Horse Events

[Jon P. Ferguson]

I shoot horse events during our season here in Southeastern Michgan. A seldom discussed photo subject, but one of the most challenging I've found in 40+ years of photography.

Is there anyone else out there ??

Jon F.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I shoot horse events during our season here in Southeastern Michgan. A seldom discussed photo subject, but one of the most challenging I've found in 40+ years of photography.

Is there anyone else out there ??

Jon F.

Jon,

I know we have more guys shooting horses. There is, BTW, one OPF member who is interested in starting such photography, but it looks, perhaps, as if he has as yet little experience

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=458

Meanwhile, I'll keep my eye open when I browse people's websites.

Please consider posting some of your pictures. That is IMHO, the best way to get the others to beam in!

Asher

 

[Rob Peterson]

I shoot horse events during our season here in Southeastern Michgan. A seldom discussed photo subject, but one of the most challenging I've found in 40+ years of photography.

Is there anyone else out there ??

Jon F.

In 2000 I began shooting riders from the barn where my daughter rides. (This is for fun and memories, not as a pro.)

You'll find equesterian photos in my PBase account, mostly in the Hunter/Jumpers and Ireland galleries.

I typically shoot with a 1D and 70-200 f/2.8L. On occasion I'll change to a 20D or a 70-300 IS DO, or I'll add a 1.4X extender. In some venues, typically those with a roof but no walls, I fill flash with a 550EX.

Bob

 

[Asher Kelman]

In 2000 I began shooting riders from the barn where my daughter rides. (This is for fun and memories, not as a pro.)

You'll find equesterian photos in my PBase account, mostly in the Hunter/Jumpers and Ireland galleries.

I typically shoot with a 1D and 70-200 f/2.8L. On occasion I'll change to a 20D or a 70-300 IS DO, or I'll add a 1.4X extender. In some venues, typically those with a roof but no walls, I fill flash with a 550EX.

Bob

Jon,

Some questions:

The 70-300 IS DO sounds convenient but how good is it if you want to make enlargements compared to using the 70-200 with a 1.4 extender.

Do you use a flash extender or a reflector behind to boost your 550EX shots?

Asher

Addendum off topic:

http://www.pbase.com/rwzeitgeist/image/36382505

In your picture of morning fog, have you tried reworking it in terms of some sky or sharpening of the foreground grass. This image seems worth more work perhaps, although it is just my opinion. How does it print?

 

[Rob Peterson]

Some questions:

The 70-300 IS DO sounds convenient but how good is it if you want to make enlargements compared to using the 70-200 with a 1.4 extender.

I've not done such a comparison. However, last Sunday I shot a show in an outdoor ring using the IS DO. Because I mostly shoot with the 1D, enlargements require upsizing the file, including this image, which prints beautifully as an 8x10. Before resizing, the image was 2395x1596 pixels, or about 8"x5.3" at 300dpi, so I had to upsize by about 50%. Zooming in on the screen, I think this 1D image runs out of resolution before I see any issues caused by the lens.

1/1250 sec, f/6.3, 170mm​

You can, if you wish, download and examine the full size JPG of that image, which was saved with minimal compression and has not been resized or sharpened. Clicking on the above image will take you to the PBase gallery, which contains additional examples of last Sunday's shoot using the IS DO lens. So far, I'm quite happy with the IS DO's performance.

Do you use a flash extender or a reflector behind to boost your 550EX shots?

I use no extender or reflector. One of the pros tried using a Better Beamer, but stopped because while the Beamer certainly helped when shooting across the width of the arena, the closer shots suffered from too much light falloff because of the narrowed beam.

I sometimes add a diffuser, depending on which arena I'm in, e.g., when most of the shooting opportunities are closer rather than farther.

Asher

Addendum off topic:

http://www.pbase.com/rwzeitgeist/image/36382505

In your picture of morning fog, have you tried reworking it in terms of some sky or sharpening of the foreground grass. This image seems worth more work perhaps, although it is just my opinion. How does it print?

I'd considered reworking it at the time, but ran into limitations of my Photoshop skills. Perhaps I should revisit some of my older images, now that I'm better at Photoshop. Thanks for the suggestion!

