Do you see in portrait or landscape?

steveo_mcg

steveo_mcg

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,319
Name
Steven
Edit My Images
Yes
Went out this morning, despite claims of clearing sky's it rained half the time. Whilst trudging through the rain (and missing my path) I realised I've hardly shot the 54 in landscape and the rb is usually default in portrait orentation.

So do you see primarily in portrait or landscape?
 
...and....cue the Square format lads saying "there's a difference ?"

(oh - and for my own part, mostly landscape)
 
80% of everything rectangular I do is portrait format. I have a few square format cameras though and I do sometimes rotate 6x6 folding cameras through 90 degrees for a better composition!


Steve.
 
Almost universally in landscape, although almost never in standard 3:2. Almost everything shot in 135 gets a crop to either panoramic or 5:4.

Square is nice as well, differently though. A successful square seems harder to me, but extremely rewarding when it works
 
I like landscapes in portrait format and portraits in landscape format.
 
Generally landscape. I assuming I'm too lazy to turn the camera...
 
Square 99% of the time for me but if I deviate to 35mm its usually landscape, particularly for portraits.....

Mark
 
Very subject dependent for me. I probably shoot more landscape format shots, but often see 'portrait' landscapes and 'landscape' portraits..
 
I see in portrait most of the time and often have to work to take landscape versions of my pictures. :confused:
 
Actually looking through my photostream my 35mm and infernal box photos tend to be in landscape I wonder if it's just ergonomics.
 
I haven't really thought about how I see a potential pictures. I think it's probably about 50/50 of the ones I like, based on a quick scan of the photos on my hard drive. I often crop to portrait so maybe it'd be worth trying a whole roll in landscape only and then a roll in portrait only to see which I get on with better.

Good question :)
 
TheBigYin said:
...and....cue the Square format lads saying "there's a difference ?"

(oh - and for my own part, mostly landscape)
Click to expand...
Of course there is a difference, all the pros shoot their 'blads on their side...
 
I am becoming more conventional with age... and technology. A lot of my old shots have very skew horizons; I would tilt the camera to suit the subject or fill the frame...
10582804_839023056122613_8459493683808902885_o.jpg

And old habbits die hard... this was taken a week or so back on my old XA2 compact, and working in close confines with fixed and not hugely wide lens, I automatically framed for the subject, not the horizon... which was great when I made prints and stuck them in a book... and it didn't look anywhere near as 'unnatural'.. however, since these days everything goes straight to screen, and now, even worse, the machinery even tries orientating the picture to how the camera was held.... I find I am shooting more and more 'on the level' and, since screens tend to be Landscape Orientated, more in Landscape mode to best fill the monitor screen.
10504984_839023032789282_8878377104781941711_o.jpg

Same bike in show, taken on 2nd walk round with DSLR. (My daughter keeps robbing the electric picture maker; hence carrying the 35mm compact :-) )
 
No set method tbh.....simply shoot whichever way looks best in the viewfinder.
I regularly see and shoot landscape scenes in portrait orientation not least of all as i like to put a subject up close in the scene but still have sky.
 
Whatever suits the subject.
 
The definitive answer is that it depends on the composition and the image you are trying to create. My view point will be different to yours and vice versa. There is no right or wrong way, the next logical step is to crop or not to crop, either in camera or PP and so it goes on......
 
Square is useful for Oxo cubes...but it's a world of rectangles and so natural.
 
 
Come to think of it, 35mm film was always more wasteful for printing and wonder why they didn't invent 40mm wide film in the beginning...so the frame size would be roughly 29mm X36mm.
 
I see in landscape but I'm often seen turning my head 90 deg for a portrait view ;)

Interestingly, books are written in portrait view because our eyes see one line at a time, whereas TVs are landscape because our brains can take in a wider range of info in landscape. If novels were written in landscape, for example, we'd be reading more than one line at a time, or certainly find it more difficult not to.
 
ped said:
I see in landscape but I'm often seen turning my head 90 deg for a portrait view ;)

Interestingly, books are written in portrait view because our eyes see one line at a time, whereas TVs are landscape because our brains can take in a wider range of info in landscape. If novels were written in landscape, for example, we'd be reading more than one line at a time, or certainly find it more difficult not to.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I expect thats why landscape is the default for stills. I wonder how that applies to photo's, difficult to do a like for like given the radical change to composition that would make even on an RB or the like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top