Exercise twelve: Positioning the horizon

I approached this exercise already familiar with the notion that more often than not horizons tend to be positioned - and it's a reasonable rule of thumb. I looked forward to this exercise as an opportunity to challenge this.

So, in summary, the brief was to take approximately six shots of a landscape scene, raying the position of the horizon in the frame.

This series of images were take from a high vantage point during early morning. My intension was to capture some of the early morning mist. To cope with the bright sunshine I was shooting with an ND filter. I've given a brief analysis of the each shot below.

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

It's a pleasant image, as are the others, but it doesn't quite work. However, the issue doesn't lie with the horizon, it's the lack of foreground detail that means it lacks impact.

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

An improvement on the first shot as the lack of foreground interest is compensated slightly by the extra sky space. Still falls short though.

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

This is the first shot that conforms to the notion that sitting the horizon on either the upper third (as in this shot) or the lower third is more visually appealing. It works relatively well as you can clearly see that the scene is lit from the upper right of the image and there is a balance between the two contours of fields and the sky (each occupying a third each).

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

This shot still retains the sense of depth achieved by the two stretches of land but also brings the sun into shot; introducing an additional point of interest. So even though the horizon is positioned centrally, there's balance between green and blue, and the varying shades of blue along with the sun means that the scene isn't rendered static.

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

This one works well, and yes the horizon has been placed on the lower third of the frame. There's still sufficient foreground interest as it retains the view of both fields and the lower the horizon goes the more the eye is drawn to the mist that sits below it.

35mm, 1/60 secs at f/29, ISO 400

Shooting with the horizon so low can be hugely effective but it doesn't work in this shot, despite thinking that it would at the moment of capture. The sun isn't appealing and the huge expanse of sky without cloud now looks uninteresting. Seeing the tops of the trees at the bottom of the shot also gives the viewer the sense that they're missing something.

I do think that the final shot would work with a different subject (perhaps the wind farm that's also in shot) and in different conditions (dusk, dawn, storm clouds etc.).

Another enjoyable exercise that has questioned by preconceptions. Before the activity I would have taken just two shots: one on the lower third and one on the upper third. Having analysed the results one of the strongest images is the centrally positioned horizon.