DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Sloping Horizons
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 24 of 24, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/13/2002 10:01:01 AM · #1
I know the earth is round and all that, but I'm noticing a lot of sloping horizons in the pictures. I'm not claiming I always take the perfect horizon, but that's one of the beauties of post-processing - you can slightly rotate your shot so that the horizon IS level.
06/13/2002 10:03:54 AM · #2
definitely. but it is *so* hard to convey the effects of drunkenness with a level horizon : )

Originally posted by gr8photos:
I know the earth is round and all that, but I'm noticing a lot of sloping horizons in the pictures. I'm not claiming I always take the perfect horizon, but that's one of the beauties of post-processing - you can slightly rotate your shot so that the horizon IS level.


06/13/2002 10:05:21 AM · #3
Got a point there! *grin*

Originally posted by magnetic9999:
definitely. but it is *so* hard to convey the effects of drunkenness with a level horizon : )

Originally posted by gr8photos:
[i]I know the earth is round and all that, but I'm noticing a lot of sloping horizons in the pictures. I'm not claiming I always take the perfect horizon, but that's one of the beauties of post-processing - you can slightly rotate your shot so that the horizon IS level.


[/i]


06/13/2002 10:08:04 AM · #4
You guys crack me up!
06/13/2002 11:25:28 AM · #5
You mean the earth isn't supposed to be round?
06/13/2002 11:30:02 AM · #6
I think the 'horizontal horizons' rule is one that I commonly like to break. I do understand the rules and concepts of horizons, however. One of the most common errors I see in a horizontal horizon is that it's too close to the top or bottom of the frame... Positioning a horizon in a frame works differently for different compositions... Sometimes, it works best when splitting the frame in the center and sometimes it works best on a third line. I don't particularly like single horizon shots either... I like to have a 'layered' effect with multiple horizons... sorta like langdon's shot in the 'people' challenge with a sand/water and water/sky horizon... the multiple layers interest me much more :)
06/13/2002 11:37:00 AM · #7
Angled horizons aren't the problem -- barely angled horizons are. At least IMHO. When it's just a little off, it looks accidental. A lot off appears to be intentional. (Maybe we just hope that a seriously angled horizon wasn't taken by someone trying to get it nice and flat...)


06/13/2002 12:37:21 PM · #8
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
"Sometimes, it works best when splitting the frame in the center ...."

John, "text book" says the horizon should never be in the middle of the frame, as it cuts the photo visually into 2 pictures. Any comments/examples on where breaking this rule would work? (Just curious). ;)



06/13/2002 12:42:15 PM · #9
Originally posted by Karen Bryan:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]"Sometimes, it works best when splitting the frame in the center ...."


John, "text book" says the horizon should never be in the middle of the frame, as it cuts the photo visually into 2 pictures. Any comments/examples on where breaking this rule would work? (Just curious). ;)


[/i]

I have seen some where it works nicely but I will have to look for them... I don't normally do it myself... I try to go for the third lines when possible..
06/13/2002 12:46:25 PM · #10
Originally posted by Karen Bryan:

"text book" says the horizon should never be in the middle of the frame, as it cuts the photo visually into 2 pictures. Any comments/examples on where breaking this rule would work? (Just curious). ;)


Here you go.
06/13/2002 12:51:53 PM · #11
Originally posted by Reuben:
Originally posted by Karen Bryan:
[i]
"text book" says the horizon should never be in the middle of the frame, as it cuts the photo visually into 2 pictures. Any comments/examples on where breaking this rule would work? (Just curious). ;)


Here you go.
[/i]

That is one example that works... if the horizon is not long and flat, sometimes centering on the frame will work...
06/13/2002 01:03:42 PM · #12
what Patella said : )

Originally posted by Patella:
Angled horizons aren't the problem -- [i]barely angled horizons are. At least IMHO. When it's just a little off, it looks accidental. A lot off appears to be intentional. (Maybe we just hope that a seriously angled horizon wasn't taken by someone trying to get it nice and flat...)


[/i]

06/13/2002 01:34:26 PM · #13
Here's a nice shot where the horizon is almost perfectly centered...

CLICK HERE
06/13/2002 01:45:39 PM · #14
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Here's a nice shot where the horizon is almost perfectly centered...

