my iphone (adjusted the composition to have the right balance of sky vs ground) and waited for her to be in the right position and took a couple of pictures in succession and then selected the one that appealed to me the most. It might as well have been a quick snap without the opportunity to level the horizon, but usually in those cases, the subject becomes more off centered or partially out of the frame than the horizon tilting to such a steep angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, interesting speculation. The slanted horizon was totally intended, and pre-calculated though. I was indeed lying on the grass and seeing the slanted horizon from my POV. My daughter was running around. Seeing her running in the backdrop of the slanted spectacle gave me the idea of the shot. So I grabbed my iphone (adjusted the composition to have the right balance of sky vs ground) and waited for her to be in the right position and took a couple of pictures in succession and then selected the one that appealed to me the most. It might as well have been a quick snap without the opportunity to level the horizon, but usually in those cases, the subject becomes more off centered or partially out of the frame than the horizon tilting to such a steep angle.

I wish I had interpreted all that backstory information you've provided conveying your intent behind your image, Supriyo, and not relied on speculation. I didn't even know it was your daughter. Should that matter to the viewer? Is it the viewer's fault they don't see what you see in the image?

 

So what do you think I should've looked at in your image that would override my being distracted by the severe slant? The more you have to explain about the image, the more it says it's not working as intended. Anyone can like an image for any number of reasons like say it shows puppies and kittens and little children doing innocent things. How does a photographer make it more than that? Putting one of these attention getting subjects on a severe slant is saying what?

 

Did you ever watch mid-'60's Batman TV episodes where the cinematographer tilted the camera to show there's something wrong and foreboding about one of the villains intent? How do you apply that effect on an innocent child running without it meaning something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why don't you ask the people who posted the images ?

It's No Words forum for a reason. There's millions of images of pretty much the same type of scene and subject. I don't think it's my place to intrude on what amounts to someone else's own journey.

 

That's why I don't do critiques. It's pointless because people photograph for a wide range of reasons. The ten or so years I've been a PN member and contributor to these forums, the one thing I gleamed from critiques is it's more about the relationship of the members critiquing other members than it having anything to do with growing as a photographer.

 

I posted this thread as I said in my OP to just vent due to frustration from knowing what I know about the social dynamics of PN throughout the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's the old story about the Cowboy, paid off at the end of a cattledrive in a little town. He bought some new clothes, checked in to the hotel, had a bath & shave and dressed in his new clothes. He went down and had a fine dinner with a drink or two and a good cigar after. When paying his tab he asked the waiter if there was any gambling in town. The waiter responded, "There's a crooked game at the Mint Bar, but that's it." The Cowboy thanked him and said "Believe I'll go look it over." Waiter looked at him and said "I told you it was crooked!" Cowboy smiled, tipped his hat and replied as he ambled out, "You also said it was the only game in town."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's the old story about the Cowboy, paid off at the end of a cattledrive in a little town. He bought some new clothes, checked in to the hotel, had a bath & shave and dressed in his new clothes. He went down and had a fine dinner with a drink or two and a good cigar after. When paying his tab he asked the waiter if there was any gambling in town. The waiter responded, "There's a crooked game at the Mint Bar, but that's it." The Cowboy thanked him and said "Believe I'll go look it over." Waiter looked at him and said "I told you it was crooked!" Cowboy smiled, tipped his hat and replied as he ambled out, "You also said it was the only game in town."

You talk up a pretty picture of a good story, Sandy. You certainly have no complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I had interpreted all that backstory information you've provided conveying your intent behind your image, Supriyo, and not relied on speculation. I didn't even know it was your daughter. Should that matter to the viewer? Is it the viewer's fault they don't see what you see in the image?

 

I don't expect the backstory to matter to anyone for experiencing the photo. You were giving a different POV than me where the photo doesn't appear to be about energy and exuberance, rather the result of a technical mistake. Thats a valid speculation for someone who considers the tilted horizon to be disturbing rather than adding value to the photo. Its interesting to me since I didn't think of it that way.

 

I'm asking myself if that is a selfy of the girl setting the camera on the ground with a timed shutter release and the camera just fell over in the process or is Supriyo laying on the ground and just couldn't level the camera fast enough to get the shot. All in all I'm confused why it's that slanted.

