Horizons and other useful things to remember:

[Joeseph]

One of the most important things when photographing anything with a visable horizon, is to ensure the horizon is "dead accurate" before posting the photograph, said a previous forum member (Scott T, if you're listening?) on a number of occasions when a Kiwi photographer should post something with even the teeniest, tinyest amount of tilt.

This is something I hear in my head (voices?) whenever I'm editing a picture for posting, does anyone else have things they absolutely "must" follow?
Curious to know what others have in mind when they're editing their shots for posting? feel free to chip in...

 

[Arbby]

Indeed. I have seen a few sea and lake photos where you could water ski without needing a tow boat

One of my tips might be named edge patrol. Always check around the edges of your image for distracting elements especially when they are cut off making them look bad and distracting.

 

[nevermore]

My only pervasive rule is that the image have a watchable quality. Otherwise, why bother with post processing or publishing.

Beyond that, while there are countless “rules” or guidelines that may be helpful, if not advisable, they always seem limited to a particular context. Remove that context or substitute another, then the “rule” becomes less compelling.

That’s just my $0.02.

 

[gmcphotographics]

One of the most important things when photographing anything with a visable horizon, is to ensure the horizon is "dead accurate" before posting the photograph, said a previous forum member (Scott T, if you're listening?) on a number of occasions when a Kiwi photographer should post something with even the teeniest, tinyest amount of tilt.

This is something I hear in my head (voices?) whenever I'm editing a picture for posting, does anyone else have things they absolutely "must" follow?
Curious to know what others have in mind when they're editing their shots for posting? feel free to chip in...

There's a difference between a percieved horizontal level and actual horizontal. Often an apparent horizon isn't actually the horizon at all. Often it's the vertical items that tell the truer story,.

 

[joayne]

When photographing people, make sure the head is in a clear spot. No palm trees, reflective glass, branches, signs to look like they are growing out of the subjects head.
It's funny how often it happens. Keep the head in the clear.

 

[Wilt]

One of the most important things when photographing anything with a visable horizon, is to ensure the horizon is "dead accurate" before posting the photograph, said a previous forum member (Scott T, if you're listening?) on a number of occasions when a Kiwi photographer should post something with even the teeniest, tinyest amount of tilt.

This is something I hear in my head (voices?) whenever I'm editing a picture for posting, does anyone else have things they absolutely "must" follow?
Curious to know what others have in mind when they're editing their shots for posting? feel free to chip in...

1. And if one is simply not pointing the lens absolutely perpendicular to the coast/horizon, perspective makes the coastline/landmass fade off into the distance at an ANGLE to the frame edges.
2. Or, if there is a RISE/FALL of elevation of the land, it is inherently at an angle to the frame edges, even if the camera itself is perfectly level.

...why rigid rules are meant to be guidelines but no rules that must be obeyed. In either of the aforementioned situations, make the visible horizon LEVEL is portraying the scene not as reality. As @gmcphotographics has stated, "Often an apparent horizon isn't actually the horizon at all. Often it's the vertical items that tell the truer story,." And sometimes there is not something truly vertical, like trees along a windswept point of land will display a permanent lean in their growth due to the chronically directional winds at that location!

 

[OhLook]

When photographing people, make sure the head is in a clear spot. No palm trees, reflective glass, branches, signs to look like they are growing out of the subjects head.
It's funny how often it happens. Keep the head in the clear.

I don't often photograph people, but I notice this in others' B&W street shots. Besides avoiding palm trees and all, you can lose someone's head even with a clear solid-color background if the tones are too similar. A person with dark hair can fade into a dark background area. Light hair or light hat, light background: same problem. Clothing also needs some tonal contrast if you want a whole figure to stand out in a scene (you might not, depending). We use outlines of shapes as the first quick clue to what we're seeing.

When my subject is geometrical, with strong verticals or horizontals, I don't want a tilt unless it's for an expressive effect. The tripod stays home, so getting angles right often takes several tries.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

With birds: head angle.

I was on Arthur Morris' forum, long time ago, 12, 14 years. And the head angle was an issue there. No matter how perfect a shot was, if the head angle wasn't perfect, the shot wasn't. And that stuck. To this day I can't ignore that mantra: watch the head angle.

Meaning: the bird has to face the camera, so a head only slightly turned away from the camera is a no-no. When out shooting and when culling I look for the perfect head angle. It's crazy how that stuck with me all these years.

 

[Pictoraider]

Photographer Nath-Sakura does knowingly shoot with the horizon tilted, banking on the fact that the viewer's brain will make the correction that makes the photo work : her calculation is that the brain will rely on the fact that it "knows" the model is positioned vertically and will re-invent the scene she has mischievously recorded for the onlookers. A similar process takes place when the human brain makes adjustments and makes us see a blank page, even though this blank page is illuminated by tungsten lighting.

