Topic: A Turn In Blind River (Read 3976 times)

RMW · « **on:** April 10, 2018, 05:36:36 pm »

St. James Parish, La. USA

kers · « **Reply #1 on:** April 10, 2018, 06:44:29 pm »

I like it very much, ...but...

( me) I do not like the horizon being not horizontal...

i am sensitive to that ( doing architecture )

my fault

guido · « **Reply #2 on:** April 10, 2018, 06:58:59 pm »

Lovely image!

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #3 on:** April 11, 2018, 02:52:36 am »

Quote from: kers on April 10, 2018, 06:44:29 pm

( me) I do not like the horizon being not horizontal...

What horizon?

Jeremy

Paulo Bizarro · « **Reply #4 on:** April 11, 2018, 06:59:52 am »

Nicely done.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #5 on:** April 11, 2018, 09:30:17 am »

Quote from: petermfiore on April 11, 2018, 08:51:05 am

Behind the tree on the left, the water edge is not level...a bit disconcerting.

Peter

Which could be the result of the water's edge not being exactly perpendicular to the direction of the lens.

32BT · « **Reply #6 on:** April 11, 2018, 09:43:21 am »

Quote from: Eric Myrvaagnes on April 11, 2018, 09:30:17 am

Which could be the result of the water's edge not being exactly perpendicular to the direction of the lens.

But that's a technicality, still doesn't make it "a balanced composition". i.e. the camera could have been perfectly level and the photographer can argue so all day long, but the audience is still going to perceive a "rotated" result.

RMW · « **Reply #7 on:** April 11, 2018, 10:44:13 am »

Thank you all for your comments.
Glad some of you like this foto.
And understand some of you find the un-levelness disconcerting.
I didn't notice it until Kers pointed it out.
My mistake. (And not my biggest ever, I'm sure.)
Good to know eagle eyes are alert on LuLa.
Richard

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #8 on:** April 11, 2018, 03:58:26 pm »

Quote from: opgr on April 11, 2018, 09:43:21 am

But that's a technicality, still doesn't make it "a balanced composition". i.e. the camera could have been perfectly level and the photographer can argue so all day long, but the audience is still going to perceive a "rotated" result.

The audience can perhaps take a chill pill instead (or is it OCD pill?) or learn that rivers and small lakes do not have a "horizon" unless the banks are perfectly straight and perpendicular, as Eric noted.

EDIT: The above notwithstanding, there is surefire way to ensure verticality: connect the dots between the tree and its reflection.

32BT · « **Reply #9 on:** April 11, 2018, 04:45:36 pm »

Quote from: Slobodan Blagojevic on April 11, 2018, 03:58:26 pm

The audience can perhaps take a chill pill instead (or is it OCD pill?) or learn that rivers and small lakes do not have a "horizon" unless the banks are perfectly straight and perpendicular, as Eric noted.

EDIT: The above notwithstanding, there is surefire way to ensure verticality: connect the dots between the tree and its reflection.

What's the point? We're not interested in whether the scene is "perfectly" straight against some measurable technical standard. We should be interested in a perceptually straight result. You really have to eye-ball this one. No two ways about it. We may well end up with a technically rotated image while our perception is tricked into believing it is straight, but that is exactly what "composition" is all about.

guido · « **Reply #10 on:** April 11, 2018, 05:35:08 pm »

A grid focusing screen and a bubble level in the hot shoe are both your friends in these cases...

RMW · « **Reply #11 on:** April 11, 2018, 06:22:12 pm »

A straighter version.
For me, it's pretty hard to say what is exactly level with this image.
The sun stripes are a bit mis-leading perhaps?
Does anyone still find it disconcerting?
Richard

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #12 on:** April 11, 2018, 06:39:14 pm »

Quote from: guido on April 11, 2018, 05:35:08 pm

A grid focusing screen and a bubble level in the hot shoe are both your friends in these cases...

Not for the OCD crowd

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #13 on:** April 11, 2018, 06:47:45 pm »

Quote from: RMW on April 11, 2018, 06:22:12 pm

A straighter version.
For me, it's pretty hard to say what is exactly level with this image.
The sun stripes are a bit mis-leading perhaps?
Does anyone still find it disconcerting?
Richard

Not really.

But if you want to absolutely level it, this is what needs to happen (red the indicates the current state, green line true vertical):

RMW · « **Reply #14 on:** April 12, 2018, 01:36:46 pm »

Thank you Slobadan.
Your artistry and precise craft are a most worthy example.
Richard

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #15 on:** April 12, 2018, 02:17:09 pm »

I think we got carried away with the leveling and neglected other virtues of the image. Even in its OP version, the image is busy enough (in a positive sense) that the leveling did not bother me much.

Post processing is rather well done, particularly in controlling strong highlights. I might want to see a little bit more detail in the shadows, just to see if it helps or detracts from the overall feel.

It could be a difficult image to print, but done well, it would look great.

KMRennie · « **Reply #16 on:** April 12, 2018, 05:51:47 pm »

I am with Slobodan when he says that the levelling or otherwise is not the most important aspect of this image. However in a perfectly level surface the top of the object and its reflection is at right angles to the level only in the middle with respect to the viewer. I am sure that their is an easier way to say this but I can't find out how to put it right now. If a vertical object is not in the centre its relection will point to the observor. Try this, put a mirror flat on a table place 3 AA batteries on it 1 in the middle and 1 at either edge now look at them. Only the reflection of the battery in the middle is vertical, move your viewpoint to the battery on the left and its reflection will straighten and the other 2 will shift towards you. So using a reflection to level an image only works if the thing being used is in the middle. Far banks of lakes/ lochs or streams are not level unless they are parallel to the observer there are special cases if the observer is very close to the water surface then the far bank will look level but at adult eye height this will not be the case unless the river / lake is very wide. Sorry to come across all school teacher'ish. The important point, for me, is does it look correct. Ken

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #17 on:** April 12, 2018, 06:16:36 pm »

Ken, your perfectionism surely beats mine

i think a factor to take into account is the viewing distance. Your mirror example is based on a rather short distance, which introduces perspective distortions, just like a wide angle lens. Further away, like in the OP photo, and you can use objects further from the center of the image as a decent approximation. In any case, what I used is a rule of thumb. Would be interesting to see a more detailed geometrical analysis somewhere.

KMRennie · « **Reply #18 on:** April 12, 2018, 06:32:08 pm »

I decided to keep it simple Slobodan. Of course you are correct it depends upon subject distance but also the angle subtended. If you are using a wide angle lens then the leaning effect still occurs and this is a real effect not a lens distortion one. There was a time that I could have worked out distances, angles and amount of lean in reflection angles, but I am wiser now. If it looks right then it is. Ken (the retired Physicist)

RMW · « **Reply #19 on:** April 13, 2018, 12:00:29 pm »

About Slobodan's question regarding more detail in the shadows: Tried that, and to me it detracted from the overall feeling. Just too rococo- IMHO- for an LA wetland !

Author Topic: A Turn In Blind River (Read 3976 times)