Our commercial shooting has instilled the habit of framing both horizontal and vertical versions of important shots, so the clients have the most flexibility (and I therefore get repeat customers).
That habit has made the transition to my stock shooting, and I now compose and shoot most scenes/animals/settings in both horizontal and vertical formats. Call it "bracketing" and you wouldn't be far wrong.
It paid off big time this week, when I sold a vertical to one client and horizontal of the same scene to another, more than doubling the income. The point was amplified because the images were successive file #'s from the camera (7823 and 7824)! I've sold both hor's and vert's of other subjects many times over the last 25 years, but this is the first time they were successive shots.
Posted by Luke Ormand on April 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM
Hank,
That's a great point - thanks for sharing with the rest of us. For the work I've contracted out there have been some instances where I had the final product but the client needed more canvas on the top or on the sides - or they had to tweak the composition for whatever reason. Similarliy, there have been some photos that I have that could simply not be used for the job because the format didn't work (for a page in a book for example). Having verticals and horizontals would prevent that!
Posted by Nancy de Flon on April 20, 2011 at 12:56 PM
Thank you so much for sharing this important reminder, Hank. I always try to remember this when shooting lighthouses, but it's good to think of it for just about every subject.
Excellent point - thanks, Hank, for sharing this bit of wisdom.
Sandy
Posted by Garry Revesz on April 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM
Great point Hank, because I have always looked at a shot I'm taking as either H or V whichever suits the composition best. However, I do have one question to clarify your point. Are both 7823 & 7824 shot as hor images but you just cropped 7824 as a vert, OR, was 7824 actually shot as a vert with your camera at 90 degrees? That makes it a different image altogether.
Good question, Garry. It's coincidence, but 7823 was the last I shot in vertical format (camera tipped on its side), and 7824 is the first in a series I shot after recomposing for the horizontal version (camera flat). It's an interesting mental exercise and challenge to conceive compositions in the "alternate" format when a scene screams either vertical or horizontal, but in fact there are distinct markets for each. It might be "best" in vertical aesthetically, but useful too when recomposed for horizontal. In my example the vertical is a cover and the horizontal is being use for a double truck (2-page spread).
Discussion
7 repliesOur commercial shooting has instilled the habit of framing both horizontal and vertical versions of important shots, so the clients have the most flexibility (and I therefore get repeat customers).
That habit has made the transition to my stock shooting, and I now compose and shoot most scenes/animals/settings in both horizontal and vertical formats. Call it "bracketing" and you wouldn't be far wrong.
It paid off big time this week, when I sold a vertical to one client and horizontal of the same scene to another, more than doubling the income. The point was amplified because the images were successive file #'s from the camera (7823 and 7824)! I've sold both hor's and vert's of other subjects many times over the last 25 years, but this is the first time they were successive shots.
That's a great point - thanks for sharing with the rest of us. For the work I've contracted out there have been some instances where I had the final product but the client needed more canvas on the top or on the sides - or they had to tweak the composition for whatever reason. Similarliy, there have been some photos that I have that could simply not be used for the job because the format didn't work (for a page in a book for example). Having verticals and horizontals would prevent that!
Sandy
Garry