Perceptually a face tilted at an odd angle is much more difficult to connect with that one which is oriented in the same general direction as the head of the viewer. It takes the viewer longer to connect and the connection may not have as strong an emotional impact.

There are two good reasons not to tilt, The question I ponder when I see tilted photos is, why do you find it necessary to tilt? How do you feel it improves the photo?

i think you nailed the lighting in this. Very nice and the model is BEAUTIFUL!

cgardner wrote:
Perceptually a face tilted at an odd angle is much more difficult to connect with that one which is oriented in the same general direction as the head of the viewer. It takes the viewer longer to connect and the connection may not have as strong an emotional impact.

There are two good reasons not to tilt, The question I ponder when I see tilted photos is, why do you find it necessary to tilt? How do you feel it improves the photo?

the reason why i tilted the photo is because i didn't wanna see more of the floor and the wall behind the model. if that makes any sense

The tilt works. First, the front leg is perfectly aligned vertical. Second, her body is almost a perfect diagonal through the frame. Third, it makes the picture much more about her than the environment You would've had a lot more couch and floor and wall without the tilt. And it gives the pic some energy as opposed to another typical portrait.

Rhommel Bernar wrote:
cgardner wrote:
Perceptually a face tilted at an odd angle is much more difficult to connect with that one which is oriented in the same general direction as the head of the viewer. It takes the viewer longer to connect and the connection may not have as strong an emotional impact.

There are two good reasons not to tilt, The question I ponder when I see tilted photos is, why do you find it necessary to tilt? How do you feel it improves the photo?

the reason why i tilted the photo is because i didn't wanna see more of the floor and the wall behind the model. if that makes any sense

That actually makes very little sense to me, because perceptually when a photo has a compelling center of interest and an eye pleasing path to it the brain of the viewer will automatically tune out everything else the same way it tunes out anything not in the small center of vision in real life. Techniques like selective focus and vignetting the edges of a photo can be used provide clues to the viewer where the more important areas of the photo are located, in effect pushing the eye up and into the photo to find them. If a foreground / background is distracting it can be made less so that way.

Any technique pushed to the point where it is noticed becomes a distraction from the content and message. The fact the tilt is artificially contrived makes it a noticeable distraction. Yes a tilt of the camera can make a stiff pose look more dynamic, but my point here was that these poses didn't need the help - the poses themselves, if captured level, would have been quite effective.

I don't really like either of these images.

Looking at this amazingly attractive girl I'm think of all the ways I would have worked with the model and lighting and location to get something really special. Take the girl outside, tell her a joke- get her to smile- put some emphasizes on all her good parts and make her look less static.

The tilt doesn't do it for me either. Mind posting some more photos from this shoot?

hope this comment helps

Ryder Haske wrote:
I don't really like either of these images.

Looking at this amazingly attractive girl I'm think of all the ways I would have worked with the model and lighting and location to get something really special. Take the girl outside, tell her a joke- get her to smile- put some emphasizes on all her good parts and make her look less static.

The tilt doesn't do it for me either. Mind posting some more photos from this shoot?

hope this comment helps

there was a winter storm outside and with 50mm of snow and -20 celsius..i dont think i would able to emphasize all her good parts if she was wearing layers

this was taken @ her apartment.. that was her couch... basing from your comment, I dont think you will like the other ones as well because you dont like the location

cgardner wrote:
That actually makes very little sense to me, because perceptually when a photo has a compelling center of interest and an eye pleasing path to it the brain of the viewer will automatically tune out everything else the same way it tunes out anything not in the small center of vision in real life. Techniques like selective focus and vignetting the edges of a photo can be used provide clues to the viewer where the more important areas of the photo are located, in effect pushing the eye up and into the photo to find them. If a foreground / background is distracting it can be made less so that way.

Any technique pushed to the point where it is noticed becomes a distraction from the content and message. The fact the tilt is artificially contrived makes it a noticeable distraction. Yes a tilt of the camera can make a stiff pose look more dynamic, but my point here was that these poses didn't need the help - the poses themselves, if captured level, would have been quite effective.


thanks for this valuable input... i actually learned something from this..

I've only got into photography just last year (January) and started shooting models just last August.. i still got a lot to learn!!

Great Photos. I think they are both nice shots of a great looking model. I cannot decide whether the first photo would have be better off without the tilt. I can see both sides of the debate, but I certainly don't think it ruined an otherwise great shot. Maybe its not everybody's cup of tea, and it would not really fly for a model's portfolio but I think it certainly is an interesting shot. Keep on bending the rules and posting your results you never know when defying convention will lead to something really unique.

My only critique on the second one is that it appears her hands are stretching her eyeballs back - looks kind of strained.

As for the tilt on the first one.........I like it a lot. While the composition of the sofa is at an extreme tilt, the subject herself appears nicely composed vertically. To rotate it and have her sitting straight on the sofa, whether vertically or horizontally, would be just too routine. Have her tilt her head slightly back to the left over her shoulder and she'd line up almost perfectly on the vertical axis.

Don't change it!

figucp0 wrote:
it would not really fly for a model's portfolio

Not true.

chris sorensen wrote:
figucp0 wrote:
it would not really fly for a model's portfolio

Not true.

You are right. I should have said it "might" not fly for a model's portfolio. I am certainly no expert in what agencies, scouts look for. I guess I was just trying to say it is not a "typical" portfolio shot you would see required for a first book. To make my position clear I really like the photograph, and thought the anti-tilt people were being a little harsh, that was all.

-Cristobal

Good job. I like them. How'd you process the second one?

24Peter wrote:
Good job. I like them. How'd you process the second one?

thanks peter, i didnt do much processing on both these images... for the 2nd one (jeans+white shirt), I just played around with the levels and curves.. did some minor skin retouching and that is all...

Gorgeous model and lighting, and you go ahead and tilt your little heart out if it's what you like. Great job, keep posting.