Try the two photos with the crooked horizon on her Gallery page

Galerie | Nath-Sakura Workshops formations photo

nath-sakura-formations-photo.fr

She has produced many others of the same kind, playing and banking on optical illusions.

Photos | Nath-Sakura photographe et directrice artistique

www.nath-sakura.net

 

[West Coast Birder]

With birds: head angle.

I was on Arthur Morris' forum, long time ago, 12, 14 years. And the head angle was an issue there. No matter how perfect a shot was, if the head angle wasn't perfect, the shot wasn't. And that stuck. To this day I can't ignore that mantra: watch the head angle.

Meaning: the bird has to face the camera, so a head only slightly turned away from the camera is a no-no. When out shooting and when culling I look for the perfect head angle. It's crazy how that stuck with me all these years.

Hmm, were they saying that a bird facing the camera is desirable? Because to me, that’s the least flattering angle for most birds, the only exception being owls with their flattened facial disks.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Hmm, were they saying that a bird facing the camera is desirable? Because to me, that’s the least flattering angle for most birds, the only exception being owls with their flattened facial disks.

No, the bird isn’t to face the camera straight ahead! The head needs to be angled just a little bit towards the camera so there is eye contact. I’ll post examples later.

 

[Dragonspeed]

No, the bird isn’t to face the camera straight ahead! The head needs to be angled just a little bit towards the camera so there is eye contact. I’ll post examples later.

Sharp eyes and catchlight in the bird's eye - otherwise they look like they could be stuffed mannequins

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Sam, Daniel Cadieux has great examples of perfect head angle. Like here.

But images like these with the head turned away from the camera, are to be avoided.

 

[gmcphotographics]

Photographer Nath-Sakura does knowingly shoot with the horizon tilted, banking on the fact that the viewer's brain will make the correction that makes the photo work : her calculation is that the brain will rely on the fact that it "knows" the model is positioned vertically and will re-invent the scene she has mischievously recorded for the onlookers. A similar process takes place when the human brain makes adjustments and makes us see a blank page, even though this blank page is illuminated by tungsten lighting.

Try the two photos with the crooked horizon on her Gallery page

Galerie | Nath-Sakura Workshops formations photo

nath-sakura-formations-photo.fr

She has produced many others of the same kind, playing and banking on optical illusions.

Photos | Nath-Sakura photographe et directrice artistique

www.nath-sakura.net

I think she is using a common fashion / commentary / art technique called “the Dutch angle”. It’s used a lot in TV and films to create tension.

Remember, if the subject is out of focus, under exposed, garish, grainy or wonky….then it must be art!

If the photo needs an explanation or dialogue, then it’s called “alternative photography”.

 

[gmcphotographics]

Sam, Daniel Cadieux has great examples of perfect head angle. Like here.

But images like these with the head turned away from the camera, are to be avoided.

View attachment 51012

View attachment 50998

I agree, most of the time this is true. With all good rules there are a few exceptions. Sometimes there is a very specific narrative where a bird about to leave the perch or resting place and then getting an over the shoulder 3/4 shot from behind works well. Eye contact is crucial. The photo needs a particularly elusive combination of pose, lighting and drama. Hpefully, this photo of mine is a good example:

 

[ShipleyNW]

Generally, a viewer's eye is drawn to brights. If you can grab them with brights, you have a better chance of guiding them through the rest of the frame.

Like all rules, there are a million workarounds depending on the scene, but you gotta have a plan. If you don't have a plan, managing your brights is a good place to start.



I'm a "whatever floats your boat" kinda guy, but I'm anal about level. Second maybe only to autofocus, the viewfinder level overlay is the finest feature of modern digital cameras. After I frame up a shot, I get to level and pull the trigger. There's no excuse. I have shots that I describe as "brutally level," and they're some of my favorites.

 

[ShipleyNW]

Sam, Daniel Cadieux has great examples of perfect head angle. Like here.

But images like these with the head turned away from the camera, are to be avoided.

View attachment 51012

View attachment 50998

It's funny. I have this series that was ruined by head angle. As the head angle improves, the rest of the scene degrades. I'd have to pick one, and there's not one I particularly like.

 

[Cathy_B]

Always check the weather as many times as you can and neverrrr shoot outside in the middle of the day when there is bright sunlight. Photoworks is capable of removing shadows but there is only so much you can when it's the harsh sunlight that's causing them.

While shooting portraits ask people to mew, it helps prevent appearance of a double chin in pictures. If it's still there, use a double chin editor The thing is, a lot of people don't place their toungue correctly hence the double chin in pictures and in real life, but that could be avoided easily.

 

[Joeseph]

neverrrr shoot outside in the middle of the day when there is bright sunlight. Photoworks is capable of removing shadows but there is only so much you can when it's the harsh sunlight that's causing them.

Unless, that is, you're shooting Infra-red! bright and glary sunshine is great for IR....

 

[Cathy_B]

Unless, that is, you're shooting Infra-red! bright and glary sunshine is great for IR....

True!