this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2025
187 points (100.0% liked)

pics

19899 readers
1394 users here now

Rules:

1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer

2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.

3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.

4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.

5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.

Photo of the Week Rule(s):

1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.

2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.

Weeks 2023

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

If the photo's content is such viewer would be inclined to rotate the photo back to level in their mind, then there is no justifiable reason to have an off-level horizon. Camera tilts in and of themselves don't somehow make an unexceptional photo "artsy". In this example, there is no content in the photo that makes tilting it "add" anything to the composition. It's especially bad when the horizon is the sea. This photo is not enhanced in any way by tilting the horizon. It makes it neither artistic nor cool.

Instead, the content of the photo should complement the rotation, such as this

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

It makes it neither artistic nor cool.

being "artistic or cool" may be your goal, but they're not universal goals.

there is no justifiable reason to have an off-level horizon.

art doesn't need to justify.

Instead, the content of the photo should complement the rotation

that's an awful example. Not even mediocre 🤮

you see, de gustibus non est disputandum