Opinions....photos at an angle, artsy or annoying?

[Mickey Fliers]

Just looking for some opinions. My DH can't stand it when I take images at an angle. I like it in some situations. For example:

 

[ma2jr]

Artsy.. love photos that are "outside the box"

 

[ma2jr]

Artsy.. love photos that are "outside the box"

 

[Wishes2you]

I have to say Artsy as well. I like your above photo very much.
I have seen other photos on this board done at an angle. I think
alot also depends on what you are photographing. It works for
somethings and not for others. I am planning to try some angle
shots after seeing other ideas here recently.

 

[Chikabowa]

I think it so depends on WHY you have the tilt. Sometimes an angle really does something for the photo and it really adds a sense of art - but too often I see tilts for the sake of tilts. I feel like if I have to move my head or feel like I need to turn my laptop on the side to see what is going on, then it's a tilt for tilts sake and shouldn't necessarily be done.

And trust me... I do tilts quite often....

For this particular picture, I think it's too much. I see exactly where you were going and had you been able to move about 5 feet to your right (which you probably couldn't considering there was water there...) and then fill your frame with JUST the subjects, I think overall the tilt would have worked better. However, at this angle, it just feels odd.

 

[Pooh_Girl]

I'll chime in as another one that thinks it's artsy... to an extent. I think one has to be careful how much of an angle they shoot at. For instance, I think that 45 degrees might be a nice touch, but I would never go beyond that. And then sometimes, I think that even 45 could be too much. It just depends on the circumstances. (BTW, I think yours came out really nice!

 

[EnnEss]

It's def a personal preference thing. This one makes me tilt my head, i looked at it ten times and Im constantly tilting my head. The frame would have been filled with the swimmers if it was vertical so the extra room my eyes never even went to. Maybe that's why? Maybe it's just how my brain works compared to someone else's.

 

[Mickey Fliers]

For this particular picture, I think it's too much. I see exactly where you were going and had you been able to move about 5 feet to your right (which you probably couldn't considering there was water there...) and then fill your frame with JUST the subjects, I think overall the tilt would have worked better. However, at this angle, it just feels odd.

You are absolutely right! Dang pool and other swimmers constantly getting in the way of great shots.

 

[jann1033]

I think it so depends on WHY you have the tilt. Sometimes an angle really does something for the photo and it really adds a sense of art - but too often I see tilts for the sake of tilts. I feel like if I have to move my head or feel like I need to turn my laptop on the side to see what is going on, then it's a tilt for tilts sake and shouldn't necessarily be done.


However, at this angle, it just feels odd.

i love artsy photos but really angled is not much out of the box any more imo.now standing upside down might be another story

i agree with the above though but i also think you could have taken the opposite approach ie move the other way and shoot more of the water and maybe just one swimmer sharply focused and then it slightly angled... ...imo this way to much is in sharp view to really look intentionally artsy (ie the father's legs etc in the background just kind of makes it look unplanned)and there is really not enough of the water to give you a sense of the action about to take place, the grueling uphill battle of the meet ahead, which you could capture more with more water to emphasis the long road ahead.
the problem i have with some tilts is if it makes it look like something is sliding out of the photo . here i think maybe the angle is a little to much as it makes me feel like they could fall backward which conflicts with them ready to spring forward. imo anything like a tilt or soft focus should have a reason behind it that adds to the photo, i mean other than the reason that i forgot to take it right ( which i have done to many times to count)
sorry just realized i deleted the wrong part in the quote, i meant to leave in the part about how you could have done it...

 

[ssanders79]

I would say both artsy and annoying. I like the tilted look as long as it does not get abused/overused. I know someone that overuses this technique and it drives me crazy looking though thier galleries.

Composition rules are ok to be broken as long as you have a method to your madness.

Bottom line, I choose artsy unless it overused.

 

[WDWFigment]

i love artsy photos but really angled is not much out of the box any more imo.now standing upside down might be another story

i agree with the above though but i also think you could have taken the opposite approach ie move the other way and shoot more of the water and maybe just one swimmer sharply focused and then it slightly angled... ...imo this way to much is in sharp view to really look intentionally artsy (ie the father's legs etc in the background just kind of makes it look unplanned)and there is really not enough of the water to give you a sense of the action about to take place, the grueling uphill battle of the meet ahead, which you could capture more with more water to emphasis the long road ahead.
the problem i have with some tilts is if it makes it look like something is sliding out of the photo . here i think maybe the angle is a little to much as it makes me feel like they could fall backward which conflicts with them ready to spring forward. imo anything like a tilt or soft focus should have a reason behind it that adds to the photo, i mean other than the reason that i forgot to take it right ( which i have done to many times to count)
sorry just realized i deleted the wrong part in the quote, i meant to leave in the part about how you could have done it...

Agree with this completely. There needs to be a deliberate reason as to why you use the angle, otherwise it just seems haphazard or "abstract for the sake of abstraction."

 

[fitzperry]

I would say both artsy and annoying. I like the tilted look as long as it does not get abused/overused. I know someone that overuses this technique and it drives me crazy looking though thier galleries.

