Not on the vertical!

I have read a few comments recently on photos were people have mentioned about a tree, post, perch or bird not being on the vertical.

I know sometimes it can distract the eye but it shouldn't take anything away from whether it is a good picture or not, even a great picture, since non vertical is how the situation was when the photo was taken?!

I don't think it is a problem if a little rotation is done with photoshop but does it really need to be done.

Just thought I open this for discussion.

Cheers

Gavin

in my opinion it becomes a distraction that sometimes takes the focus away from the real image. Horizons are a pet hate of mine as even 1/2 degree off gets immediately noticed regardless of the image content. I guess my engineering background is the problem :)

(Edit) ....since non vertical is how the situation was when the photo was taken.... The situation wasn't off vertical but the camera was and should be corrected imho

not sure it's just engineering. Practical photography has some good ideas on composition this month. Either keep horizons horizontal and verticals vertical or go for really dynamic and whacky shots which add deliberate tension to the subject. Horizons that are 'nearly but not quite' suggest inattention to detail and distract from the main subject.

Hi Gavin
my opinion for what it is worth. It is in the eye of the beholder and if you are happy with it leave it alone. That is what I do.
John
Aberdeen

Peter hit the nail on the head. If you are going to do it, ensure people realise that you meant to do it.

T

I have to agree with Peter entirely - "inattention to detail and distract from the main subject" is what I think when I see a wonly horizon. Or alternatively just sloppy photography. If you go to the coast buy a spirit level! A lot of time can be saved by getting it right first time in camera.

Niall

I think the point is being slightly missed here...

I mean, if a tree is not straight or a perch and that is how it naturally was then why chnage it. I agree that errors of not having the camera level when taking the picture is a lack of attention to detail but not when the thing wasn't level or upright in the first place!!

see what you mean Gavin. I suppose this is an aspect of cheating that is part of the nature photographers repertoire, like clearing debris from around flowers and fungi or cloning out distractions. Some have defined nature photography as finding order out of chaos!

This may be (in whole or in part) referring back to comments I made about an owl on a post.

I think I mentioned in the post concerned that the post may have indeed been wonky for real. However, on that particular shot, the background and the stance of the bird gave an overall impression of leaning to one side. That may have just been an optical illusion, and the camera may have been truly vertical. But only the photographer knows that, and so when displaying images to others (who don't know better), images should be straight, and if not, the photographer should explain "although this looks wonky, it was actually like that.."

I've taken images (landscapes) where it looks as though the horizon isn't straight. I know for a fact that it is (because I used a spirit level), but it still doesn't *look* straight. This may be due to the way a shoreline runs, or the shape of the clouds, or whatever. In such cases, I may actually rotate the image slightly, so that the overall *impression* is of a straight horizon - even if it means the resulting horizon is technically not level.

But as Peter said, generally horizons that are just off can ruin an otherwise stunning shot, simply because of a lack of attention to detail.

Michael S

Here's the image (and my message) that I referred to in the previous message:

http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=5228&b=se&st=120&la=164&ph=151&sid=29437&u=29470

I would agree that if a tree or perch isn't level naturally then leave it as nature intended. However on the Owl shot that I commented about the owl would naturally be vertical as it would compensate for any slope on the perch. This gave the impression that the camera was off slightly. In wildlife photography I think that it is more than acceptable to correct in PS any minor rotational errors that occur when an image is taken as time is often a critical factor and I would personally worry about getting the shot rather than checking a spirit level :-)

Landscape work is normally less time critical and errors in this subject matter aren't acceptable in my opinion.