Bob

 

[Gary Ayala]

Tom

LOL - I was about to bring Tom's name as one who looks to shoot horses but he beat me to the post. He has even dragged me along for a 6am Saturday shoot of the workouts at Santa Anita.

I guess this shot is more about racing than horses ...

 

[Tony Field]

I shoot horse events during our season here in Southeastern Michgan. A seldom discussed photo subject, but one of the most challenging I've found in 40+ years of photography.

For the first time since I shot one roll of film in 1973, I shot a few days at the Spruce Meadows North American. The equipment was mosquito repellent, sun block, two cameras, a 70-200 F2.8, 300mm F2.8, and 1 1.4 TC. I certainly found that, since the jumping is so repetitive, it was easy to time the shots. Composition, on the other hand, was a bit tough when you fill shoot to fill the frame. A few of the pros that shoot jumping on a regular basis were kind enough to give me a school of hard knocks quick course on what and how to shoot.

It turned out that there are three horse "attitudes" that seem to work for jumping.

1. All four feet are perfect above the railings. Usually this is on a jump with two rails about a meter apart. Ideally, you want all four feet at exactly the same altitude - but that is difficult to time.

2. The front feet of the horse are perfect tucked and essentially above the railing. It looks bad if the shot is done just before peak height or if the horse is coming down - however a bit early is better than a bit late.

3. The hose is on it's way down from the railing and the feet are just a centimeter or two above the ground. This displays the muscles superbly. It also seems reasonable to have only one foot just touching the ground however it should not be fully compressed.

4. There are, of course, other variations that seem to work. Tight crops of the rider and horses head are excellent as are spectacular falls. It is even better when you can show the rider's emotions. Tight crops can be tough - assuming that you compose for the full frame.

The above seems to apply when the horse is shot straight on, at and angle or is jumping at right angles to the photographer.

Here are four images from my first try that attempt to follow the "rules" - these are certainly not of the same caliber that Peter LLewellen or some of the pro's from California that were at the competition. None the less, these were fun.

These of the shots are essentially full frame - the only one that is a significant crop is with the four legs above the bars. I hate doing that since it becomes tough to make high quality 16x20 prints. Hopefully, these illustrate the basic shooting styles that the experts at Spruce Meadows were kind enough to tell me about.
1

2

3

4

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Tony,

This seems something like shooting on the "Catwalk".

I have only shot horses at Santa Anna and was eventually asked to leave the side of the track! This photography can be very thrilling. However composition is harder than one might think, although when one knows the course, one can do better.

So for your pictures, do any of the photgraphers use wider angle and then crop to perfect the composition after capturing the perfect form of the horse and rider.

That would allow perhaps compositonal limitations to be overcome. What do you think?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Asher
You've read to fast!
Tony's last §:

These of the shots are essentially full frame - the only one that is a significant crop is with the four legs above the bars. I hate doing that since it becomes tough to make high quality 16x20 prints.

No crop!
This is one of the photographer's skill to be in the right place with the right lense!
These are the best to achieve a good composition. IMHO.

 

[Tony Field]

This seems something like shooting on the "Catwalk".

Yes - the parallel is closer than you think - some of the female spectators were definitely catwalk types with the latest fashion and sometimes I thought the ladies were more interesting than the jumping

So for your pictures, do any of the photographers use wider angle and then crop to perfect the composition after capturing the perfect form of the horse and rider.

That would allow perhaps compositional limitations to be overcome. What do you think?

Most of they guys and gals were shooting 70-200, 300, 400 and 600mm often with a 1.4 or 2x TC. The experienced photographers usually cropped almost exactly to the framing needed for the image - some were shooting the riders, some the rider+horse, and some shooting signage shots. Some of the news photographers who were there only for a few hours were a little sloppy with composition since they needed only one good image for the paper - however, looking over their shoulder in the media room indicated that they still composed reasonably tightly by most standards - as you would expect for a professional news pj who can shoot almost anything quite well.

I did not find it too difficult to shoot with reasonably tight composition - the only time there was a problem is when using auto-focus and you might be left/right/up/down with the centre focus sensor. Then a bit of compositional slop is useful. Manual pre-focus for a single shot was generally better. However, auto-focus with continuous focusing (i.e. AFC for Nikon or AI-Servo for Canon) was useful on some sequences of jumps.