Composition rules are ok to be broken as long as you have a method to your madness.

Bottom line, I choose artsy unless it overused.

Exactly. Awhile back someone either here or on one of the other disboards (I forget which) linked to a wedding album that everyone was raving about. I'd estimate that 2/3 of the shots in it were tilted. Totally ruined the effect, IMO. I say do it if it aids the composition in some way. But as another poster said, if it is just a tilt for tilt's sake then straighten it out.

 

[Amy]

Agree with this completely. There needs to be a deliberate reason as to why you use the angle, otherwise it just seems haphazard or "abstract for the sake of abstraction."

Exactly. Awhile back someone either here or on one of the other disboards (I forget which) linked to a wedding album that everyone was raving about. I'd estimate that 2/3 of the shots in it were tilted. Totally ruined the effect, IMO. I say do it if it aids the composition in some way. But as another poster said, if it is just a tilt for tilt's sake then straighten it out.

I agree with these. I generally think that tilting is really annoying, like I have to keep turning my head to see the photo. However, we just got back from vacation, and I actually purposely tilted 2 photos. IMO, one worked and one did not.

Here's the one that didn't work. We visited Casa Loma in Toronto, and I was trying to get most of the castle in the frame. You know how straight lines get distorted and it looks like they're tilting in toward the center? So I figured I'd try a tilted shot. YUK!!!!

Now this photo seems to work ok with a tilt. This is the Stanley Cup in the Hockey Hall of Fame. There's a beautiful stained glass ceiling in the room, and I wanted to get both in the photo. Trying to compose with the Cup vertical just didn't work right, so I tried an angle shot. (And yes, I know the stained glass is over-exposed - it was early afternoon, bright sun, and a line of other people who wanted to get some photos, so I couldn't spend too much time trying different exposures.)

 

[emmabelle]

I like artsy, but my sister-in-laws photographer took almost every picture of her wedding at an angle. It was a little too much. The wedding was in a tent that had white sides with the fake plastic windows. We looked like we were on the titanic, while it was sinking.

 

[Golf4food]

Artsy in the right context and in small doses, and never, ever when there is a horizon involved (ok, maybe in a very special circumstance, but 99% of the time I cannot stand a tilted horizon, especially in shots that include the ocean).

 

[Gdad]

I agree with the prevailing opinion- can be good if done right but too many of them and it's all bad.

 

[disneygirlinnj]

I think most times it's artsy. But then there's always the photo that you say 'wow... they have no idea how to take photos'. But I can honestly say... the photo in the pool you posted is great!

 

[jann1033]

amy i think the stanley cup photo is a great eg of a well done tilt, you don't notice the "tilt", just the interesting photo

 

[zackiedawg]

The way I've always thought about something being 'artistic' versus contrived and annoying is this:

If your instincts led you to angle the shot in a pleasing compositional manner, and it was used sparingly and purposefully, then it is probably artistic.

If you consciously thought when taking the photo that you could tilt the frame on the diagonal and it would be artistic, then it probably isn't.

Just the conscious forethought to be artistic often results in failure to be artistic...art comes from a more innate and subconscious place, more in the heart than in the brain. The same goes for breaking almost any rules of photography - you can break them without knowledge, which usually identifies someone as an amateur; you can break them with knowledge by using instinct and judgement to determine when the composition will work outside the rules, which usually identifies someone as an artist; or you can break them with knowledge for no real purpose at all other than breaking the rules, which identifies someone as a wanna-be artist who's clearly trying too hard.

In the posted examples - the swimmer photo doesn't really work as well for me, but it also isn't a blatant attempt to be artistic, nor is it purely amateurish...it was an attempt to deal with a tricky composition from a tight angle, and might have missed the mark a bit. The Church photo I agree just doesn't work at all. But the Stanley Cup photo works very well for me, and an example of instinct and a good compositional eye intentionally breaking the rules to good result.

 

[RBennett]

The way I've always thought about something being 'artistic' versus contrived and annoying is this:

If your instincts led you to angle the shot in a pleasing compositional manner, and it was used sparingly and purposefully, then it is probably artistic.

If you consciously thought when taking the photo that you could tilt the frame on the diagonal and it would be artistic, then it probably isn't.

Just the conscious forethought to be artistic often results in failure to be artistic...art comes from a more innate and subconscious place, more in the heart than in the brain. The same goes for breaking almost any rules of photography - you can break them without knowledge, which usually identifies someone as an amateur; you can break them with knowledge by using instinct and judgement to determine when the composition will work outside the rules, which usually identifies someone as an artist; or you can break them with knowledge for no real purpose at all other than breaking the rules, which identifies someone as a wanna-be artist who's clearly trying too hard.

In the posted examples - the swimmer photo doesn't really work as well for me, but it also isn't a blatant attempt to be artistic, nor is it purely amateurish...it was an attempt to deal with a tricky composition from a tight angle, and might have missed the mark a bit. The Church photo I agree just doesn't work at all. But the Stanley Cup photo works very well for me, and an example of instinct and a good compositional eye intentionally breaking the rules to good result.

Well put!