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.

Exercise eleven: Balance

This represents the first reflective exercise; requiring me to trawl through previous shots to see whether the images possess balance (or not!) and how this is achieved.

The majority of my previous shots have been family portrait shots but I hope I've been able to identify a sufficiently diverse set of images. The idea being that I may naturally achieve balanced compositions for one genre and not another.

50mm, 1/80 secs at f/2.5, ISO 100

I thought I'd start with a relatively simple one - a shot of my Grandparents at a recent family wedding. This one's a favourite shot and captures the character of both subjects - my Gran being more outspoken and noticeable and my Grandad slipping into the background whenever he can. And although in this shot he takes up more of the frame balance is achieved by the fact that it's my Gran that's in focus and is therefore more prominent.

18mm, 3.2 secs at f/22, ISO 100

Arguably my favourite ever landscape shot (well, that I've taken anyway) and my first long exposure. Two points of interest in the frame being the bring arch/waterfall and the boulder in the bottom right hand corner. There is a strong relationship courtesy of the flowing stream, leading the eye from the first point of interest to the second (which also portrays a contrast between liquid and solid). And although each point is diagonally opposite each other, balance is struck.

11mm, 4 secs at f/18, ISO 200

The first two examples contained two points of interest, so in addition to introducing a range of genres I also wanted to increase the complexity by introducing a third point of interest. This shot was taken on a recent shoot at Manchester's John Rylands Library.

Inititally the eye is drawn to the central light but then sweeps up to the arch at the top of the steps on the left, and then the past the arches down the steps to the right. The image therefore has a natural balance.

50mm, 1/80 secs at f/1.8, ISO 400

It took me a while to get to grips with this image as there are a number of aspects to it. Running from right to left and in decreasing importance/priority is the monkey in a seating position, the monkey lay down and the texture of the net. These aspects do not suggest balance yet intuitively I felt it was.

Realisation came when I stopped looking for physical subjects in the frame. So in this instance, although the texture of the net is a worthwhile inclusion, it's the lack of a subject on the left that gives the image balance - in other words, the space that the primary monkey is gazing in to. Should he have been looking to  his left the shot would not be balanced.

45mm, 1/80 secs at f/5.6, ISO 160

Following on from my observations of the previous shot I chose a shot with similar traits (not subjects!), so here's another with a significant amount of space. Once again, based on the physical elements of the scene the weight of the shot is skewed to the right hand side. However, it's the space the subjects are peering into that gives it balance (and makes the viewer strain his/her neck trying to peer around the left hand side of the frame). What struck me by this point is that I'd not made conscious decisions about the balance that compositions of this nature gives... it has been natural until now.

160mm, 1/640 secs at f/4.5, ISO 100

Again, a difficult one. On the face of it there's one subject positioned heavily towards the right hand side of the frame as the bushes over to the left are of no interest. Rather than the previous two images achieving balance because of the space the subject(s) were looking into, this one is balances by virtue of the direction in which the bird is hurtling towards (between the bushes on the left and the tree). This is also emphasised by the outstretched wing pointing towards this space too.

I found this exercise so valuable and really enjoyed analysing previous shots, not least because I was able to determine whether my images had natural balance because I'd certainly not been conscious of balance before now. I was really pleased to find that far more often than not my images had balance.

Even after reading the exercise I was looking for physical attributes of an image to determine whether it had balance yet what I discovered was that space can provide balance, as can selected focus/clarity.

From here on in I intend to be much more conscious of this aspect of composition.