 

You were speculating how the horizon got tilted (and came up with some interesting possibilities which I didn't think of), I wanted to clarify how the photo was shot. Feel free to ignore it if you want. Again, I understand that to you the photo doesn't convey energy or excitement, and hence its natural for you to interpret the image the way you did (or have confusion regarding it's message). I am totally fine with that.

 

So what do you think I should've looked at in your image that would override my being distracted by the severe slant? The more you have to explain about the image, the more it says it's not working as intended. Anyone can like an image for any number of reasons like say it shows puppies and kittens and little children doing innocent things. How does a photographer make it more than that? Putting one of these attention getting subjects on a severe slant is saying what?

 

I don't think you could have looked at anything in the image to override the distraction caused by the severe slant. It was clear to me from the beginning that the photo doesn't work for you, and as I said in my previous comment, I am not trying to convince you about the image. I respect your POV. The backstory that I gave was just to clarify that the horizon tilt was preconceived, not result of an accident.

 

Did you ever watch mid-'60's Batman TV episodes where the cinematographer tilted the camera to show there's something wrong and foreboding about one of the villains intent? How do you apply that effect on an innocent child running without it meaning something else?

 

Context.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do you think I should've looked at in your image that would override my being distracted by the severe slant?

Supriyo, I'm not sure answering this will be productive. The reason I say this is that your fairly gracious explanation of what you see and what you intended was met with this:

The more you have to explain about the image, the more it says it's not working as intended.

So, it seems like you're being set up. You're being asked to explain even further while being told that the mere existence of your explanation shows that your photo isn't working.

 

As for this:

The more you have to explain about the image

I didn't think Supriyo's explanation came because he felt he had to or the image warranted it. I think he felt a particular viewer, not the photo, warranted it. I think he was speaking as one photographer to another and just providing information about his photo, but not because he felt the photo was unfinished or inexplicable without it. There's a difference between providing interesting background info and even personal interpretation of one's own photo and that photo's supposedly needing such additional info or the photo falling short because such info was provided.

 

I often like hearing what others say or write about their work but I don't take that as a sign that their work itself isn't enough.

We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think Supriyo's explanation came because he felt he had to or the image warranted it. I think he felt a particular viewer, not the photo, warranted it. I think he was speaking as one photographer to another and just providing information about his photo, but not because he felt the photo was unfinished or inexplicable without it. There's a difference between providing interesting background info and even personal interpretation of one's own photo and that photo's supposedly needing such additional info or the photo falling short because such info was provided.

 

I often like hearing what others say or write about their work but I don't take that as a sign that their work itself isn't enough.

 

Thats actually my point. Thanks Fred, for putting it in a concise way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Tim.

 

Why you did Tim. You maybe didn't use the word "rule" but certainly the implication is clear.

 

"I'm having a moment where I just have to vent just coming out of the No Words forum. I keep seeing just gorgeous landscapes mainly beach and sky scenes, some with sunsets. And the freakin' horizon where sea meets sky is on an angle.

HAAAAAA! I just want to scream! It would be no problem to fix this even if it crops some elements out. What is it with people who take these nice looking photos and don't fix this?

 

Am I the only one that's bothered by this? I don't even get the opportunity to go to some of these exotic places so there's no excuse to get at least one of the shots of what amounts to a still, no movement scene and get the horizon lined up or at least fix it in post.

 

There! I'm done. I feel better now.

 

Post anything for or against and I welcome any other venting about other photo faux pas and just lazy photographing."

 

Seems pretty plain to me that to you, slanted horizons are verboten.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's No Words forum for a reason. There's millions of images of pretty much the same type of scene and subject. I don't think it's my place to intrude on what amounts to someone else's own journey

 

i didn't mean in the thread i meant via PM

Edited by jnanian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s (PM) already been suggested on the first page, and ignored....

That dog won’t hunt.....

 

“A little disingenuous to “Like” it there and rant on it here.

Why don’t you simply send her a PM with a little praise and tactful opinion?

We call that other stuff “two faced” around here....”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s (PM) already been suggested on the first page, and ignored....

That dog won’t hunt.....

 

“A little disingenuous to “Like” it there and rant on it here.

Why don’t you simply send her a PM with a little praise and tactful opinion?

We call that other stuff “two faced” around here....”

 

oops, sorry i must have missed it !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...