|
girlclimb
Aug 31, 2004, 10:17 PM
Post #2 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2003
Posts: 197
|
180 and 90L the 90 R makes me dizzy .. the original is the most natural but i like how the 180 kinda of make s you feel as if you were not even on the cliff when you took the photo
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Aug 31, 2004, 10:26 PM
Post #3 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
i find 180 the most natural.
i always feel the original oriented ones look like he is crawling on the ground....
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Aug 31, 2004, 10:34 PM
Post #4 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Outstanding question popol and one with which I have agonised over many times. You are looking directly down so orientation may be correct whatever way you post the picture.
I think that the 90R is my least preferred pic as it appears to be upside down in this orientation as the pov is above the climber.
The 90L is much better as it appears that the pov is correctly orietated. It gives the impression ever so slight that it may be that the climber is climbing up.
180 also gives a much stronger impression that the climber is actually climbing in the general direction of up. This one would be my preferred option. It gives the impression that the photogropher is working hard at getting the right perspective i/e an eagles eye view of the action.
The original pic is my second preferred option as this would be the natural way of taking most pics i/e photographer leans out from cliff and clicks shutter, observer leans out from cliff and views climber.
By the way I would very much like to see the face of the climber.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Aug 31, 2004, 11:36 PM
Post #5 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
180 by a mile (kilometre? :) ) Maybe 90L. The others are just too disorienting.
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Sep 1, 2004, 2:21 AM
Post #6 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
I like 180 best, and 90L throws me off somehow. The other two are somewhere between.
|
|
|
|
|
joe
Sep 1, 2004, 2:54 PM
Post #7 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2003
Posts: 897
|
the vertically oriented ones (orig and 180) look the most natural, even though the 90L sorta works for me.
i fret over this alot. if you can see the climber's face, i usually orient the photo so his/her face is right side up, but i don't always abide by this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the_pirate
Sep 1, 2004, 3:08 PM
Post #9 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3984
|
popol: I like the original best. At first glance it looks like the talent is passed out on a sidewalk. closer inspection reveals that he is in fact climbing. btw, for a picture with no face, that's pretty damn good.
Joe, those are two different pictures. The top one should be viewed upright since the back of his head is most prominent. The bottom one should be inverted as is since the front of his head is most prominent. Neither would look as good if oriented like the other.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Sep 3, 2004, 2:28 AM
Post #10 of 10
(945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
90 L is best for me. Original is next best. I'm sick and tired of seeing the cliff upside-down. It's a cheap effect that makes the climb look steeper than it is, and I only like it when the route really _is_ steep (like overhangs and roofs.)
GO
|
|
|
|
|
|