Only a couple of shooters were using 8 fps and typically shooting about 3 or 4 images per burst. I found that single shots actually yielded better timing since I selected the time to fire the shutter whereas the motor drive would usually get images a bit before or after the "optimal" position of the horse.

Shooting motor drive is a very different style of shooting than single frame - usually, the motor drive shooter shoots way "too soon" so the 8 fps has a chance of getting a good shot. however, if you shoot motor drive with the same timing you shoot single shots - for example, with the horse just tucked over the bar - your first shot will work perfectly and you might accidentally get a good shot with the horse coming down to the grass. That, of course, is a bonus.

 

[Gary Ayala]

Asher Paalease

... do any of the photgraphers use wider angle and then crop to perfect the composition after capturing the perfect form of the horse and rider.

That would allow perhaps compositonal limitations to be overcome. What do you think?

Asher

That would be cheating. What has attracted me to photography is the test of one's mettle. If one shoots wide with the intent to crop later ... what's the point ... where is the challenge? I can hear Henri Cartier-Bresson turning over in his grave.

Shooting an action photograph in an uncontrolled environment is both a physical and mental challenge. The photograpger has to bring these two elements together creating a synergy (I hate using that word), to capture a publishable image (publishable is one of many benchmarks I use to gauge photos).

Nicely done Tony.

The first two are my favs. The first is the best, the horse seems to be effortlessly floating over the bar, no stress in the horses face, no bugged out eyes, no sweat or straining muscles ... even the tail seems whimsical ... all this is reflected in the rider's face as well. I wish the first has the same bokeh as the second as the light standard in the background is a bit distracting. The fact that all four hooves are visible and in focus makews me want to rush out and emulate the shoot. (Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.)

 

[Gary Ayala]

N or 5D

I noticed that you used both the N and the 5D ... what was your thinking on camera selection ... (Such As the N with a certain lens for the 1.3 factor or the 5D to allow for cropping)?

The N is made for action and the focus is super and nearly instantaneous ... how was the auto focus of the 5D when compared to the N?

 

[Asher Kelman]

That would be cheating. What has attracted me to photography is the test of one's mettle. If one shoots wide with the intent to crop later ... what's the point ... where is the challenge? I can hear Henri Cartier-Bresson turning over in his grave.

Shooting an action photograph in an uncontrolled environment is both a physical and mental challenge. The photograpger has to bring these two elements together creating a synergy (I hate using that word), to capture a publishable image (publishable is one of many benchmarks I use to gauge photos).

........

Gary, one may not be allowed to position oneself freely. Henri would not be using a zoom lens with IS and auto focus either, changing ISO at whim!

When ever I'm faced by limitations on location or access, I use a shift or wide angle to overcome that. In doing so, I photograph a building and some garden or some sky as I wish. I can photograph where people don't realize I can cover.

I can't see anything poor in technic in not framing as one would like at capture.

For years, telephoto for me, would be simply a crop of an image taken with my Pentax Spotmatic 50mm, my only lens.

Perfect framing can be a marvelous thing or a mere conceit.

If you get there, congrats, the route is up to you, the artist. I don't like rules!

Asher

 

[Gary Ayala]

LOL

Gary, one may not be allowed to position oneself freely. Henri would not be using a zoom lens with IS and auto focus either, changing ISO at whim!

When ever I'm faced by limitations on location or access, I use a shift or wide angle to overcome that. In doing so, I photograph a building and some garden or some sky as I wish. I can photograph where people don't realize I can cover.

I can't see anything poor in technic in not framing as one would like at capture.

For years, telephoto for me, would be simply a crop of an image taken with my Pentax Spotmatic 50mm, my only lens.

Perfect framing can be a marvelous thing or a mere conceit.

If you get there, congrats, the route is up to you, the artist. I don't like rules!

Asher

Your last remark is making me smile. I believe we are saying the same thing ... one has to use mental and physical techniques to get the best photo. And the best photo requires minimal post capture processing (if the intent was to capture a realistic image). My zoom and wide angle in my early years were my feet.

