So, talking about angles........

[Souichiro]

Lately there has been even more talk on angles. I keep onn noticing better use of angles and also I like the extremes which are sometimes shown.

Now Below I have two shots. 1st is rather radical and the second one normal-ish.

The shots were taken this way so I didn't flip it upside down or any of that kind of malarky..

So?

Which one and why?

#1


#2




cheers and rip them up!

[krigl]

The second one's not bad, it looks fairly natural, first one is strange as it puts the viewer into the position of someone upside-down in a tree. If the plane was upside-down itself that would be better because you might be flying upside down in formation with it.....basically there is no reason for the upside-down-ness in the first. You could have a 747 taking off upside-down and it would be equally strange.

[ATI_7500]

The first one has a nice idea, but doesn't work out at all.
When setting up angles, try to keep the pic at least a bit natural.


If the second one showed less of the trees (just the tops), it would be really good.

[Jakemaster]

The first is TOO radical.  A little goes a long way IMO

[FSGT Gabe]

Actually I like #1...realistic?  No.  But shots don't have to be realistic in order to be good...

Having said that, though, I am one of the people on this forum who is more radical with angles and fisheye etc...so that may be a biased opinion .

- Kevin

[MOUSY]

The first angle is definitely WAY radical.... don't think its anything I've seen before and thats what makes it so good to me... The second one, while more natural, still hits the spot, as it effectively gives that feeling of skimming the tree tops.
There both quite good IMO.... though I wouldn't use the first too often, it would certainly give a radical spin to any set of shots.

[Souichiro]

Really nice to read all these comments, I prefer the second as well since the angle in the first one doesn't have any particular use other that being strange. I put it up just as an extremity.. Glad it worked