Element

[truonda]

[Manfred M]

Hi Daniel - I'm trying to figure out why you decided to do a Dutch tilt on this image.

I'm not sure that it quite works (actually I don't feel that it does) and the approach has intoduced distracting elements that would have been avoided using a more traditional composition.

[truonda]

I learned something new today. I used a Dutch tilt because I find it generally adds a new element (pun not intended) and a new perspective to an otherwise normal composition. In this case, the angle did capture the shoulder of their friend which I agree is distracting.

[Shadowman]

The tilt does draw the eyes towards the friends shoulder. I like the conversion, a city scene like this tends to work well.

[Manfred M]

Traditionally, Dutch tilting is used to break up scenes where there are too many vertical or horizontal lines. I have certainly used it in the traditional way.

A lot of photographers are using it in the way you are and again, the question I always pose is "why did you make that particular compositional choice?" Some people seem to feel that it will change a so-so image into a great one (same issue as some people will use a grunge filter / HDRI effect to an image). I find that it can work, but more often than not, it does not.

[truonda]

My answer to your question is personal preference. I'd like to think that there are no set rules that need to be followed. If there are rules then it may be worthwhile breaking them!

[chauncey]

Where you to hang that print, you would have folks cocking their heads in looking at it.

[truonda]

Where you to hang that print, you would have folks cocking their heads in looking at it.

Point taken!

[John 2]

...................... I'd like to think that there are no set rules that need to be followed. If there are rules then it may be worthwhile breaking them!

.........but Daniel, IMHO, not for the sake of it. I agree, there are no set RULES however for me and for the most part, the art of composition is in making the viewers eye comfortable with what it is seeing given the artificial constraints of the frame we put around the image we create. The so called rules are no more than some ways and by no means the only ways of achieving that aim.

You've captured a nice pose here and to me some tilt might have worked. As it is, it is too much and makes me feel quite uncomfortable. Classically with no tilt, you could have positioned the two of them to the left, using the fact that they are looking back into the frame to hold the eye in. I suspect however, that one of the reasons for the tilt is that there is a some OOF bits in the FG you wanted to eliminate. It might be worth trying less tilt, losing the car windscreen top left in the process and darkening the FG if its a problem. But as always - all IMHO.

[bnnrcn]

Hi Daniel I wouldn't tilt it. I have to tilt my head too much in order to get to know the composition .

[Manfred M]

Daniel - I am the first one to say that the rules are made to be broken; BUT only if you know them and understand what they do for you as you craft an image. These rules or guidelines are not just photographic, but developed over the centuries from painting, and apply equally to other art forms where three-dimensional material is translated to a flat, two-dimensional presentation.

Following these guidelines dose not mean you are guaranteed an image that is compelling, just as breaking the rules does not mean you will end up with something that does not work. What I find is much more important than slaveishly following the compositional rules is understanding what they do for your image. Once you understand that, if is a lot easier to "break the rules" and (still) come up with a compelling image.

When I look at an image, the first thing I look for is whether it works or not, and why. Sometimes one can make suggestions to the photographer and applying the "rules" can tweak and improve an image, sometimes things don't work out. As you have pointed out, personal taste and preference do come to mind, whether that is composition, post-processing, subject matter, etc.

When it comes to Dutch tilting, I do think there are places it works and others, where perhaps it does not. The one thing that is important with that technique is that there should be no question in the viewers mind that it was done with purpose. Nothing is worse than the niggling question, did the photographer do that on purpose or did he not line up the horizon line properly. There is an obvious answer in this image; you certainly did this on purpose. The question on whether or not it works in this image is what is up for debate.

[NorthernFocus]

Different isn't always better. But I'm too much a traditionalist to get a lot of things nowadays...

[flashback]

What would be fun would be to see this image hanging in a gallery, with a number of people all lined up and viewing it; heads all tilted 45 degrees to the right.

For me the tilt is just too much, given the subject. It's not a question of 'rules' rather that this aggressive tilt doesn't seem to add anything to the image. Perhaps half the tilt if you have enough of the original image.

[truonda]

Here's my attempt at reducing the tilting. Also tightened the crop and darkened the background.

[Manfred M]

Compositionally, this one works better, as you have eliminated a number of extraneous elements that took your viewer's eyes away from the subjects.

On the other hand, you are now in the realm of people questioning how you held the camera.

[chauncey]

Now I'm asking myself, what is it that they're looking at so intensely???

[bnnrcn]

Hi Daniel . Although it is better, it still doesn't work fine enough. I have levelled the horizon on my laptop as a trial and I have seen that it is a nice image without tilting. So, I would go that way if it was my image