I whole heartedly agree with you on perfect framing. I, like Henri, had filed out my neg carrier to show the edges of the negative. Some of my old images still show this technique. But, as a more mature old fart, I have deleted said borders on many of the scanned images as it was, as you stated, showed more conceit than skill.

Perfrect framing is a marvel and we should all strive for a perfectly framed image before resorting to other means.

 

[Tony Field]

I noticed that you used both the N and the 5D ... what was your thinking on camera selection ... (Such As the N with a certain lens for the 1.3 factor or the 5D to allow for cropping)?

The N is made for action and the focus is super and nearly instantaneous ... how was the auto focus of the 5D when compared to the N?

Show jumping is not really fast. It does not tax the 5D focus ability even in direct head-on shots as long as you use AI-Servo (AFC on Nikon) - at least I had no problems with the 70-200 or 300 lenses.

I usually chose the camera and lens combination to give the best coverage of maybe two or three jumps from my shooting location. That usually allowed two shots to be composed full frame and the third shot was a compromise. One silly thing to remember is that the 5D cropped yields just as good images as a full frame from the 1D-IIn.

On the whole, I think I prefer the 5D for jumping simply because of the megapixels.

 

[Tony Field]

I can't see anything poor in technic in not framing as one would like at capture.

For years, telephoto for me, would be simply a crop of an image taken with my Pentax Spotmatic 50mm, my only lens.

Perfect framing can be a marvelous thing or a mere conceit.

If you get there, congrats, the route is up to you, the artist. I don't like rules!

The only thing I can agree with in these comments is that a good photographer has no choice but to work within the limites of the tools available. Beyond that, you should work to maximize the the quality of work delivered by your equipment and artistic ability/vision.

Generally, it turns out that virtually all decent photographers I know automatically work to have perfect framing within the interpretation of the image they mentally preview and the equipment limits. In no way is this "conceit" - it is an indication of hard-earned skill from being behind a camera a long time. In addition, this is not a pro/amateur distinction.

Such things are not "rules". Too many folk use "hate rules" as an excuse for not having their own technique and knowledge.

 

[Asher Kelman]

The only thing I can agree with in these comments is that a good photographer has no choice but to work within the limites of the tools available. Beyond that, you should work to maximize the the quality of work delivered by your equipment and artistic ability/vision.

Generally, it turns out that virtually all decent photographers I know automatically work to have perfect framing within the interpretation of the image they mentally preview and the equipment limits. In no way is this "conceit" - it is an indication of hard-earned skill from being behind a camera a long time. In addition, this is not a pro/amateur distinction.

Such things are not "rules". Too many folk use "hate rules" as an excuse for not having their own technique and knowledge.

Your points are all well made, Tony.

Your own dance pictures show that.

However, there is also the additional creative possibility of not doing what people expect!

For example, (since this is a horse picture thread), a picture of a horse jumping taken with the camera at 45 degrees, would create an entirely new picture, asymmetric and perhaps with a unique meaning. Now, you and your client ikely have no use for such a picture, or you might be surprised!

Asher

 

[Tony Field]

For example, (since this is a horse picture thread), a picture of a horse jumping taken with the camera at 45 degrees, would create an entirely new picture, asymmetric and perhaps with a unique meaning. Now, you and your client ikely have no use for such a picture, or you might be surprised!

This certainly could be true - in this case, the client is me - I am shooting a year long project with an "art / coffee table book" as the target product.

A local pro (Bill Marsh) has a point of view when shooting his images. He says "your pictures will always sell if your are first, best, or different." It is tough to be "first" since most images have already been shot, it is tough to be "best" since that would imply extreme artistic / photographic talent, so the only thing open for mere mortals is to try to be "different".

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well Tony,

Hook us up with Bill! Does he have a website?

Asher

 

[Tony Field]

Hook us up with Bill! Does he have a website?

yes: http://www.billmarshphotography.com/

 

[nicolas claris]

For example, (since this is a horse picture thread), a picture of a horse jumping taken with the camera at 45 degrees, would create an entirely new picture, asymmetric and perhaps with a unique meaning. Now, you and your client ikely have no use for such a picture, or you might be surprised!
Asher

Asher
I'm sorry but on this one, with all the respect due to your position (;-)) I disagree with you.

