--- Jez Cunningham <jez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Water in rivers and lakes may be level but what we see is not usually
> the water (unless we're half-submerged) but the opposite bank which
> can be at any angle, so psychology plays a huge part...
Hi Jez,
And that is the reason why I agree wholeheartedly with what Walt
wrote... "it is better to look level than be level." Even though my
camera was probably level (at least I initially thought it was and at
this point it really doesn't matter :)), those two photos always looked
a bit out of whack to me, causing distraction and this was confirmed by
other viewers. The only way I could make the photo "appear" level and
make the image more pleasing to view imho, was to level the bank of the
stream near the center of the photo by rotating the image 1 1/2 degrees
to the left in photoshop. For all I know, that bank could have been
running on an angle as well. I need to pay more attention to how the
scene appears and feels in the viewfinder. Maybe it's time to get John
to etch my 2-13 screen. :)
Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: hiwayman@xxxxxxx
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [OM] Re: Level photography ;-), was [photo] Fall Mist
> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:00:20 +0000
>
> >
> > To sum it all up, it is better to look level than to be level.
> >
> > Walt
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|