The horizon is tilted: How do you deal?

[matt_plunkett]

My question is prompted by one of the images posted a few days back (Joe Johnson's "Sage at Sunrise"), where the horizon was tilted yet the clouds seemed to show that the camera was indeed horizontal. This is a problem I've run into a lot myself, especially when in southern Utah or the Sierra Nevada range.

 

<p>

 

When you're standing somewhere where the horizon drops to one side or another, you don't notice an incongruity, since other visual clues tell you what's correct. But in a pbotograph, a horizon line slanting across the projector screen looks really off, regardless if it's a "reflection of the natural world" or not.

 

<p>

 

So how do you deal with this? Not take such pictures? Keep it crooked and explain it away each time? Or level the horizon out, as a form of poetic license?

 

<p>

 

-Matt

[glen_johnson]

Shoot it level.

 

<p>

 

Shoot it tilted.

 

<p>

 

Fix itto suit what you want on the easel in the darkroom.

[glen_johnson]

I suppose it is worth noting that some kinds of viewers are more critical of this sort of thing than others. For some people having the horizon line up parallel to the edge of the print is essential, and anything else just kills the photo for them. Everyone is not like this.

[don_baccus]

People who believe that nature's horizons are all straight clearly don't spend much time outdoors. And if they think a straight horizon with tilted clouds looks natural, they must spend even less time outdoors.

 

<p>

 

So ... I just don't worry about such folks.

 

<p>

 

Regarding the photo in question, a quick look made it apparent that he was shooting on the alluvial fan at the base of a range, and alluvial fans are never level...

 

<p>

 

If tilted horizons really bother you a lot, you can always move to Kansas!

[brad_mills]

A level on the camera does the trick for me. There are lots of "illusions" in nature - level horizons being one of them, the size of the moon being another.

 

<p>

 

Then I print it the way it is most pleasing to me.

 

<p>

 

The place that I find the "unlevel" horizons the most troubling to me is when I see a lake tilted which is obviously wrong.

[gws___]

Make sure your camera is level, and make the shot. I use the small levels that are built into my Bogen Super Ball head. Like I said in an earlier post, here in Colorado there are very few places where the horizon does not tilt in one direction or another. I am sitting here, at this moment, looking out of my office window at Pikes Peak and the surrounding mountains and there is absolutely nothing level anywhere in sight along the horizon. That's life, that's nature. I think someone, hungry for something to write about, probably wrote a book or an article and mentioned that slanted horizons are objectionable, so now many people think horizons should all be level. My personal take on the subject is...if they are level, they're level, if they are not, they're not. Very porfound isn't it.

In response to your question should you explain each slanted horizon when showing your slides, heck no. The human eye is very accustomed to seeing horizons that way. If anyone does mention it, simply respond, "yep that's the was it was". Of course this is just one man's opinion. I am sure you will hear others. Opinions are like noses, we all have one. I guess the bottom line is, you are the person behind the camera, you are the artist...it's your choice. Make pictures the way you like them.

[jim_bridges2]

I use a Bogen 3047 head and it has a level mounted in the head. I have installed "E" type screens in my F4s & 8008s, so when I'm not using the 3047 head I can still keep stuff fairly level.

[paulo_bizarro]

The only horizons that have to be level are the sea ones. As long as you shoot with the camera leveled there is no problem. For me it is very critical, as I do a lot of seaside and shoreline shooting. especially with wide angles it is very important to keep the camera level, as any tilting will make the horizon in the sea slide to the side.

[dan_smith]

First you have to realize that a level horizon on an alluvial fan is nearly impossible if it is an accurate photograph. Nature is found as it is no matter how you want it to be. Level horizons are not the norm unless you work at it and this will severely limit your shooting opportunities. The sage image that bothers you is just fine, is a good image and accurately reflects the area. Level it and the clouds tilt, the sage tilts and everything else is off.

But, if you have to have a level world shoot smaller scenes that you can control. Don't shoot much in the Great Basin or in mountainous areas and walk a lot to get the straight on shots of the slopes rather than shooting them from an angle. I think you would do better to get out more and spend time observing the world and trying to recreate it on film and you will see that straight and level isn't the normal order of things. Even the 'racetrack', the dry lakebed in

Death Valley where the moving rocks reside is not level. The end of the lakebed where the rocks are slopes to the south so the rocks that slide on it start off going uphill.(very gentle slope, but uphill none-the-less) Learn to frame your images and take into account the lack of level horizons and expand your vision or you are going to miss a lot of good images.

[frank_kolwicz]

I always find tilted horizons disturbing. In a shot like the one posted, I did not notice the difference between the land and the clouds, even when it was pointed out by Don. Even when they are right, such shots look wrong to my eye.

 

<p>

 

I have a similar problem composition and it is a seascape, too! The distant ocean horizon is level, but the shoreline is not and the shore is more prominent in the image, making it look tilted until you look carefully. The shot is one I like very much, taken on the best day on the Oregon coast I ever had, but I don't show it because of the eye-twisting effects of the non-parallel lines.

 

<p>

 

As to other landscape horizontals - I always have been able to find a true horizontal, even in the Rockies, without the use of a level, despite the fact that the mountains contain essentially nothing level. For me, at least, there is an implied level in almost every scene and only when clues are completely absent and/or the perspective seriously distorted do I feel disoriented as to level.

 

<p>

 

Frank

[joe johnson photos]

The problems come when the "apparent" horizon is close to being level but isn't. If the slope is steep enough, it's not as distracting as if it is close but not quite level. Another problem comes when there are other cues in the shot that obviously contradict the unlevel horizon. In this case, the clouds, sage, perfectly verticle flowers, etc. If the scene lacks contradicting indications of true level, then I'd say shoot with the camera on an angle to make the horizon level. However, I'd have to disagree with Frank when he said you can always find a level-looking angle. While that may be partly true, your main subject (in this case the sage) may not allow it. This is especially true when the sun is low and you don't want your shadow getting in the photo. The light was happening, the clouds in the background were most interesting in a specific direction behind the sage and the golden moment is so fleeting that angle for the sage shot was probably best as is. Having said all that, the angle on the alluvial fan still bothers me. Thats why "perfect" shots are so hard to come by. BTW, is there such a thing as a "perfect" shot? I think so. jj

[barklays___]

Let's face it, the reason for Matthew's question was based on a photo which quite simply looks tilted. The key word is "LOOKS". If the shot in question had a straight "looking" horizon line, everyone would have probably liked it. Also, if it looked level, I would hope that nobody would be pompous enough to say that the clouds were crooked!! Anybody that would put those clouds in that shot level instead of the land in question, needs to spend more "indoors"!

The point is don't always rely on man made equipment ie levels etc. and use what God gave you, those eyes! They're there for a reason. Look through your viewfinder "critically" and make the picture "look" as best you can. Only then will the narrow minded critics of the upper echelon pick apart somebody else's work.

 

<p>

 

Pete Bowman