Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?  (Read 5187 times)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14046
    • Flicker photos
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2019, 03:29:26 pm »

Plumb straight.  :)

Guillermo Luijk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1935
    • http://www.guillermoluijk.com
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #21 on: November 17, 2019, 07:31:58 pm »

On the corrected image the horizon seems nearly horizontal, however the dock still isn’t. This aspect strikes me most from this very nice image.

The only valid horizon we can find in a landscape is the sea (or a sufficiently large lake) horizon, and still is a straight approximation of what actually is a curve; unless you are a terraplanist, then it is exact.

Regarding the dock is like Slobodan explained. You are assuming the camera was oriented orthogonally to the dock's end, and in that case the dock's end would be parallel to the horizon (which we don't have BTW). In case the camera was oriented in any other direction, the dock's end would never be parallel to the (non-existent) horizon.


However, I think the original question is a bit silly. Here is my visual argument:

I assume you are just making fun Eric. In case you don't, the original image has a good bunch of trees which in average tend to grow straight. Statistically it's highly unlikely that all those trees made some arrangement to grow for years inclined towards a specific direction in order to fool us today. So it's quite safe to conclude that the distortion was caused by camera tilting and can easily be reverted.

Regards
« Last Edit: November 17, 2019, 07:43:17 pm by Guillermo Luijk »
Logged

JaapD

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 303
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #22 on: December 02, 2019, 06:55:07 am »

Guillermo and Slobodan,

Thank you both for explaining. You've convinced me and I have seen the light  ;D

Regards,
Jaap.
Logged

Tronhard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
  • Photographing for 40 years, now retired
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2021, 04:31:49 pm »

Trees do not always naturally grow straight.  I'm no expert, but trees will adapt to the conditions to keep their centre of balance but also deal with other natural impacting conditions - this type of reaction is known as a tropism.  While would normally expect tree trunks to be fairly vertical this can be changed by other stimuli other than gravity.

According to Webster's Dictionary: involuntary orientation by an organism or one of its parts that involves turning or curving by movement or by differential growth and is a positive or negative response to a source of stimulation.

For example:

Phototropism: Trees in shaded conditions (such as dense forests or areas shaded by terrain) may well grow at an angle to reach light
Anotropism:  Tree bend low to the ground, away from prevailing winds, to reduce the impact of high winds - often seen on coastal or high mountain areas.
Logged
"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1783
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2021, 07:31:06 pm »

Human vision is as much “mental” as it is “physical/technical.”  E.g. why is it that converging vertical “bother us” in the vertical (i.e. buildings converging when looking up), and yet we “expect” to see RR tracks converging in the horizontal.  It makes no rational sense.  In photography, I think it comes down to what “feels right” in an image to portray what the photographer intends.  (As has been well stated by SB.)  I’ll often fudge the “actual horizon” by a few increments of a degree because in the image is renders better in 2D what the 3D reality was.

Rand
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

Tronhard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
  • Photographing for 40 years, now retired
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2021, 01:12:31 am »

Human vision is as much “mental” as it is “physical/technical.”  E.g. why is it that converging vertical “bother us” in the vertical (i.e. buildings converging when looking up), and yet we “expect” to see RR tracks converging in the horizontal.  It makes no rational sense.  In photography, I think it comes down to what “feels right” in an image to portray what the photographer intends.  (As has been well stated by SB.)  I’ll often fudge the “actual horizon” by a few increments of a degree because in the image is renders better in 2D what the 3D reality was.

Rand

When I look at at photo, the engineer in me like to see wall buildings on the vertical (as opposed to those receding in perspecti ve) and horizontals horizontal, and not tilted slightly (as opposed to a Dutch Tilt where the effect is obviously intended).   All those years of training are hard to kick...  ::)
Logged
"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy

Guillermo Luijk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1935
    • http://www.guillermoluijk.com
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2021, 04:41:54 am »

Trees do not always naturally grow straight.
Correct but irrelevant to the topic. Please look at the image. It's clear that the trees in it are not straight, not because of any natural growing effect but because of the camera being slightly tilted down. That's what the discusion is about, not about biology matters.

Regards

Tronhard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
  • Photographing for 40 years, now retired
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2021, 04:08:26 pm »

Apologies if I caused offense!  :-[  From your response, it is clear that you were referring specifically to your photo, but the title did not specify that, in fact it is quite general and I answered it in that context.

My point was that trees will not necessarily be naturally vertical in landscape photography.  I have taken photos in wind-blasted environments where ALL the trees have grown at an angle because of anotropism.  Below I have offered a stock image showing this exact phenomena. 

Photo exanple of multiple trees not naturally vertical

 For me, the thing that should be horizontal in your photo is the water.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2021, 04:17:45 pm by Tronhard »
Logged
"All the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow", Leo Tolstoy

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21004
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2021, 05:11:47 pm »

Correct but irrelevant to the topic. Please look at the image. It's clear that the trees in it are not straight, not because of any natural growing effect but because of the camera being slightly tilted down. That's what the discusion is about, not about biology matters.

Regards
Tronhard's answer was entirely correct, as the wording of the original question made no reference to the photograph, and was stated in complete generality.
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

rabanito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1484
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2021, 10:16:29 am »

Tronhard's answer was entirely correct, as the wording of the original question made no reference to the photograph, and was stated in complete generality.



I agree
Logged

EricV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 259
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #30 on: July 13, 2021, 02:31:11 pm »

Going back to the original photo, another way to evaluate a tilted horizon is to look at reflections in the water.  Someone else (Slobodan?) pointed out this trick long ago, and I have found it occasionally useful.  In this image, even though the water is choppy, reflections are clear enough to show tilt which should be corrected.  No need to rely on trees :)
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21004
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Do trees need to be perfectly vertical in landscape photography?
« Reply #31 on: July 13, 2021, 05:00:01 pm »

Going back to the original photo, another way to evaluate a tilted horizon is to look at reflections in the water.  Someone else (Slobodan?) pointed out this trick long ago, and I have found it occasionally useful.  In this image, even though the water is choppy, reflections are clear enough to show tilt which should be corrected.  No need to rely on trees :)
Yes. But my camera won't make those nice yellow lines from plant to reflection.   ;D
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up