For me non-abstract pictures taken other than straight (I mean with horizon horizontal) means that the photographer couldn't find his way to frame/light/compose the image.
It is the mean of fake and/or ease. Poorness of creativity
Well maybe I'm wrong if the photog whishes to show "how our world is going upside down"...

Iv'e never followed art schools, or been teached and trained (sorry Alain, you're too far!) about art nor photography.
I left school before being graduated, but sensitively, I cannot agree with a picture that wouln't be "straight". It seems to me that all great painters among centuries as well as our grandfathers in the grotte de Lascau did have their sight quite straight.
Shooting at 45° or 30° or whatever° has nothing to do with assymetry, there are many ways, composition is the main one, to get assymetry in a picture!

Of course this is a very personnal opinion, I just feel so sorry when I see a picture that would so much simplier therefore so much better if it had been shot horizontal/vertical.

my 2 cts

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

I'm totally happy you disagree or we'd lose one of the givens that I wake up and go to bed with. However, I am unrepentant in my own lonely POV.

Yes, you are quite correct. In order to sell a picture of a wedding, a boat or any other commerical/social event better do it straight.

However, we have moved beyond that. This is 2006!

Abstract art of course you would concede. However, real things too may be composed at angles other than orthogonal.

It is for sure harder, but how I see things.

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Asher
I am ready to bet that even in 2007, our world will still be orthogonal (no political opinion here!).
This is not the point. You know be better than many others, you know I'm -at least in mind- a vanguardist.

I wrote

For me non-abstract pictures taken other than straight (I mean with horizon horizontal) means that the photographer couldn't find his way to frame/light/compose the image.
It is the mean of fake and/or ease. Poorness of creativity

This is nothing else than trying to explain the poorness, lack of research and going an easy way.
Let's imagine that photog in front of a subject, talking to himself:
Well, this has been done hundreds of time, I'm well placed, the sun is where it should be, my subject is right, but it shows flat. What can I do? Oh yes let drop the camera on the floor and will see the result, I've found a new way of shooting, I'm an Artist!
There are so many ways to have non orthogonal images with horizon horizontal, look again to some of my 12 mm images posted on other forum here... They are not easy, the angle and the composition look simple...

I'ts difficult for me to find the right wording, but I'm sure you understand my means. I'm fighting against easyness. Angle a camera is easy.

And BTW, for me, being an artist or not, you always have to sell an image.
A sell is a trade, a trade doesn't mean money.
When I shoot I wish (not want) people to like it. If it's the case, trade is done. If a magazine or a client (or a gallery, who knows) wishes to pay to get it, trade is also done.

Sometime, I give an image to someone who shows love for it but cannot afford it. This is the purest trade, though it doesn't make a leaving! but I don't care.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Thanks for the effort my friend Nicolas,

It is not the haphzard angle but the planned angle that I refer to.

So at random, I looked through OPF members websites. Here's one from the stock images of Bill Marsh Architecture photography CD

http://www.billmarshphotography.com/royaltyfree/cd_collections/architecture/arch2.htm

You will see examples on the first 2 pages at least.

Arc015 ARC013.jpg ARC025.jpg ARC027.jpg ARC052.jpg ARC053.jpg ARC057.jpg and many more if I'd look further!


What this means is that there is more happening in modern photography with the building itself being turned at an angle and creating a pattern so that it is a building and then a motif.

You should put aside notions of expetertese and technical competence and professionalism. None of these apply to the creative approach to NOT being orthogonal!

I ask you to look at this in a new way and take a leap to this way of thinking.

BTW, if all pictures were at such angles, then you would decide to make them religiously orthogonal.

I assure you that, the website I reference is the very first website I looked at to check out whether or not there was support for unorthodoxy.

Part of this is that we see a fractrion of the whole and we know the rest.

You present to a considerable extent the whole at least in one picture of a series.

After your real work is done, consider adding this to your possible approaches and you may be surprized.

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Sorry, Asher
I had a look, it doen't add anything.
I much, much prefer ARC019.JPG or even ARC046.JPG
Others, if you want to illustrate chaos, maybe...

After your real work is done, consider adding this to your possible approaches and you may be surprized.

