Question reguarding Horizons and such

[STICKMAN]

Hello All,
I am a newbie here, so please take my question for what it is worth. I have been all over the boards since I joined here. The question I have is I see so many times people comment that the horizon etc is slightly off. Most responces say photoshop it or such.
I just don't understand why every photo must be 100% perfect. I guess I can completely see the issues if it is a portrait or such but as for nature, landscapes and such, I think sometimes it helps the shot. I just see it so much here, that it seems this is a complete no-no. Can someone explain to me please the reasoning behind such thoughts?

Once again as stated above I am a newbie and looking to learn so please help me out if you can.... Thanks In Advance

 

[elemental]

You mean slightly rotated, right?

For me, it really depends on the type of photography in question and the viewer and photographer's aesthetic sensibilities. I think I'm somewhat the opposite- I couldn't care less about rotation of the horizon in most portraits, but it drives me crazy in landscape or similar styles. I think what it boils down to (for me) is that when the horizon is an integral part of the subject (sunsets, mountaintop shots, many landscapes), it should (usually) be straight. If the subject is something else entirely (a baby, a bug, a flower to name a few that we all see on a regular basis), the geometry of the horizon is significantly less important to me.

There are always exceptions, but I think in general this is how I personally look at it. I am also very geometry-focused in photography, so my opinion is probably more extreme than most.

 

[Senor Hound]

Its an aesthetics thing...

The ancient Greeks did a lot with this, but that's probably boring to you. Anyway, aesthetics will tell you that people feel more at ease and calm looking at a photo with certain attributes, one of them being straight, horizontal lines. Diagonal lines are more intense and powerful, and since most landscape photos are shot with the purpose of being serene and tranquil, this would kind of go against the intended underlying theme of the shot.

But a shot is whatever you want to make it. If you want to create a landscape shot with a non-horizontal background, there's nothing wrong with that. Just understand that people will view it differently, and perhaps not as positively as you might want them to.

 

[table1349]

Hello All,
I am a newbie here, so please take my question for what it is worth. I have been all over the boards since I joined here. The question I have is I see so many times people comment that the horizon etc is slightly off. Most responces say photoshop it or such.
I just don't understand why every photo must be 100% perfect. I guess I can completely see the issues if it is a portrait or such but as for nature, landscapes and such, I think sometimes it helps the shot. I just see it so much here, that it seems this is a complete no-no. Can someone explain to me please the reasoning behind such thoughts?

Once again as stated above I am a newbie and looking to learn so please help me out if you can.... Thanks In Advance

The difference between "that's a nice picture" and "Oh my lord, I love that photograph!" can be less than 1 degree tilt, one third of an f-stop or one inch closer or further away. I think that photographers as a group are a pretty demanding bunch when it comes to good and great. I know that I am at least.

 

[Socrates]

Hello All,
I am a newbie here, so please take my question for what it is worth. I have been all over the boards since I joined here. The question I have is I see so many times people comment that the horizon etc is slightly off. Most responces say photoshop it or such.
I just don't understand why every photo must be 100% perfect. I guess I can completely see the issues if it is a portrait or such but as for nature, landscapes and such, I think sometimes it helps the shot. I just see it so much here, that it seems this is a complete no-no. Can someone explain to me please the reasoning behind such thoughts?

Once again as stated above I am a newbie and looking to learn so please help me out if you can.... Thanks In Advance

I am definitely not a PP fan but, if the horizon isn't level, well that's a no-brainer.

 

[Meysha]

I guess it depends on the photo.
Post us a link of where someone's mentioned this and the photo. It may just be they were over critical, or maybe the pic really needed it.

 

[STICKMAN]

Here is one from today, I think it is a great photo imo. Other thought it was slightly off.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125342

 

[Alfred D.]

Here is one from today, I think it is a great photo imo. Other thought it was slightly off.

It would be a great photo if it were straight. Now it's a photo that still needs work.
Imo, of course.

If I were a photography teacher I would subtract points for the photo not being ready yet for presentation.
But I'm not a photography teacher, of course.

 

[skieur]

Here is one from today, I think it is a great photo imo. Other thought it was slightly off.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125342http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125342

Excellent quality photography is in the details and despite strengths a detail that is off is still a weakness.

skieur

 

[Alfred D.]

Stick, if the fire brigade is called to fight a huge fire, their work isn't finished as long as there's still something, anything, smoking. However apparently insignificant.
Perfection is in the details. Dedication is in the attention to them.

 

[NateWagner]

I would also say that the horizontal lines is one of the things that make something a photograph and not merely a snapshot. The horizontal line shows that more thought was put into the photo rather than just a quick snap (of course a snapshot can have a straight horizon, but, a photograph rarely has a crooked horizon, in my opinion).

Again, the problem at least to me is that it often looks sloppy and like it wasn't really intended. If a person intends to use a slant that can be ok, for example with architecture that can be interesting etc. But it is the exception rather than the rule.

Nate

 

[keith204]

I would also say that the horizontal lines is one of the things that make something a photograph and not merely a snapshot. The horizontal line shows that more thought was put into the photo rather than just a quick snap (of course a snapshot can have a straight horizon, but, a photograph rarely has a crooked horizon, in my opinion).

Again, the problem at least to me is that it often looks sloppy and like it wasn't really intended. If a person intends to use a slant that can be ok, for example with architecture that can be interesting etc. But it is the exception rather than the rule.

Nate

Well put. Welcome to the forum, Nate! It'll be good having you around.

 

[STICKMAN]

All great points. All taken and will be put to use in future sets. Thanks again for all the great responses, As I have stated in prior post, thats what makes this place so great. Good folks, great skills and the willingness to help out a newbie.



Thanks Again.........

 

[manaheim]

Stick, something else to think about... just a couple degrees off of horizontal looks like a mistake... whereas 20 degrees off may be art. In other words, if the angle is more severe, it likely was intentional... just a touch off means you haven't fixed it yet.

 

[cdanddvdpublisher]

The difference between "that's a nice picture" and "Oh my lord, I love that photograph!" can be less than 1 degree tilt, one third of an f-stop or one inch closer or further away. I think that photographers as a group are a pretty demanding bunch when it comes to good and great. I know that I am at least.

*nods* that's how I feel about it too