CLICK HERE


A common thread I see among these horizon-centered photos is that the horizon is not the dominant line in the photo. In this example, the dominant lines are the cloud base and the wave, both of which follow the rule of thirds. In other words, the photo still follows the rule of thirds, but the horizon just isn't the line to put there.
06/13/2002 01:52:00 PM · #15
<img border=0 src="//www.pbase.com/image/2442185/medium.jpg]

or

<img border=0 src="//www.pbase.com/image/2442186/medium.jpg]

The centered horizon works well when the sky and land/water are
both interesting, so I think it works in the first one with the
reflection. In the second one, maybe I put the horizon too high, but the sky was really dull...
06/13/2002 02:22:57 PM · #16
Originally posted by Patella:
Angled horizons aren't the problem -- [i]barely angled horizons are. At least IMHO. When it's just a little off, it looks accidental. A lot off appears to be intentional. (Maybe we just hope that a seriously angled horizon wasn't taken by someone trying to get it nice and flat...)


[/i]
In photography school "They" talked about the 'Eleven Degree Rule'. If the horizion is more than that out of level it's assumed to be intentional. Then when you learn the rules, "They" give you the T-shirt and you can (should) break them:)

06/13/2002 02:46:21 PM · #17
There are , of course, adherents to the flat earth society. Sadly even then it isn't level and flat.
06/13/2002 03:21:33 PM · #18
Originally posted by sheyingshi88:
Then when you learn the rules, "They" give you the T-shirt and you can (should) break them:)

Agreed -- but if you break 'em, you better do it with a reason, and it should be fairly apparent to someone who knows what to look for what that reason is... Or so says me. :-)


06/13/2002 03:22:22 PM · #19
Here''s a few of mine with relatively centered horizons which I thought "worked." Sorry about the "frames" but the links at Jones Soda were the handiest.

BTW -- this is what I thought I was going to get in these forums when I signed up -- thanks everyone.

Bye-Bye Sun

Ranier Sunrise

Ranier Window (This sort-of has two lines, at 1/2 and 1/3)

Golden Gate Bridge

Sunrise Over Galilee

* This message has been edited by the author on 6/13/2002 3:27:49 PM.
06/13/2002 03:33:19 PM · #20
centered, yes. slightly tilted, no : )


Originally posted by GeneralE:
[i]Here''s a few of mine with relatively centered horizons which I thought "worked." Sorry about the "frames" but the links at Jones Soda were the handiest.
06/13/2002 03:58:53 PM · #21
Originally posted by Patella:
Originally posted by sheyingshi88:
[i]Then when you learn the rules, "They" give you the T-shirt and you can (should) break them:)


Agreed -- but if you break 'em, you better do it with a reason, and it should be fairly apparent to someone who knows what to look for what that reason is... Or so says me. :-)


[/i]
I totally agree! You gotta know the rules; know what you're doing. Then to avoid the cliches I've been reading about in other threads the rules sometimes have to be broken. In other words, the rules should be a framework, not a crutch.

06/13/2002 07:18:23 PM · #22
they are not really rules, but guidelines that will lead to a photo the is pleasing to the average viewer. I think Kimby's photo this week was one that was made strong by the unconventional framing, and not sticking precisely to the "rule of thirds"

Originally posted by sheyingshi88:
Originally posted by Patella:
[i]Originally posted by sheyingshi88:
[i]Then when you learn the rules, "They" give you the T-shirt and you can (should) break them:)


Agreed -- but if you break 'em, you better do it with a reason, and it should be fairly apparent to someone who knows what to look for what that reason is... Or so says me. :-)


[/i]
I totally agree! You gotta know the rules; know what you're doing. Then to avoid the cliches I've been reading about in other threads the rules sometimes have to be broken. In other words, the rules should be a framework, not a crutch.

[/i]


06/13/2002 07:30:40 PM · #23
Originally posted by Zeissman:
they are not really rules, but guidelines that will lead to a photo the is pleasing to the average viewer. I think Kimby's photo this week was one that was made strong by the unconventional framing, and not sticking precisely to the "rule of thirds"

Really ? Looking at it I'd say it was almost a textbook example
of rule of thirds and negative space both used to good effect.

The head is smack on the lower right intersection point, the arms
are aligned along the horizontal & vertical lines...
06/13/2002 07:38:18 PM · #24
Don't forget. . .it never hurts to break a horizon with a foreground object.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2019 10:31:18 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 04/19/2019 10:31:18 PM EDT.