When to go Vertical?

[Ramsden]

Hello again,

Following my recent unsuccesfull attempt at going vertical, and with a big nudge from the author of a book I'm reading on Exposure, I realise I am probably like many photographers, and stay horizontal most of the time. 

So, with my quality management hat on; what is considered best practice for going vertical? What are your criteria for turning your camera around?

In other words:

"that shot would be greatly improved if the camera had been spun 90°

I attach a photograph of Denby Dale viaduct taken on a grey November morning. I had limited access on the adjoining road, but I now wonder whether going vertical would have accentuated the height of the arches, but possibly losing some of the width.

Learning how to use an EOS90D With 100mm Macro attached!

Ramsden

 

[Ramsden]

Thanks for all your feedback guys. Really encouraging. 

And its amazing how many vertical things I've found to shoot since Friday (like trees) 

 oh and the viaduct!

 Thanks, as ever.

Ramsden

[BrighamBB]

Great topic.

I find composition of landscape scenes becomes even more important. Leading lines, objects in the foreground, strategic use of the shadows all enter my thoughts when composing the image I want. I think when you are dealing with daylight inside the golden hours and nautical twilight those shadow questions take on added importance.

With those items in mind, here are questions that enter my mind when I am composing landscapes on the horizontal plane after taking account of lighting and any filtering I want to do employ:

Is there an object or means--leading lines--I can use in the foreground to draw an eye into the photograph?

Can I compose the image to take advantage of golden ratio--either the nautilus or a centering of lines and images that give the framing of an image?

Can I avoid an unnatural or artificial symmetry to add a natural feel or interest in the image I am making?

Let me add that I am careful about how to use a horizon. I have heard criticism that a centered horizon line is boring so I am careful about how I employ the horizon.

Hope these considerations add to the discussion.

Brigham 

[Ramsden]

Hi  Brigham

Thank you for adding to my post - its very encouraging. 

I like how your post has lots of questions, which I'm still finding difficult to remember when I lift my camera.

I'm also minded of Henri Cartier Besson's 'the brain, the eye, the heart; and have a suppleness of body'

I really like your last photo, it really draws you in.

Thanks again

Ramsden

[LeeP]

Don't bog down on what Henri Cartier Bresson et. al. say because step 1 is taking a lot of pictures and making taking pictures habitual. You have to develop your way of doing things and that comes with experience. Take pictures. Critique them honestly. Find what you gravitate to. Get good at that and then add the next thing. Yes there are all sorts of composition rules but being a slave to them will only produce frustration.

[Ramsden]

Thanks Lee.

Grounded again - or brought back to earth. 

But I had a lovely day yesterday, when my 14yr old son asked if he could go out with his camera (alone) to shoot some trains on the same line as the viaduct. We bought him a Canon EOS4000D for last xmas, and upped his lens to an EFS 18-135. 

He's watched and heard be going on about learning to work in M etc etc.

So off he went - camera set in M, trial and error (Dr Google). He had a great afternoon.

Here's one of his shots. I'm a proud dad and he was so pleased with his results.

It was grey November afternoon, in a densley wooded area - so I think he did quite well for a beginner!

[LeeP]

Very nice shot.

[LeeP]

I would also do a horizontal flip so that the bridge rises from right to left which is preferable to a descending line left to right.

[Ramsden]

That's a good suggestion that would transform the shot. 

Since I started these last couple of threads - and finding more aspect ratios - I'm now curious about the decision making process when choosing a particular ratio. Some compositions must, I assume lean towards a particular ratio.

I was also taken by Tim's reference to aspect ratios and our artistic endeavour as photographers. I can't believe its taken me nearly 2 years to start using this feature. 

I really appreciate how my eyes have been opened over the last few weeks.

More on aspect ratio please.

Ramsden

[TimBird]

On the subject of aspect ratios, I must admit I have not been aware that one can select a specific aspect ratio to capture in-camera. Certainly stands to reason if the camera can self crop to shoot various video sizes and APS- C for stills that it would also do other commoner rations for stills. I’ll have to explore.

However, my preference is to ALWAYS expose and save the full sensor area during capture. In different environments and different subject matter, I might plan ahead to crop later… ie: 1x1 (my favorite.) But I frequently find in reviewing my images, that they are ever so slightly out of level. OR, a different “level” reference presents itself in processing that didn’t occur to me in capture.

Point being that one can approach photography as a documentary medium on one end of the spectrum and a purely creative, imaginative medium on the other. I find more and more that being in the moment of capturing an image (I do mostly landscape) puts blinders on my eyes that keeps me from seeing beyond the frame of the viewfinder. So I am constantly reminding myself to look around and explore other ways to “see” the subject in front of me. 

Short story… I prefer to shoot full sensor in the field and crop only in post.

Cheers!

[LeeP]

Why do you like 1:1? 

I am so NOT a fan of 1:1, but I like to hear what people think.

I hated half frame, then I got a Pentax 17, have been using it heavily, and have warmed to the "vertical" format.

Given that I dislike 1:1, I am naturally inclined to understand it from the perspective of those who love it.