I certainly won't. When my real work is done. It's done. Good or to be thrown.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

All I did was to easily and clearly demonstrate that there are professional photographers who are serious about their work and perfectly skilled and competent judge it to be worthwhile to take and present many photographs of buildings taken at 45 degrees.

There is no evidence that, as you put, that they throw the camera to the ground and take a picture and call themselves artists. Rather the work is done with care and then presented as a choice given to other artists. For sure, it is not meant to show chaos!

I didn't say this was art or better, rather than it is at least current and not as weird as you make out!

Asher

 

[Jon P. Ferguson]

Well now...

Little did I realize what I started with this thread. The equipment comments bear a striking similarity to my own preferences. The venues however, seem to be based on the hunter/jumper type event. Most of the comments about the shots seem to be what has become "standardized" for that type of event.

I shoot association based, all breed arena events. The time/lighting/framing of this type event presents some interesting challenges not associated with hunter/jumper work.
A typical day will be working up to 50+ 'classes' with as many as 15 horses in one class in the arena at the same time.
Most are 2 day events. First class generally commences at 8:00am with a 30 minute lunch break somewhere (hopefully).
Outdoors with quickly varying light/wind/rain conditions (Michigan weather).

Picture an oval arena roughly 250' long by 80' wide, with a 5ft. high white fence surrounding.
Customer provides a class number and riders back number. Typical is 150 entries on 80 different horses. Sounds simple so far. Lets say I have only 3 customers in this class.

By the way - my definition of a customer = someone who buys $50.00 or less per show. A client on the other hand = someone who spends much more than $50.00 p/s and wants posed shots in addition.

Meanwhile...back in the arena the horse/riders are entering at a walk down the long rail on the far side. If I'm lucky my 'customers' are spaced a few horse apart from each other, so I can figure the shots with a breath or two in-between. If they are lined up 1-2-3 its plain hell.
Typical pacing will be walk once around, trot, then canter and reverse the procedure. Final judging is with horses lined up facing the judge, down the long axis of the arena.
During the movement around the arena, ideally the horses are evenly spaced so each presents a 'clean' shot. In real life they all have a little different stride length which varies their speed and subsequent position in the ring.
I line up a shot of #1 and am ready to shoot, just as the head and neck or horse#2 move into frame (I'm already panning of course). I'm as tight as I can get already..results blown shot. Better yet - horse #1 is perfect position - trip the shutter - horse on the near side (my side) of the ring enters as a blur on the left just as shutter actuates.
You are all bored by now so I will save you the rest of the tons of considerations and gory details of an arena shoot. But when I do nail it - the same old thrill is there.

 

[Don Lashier]

Nicolas,

All I did was to easily and clearly demonstrate that there are professional photographers who are serious about their work and perfectly skilled and competent judge it to be worthwhile to take and present many photographs of buildings taken at 45 degrees.

There is no evidence that, as you put, that they throw the camera to the ground and take a picture and call themselves artists. Rather the work is done with care and then presented as a choice given to other artists. For sure, it is not meant to show chaos!

I didn't say this was art or better, rather than it is at least current and not as weird as you make out!

Asher

Orson Welles started all this (at least in modern times) in 1949 with his classic "The Third Man". More recently it because almost faddish in TV production to where it nearly wore out from overuse. It is used even in wedding photography by the "journalist" style photographers - example http://neilcowley.com/weddings/

- DL

 

[Asher Kelman]

That Jon is the reality I expected.

I appreciate learning the real life challenges of perfectly framing each shot individually. But, in side by side presentations, what is wrong in using a 1DsII, capturing multiple horses, so that perfect crops can be made. With a zoom, one could choose between a perfectly framed shot or else a wider shot.

Shooting people-events where no posing is allowed, I hunt for the right angles, some people spontaniously group for a shot, others, not.

With the events, however, people expect their own picture so it is so much more difficult.

I recently shot the entry of diplomats coming into a ball room.

They didn't properly announce it. The consuls overlapped each other, and some we looking down or lost in some poem! Still they want there pcitures. So I did pcikup shots latter on.

I really admire your hard work and can see you earn every penny!

Asher

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Rakish horizons

Orson Welles started all this (at least in modern times) in 1949 with his classic "The Third Man". More recently it because almost faddish in TV production to where it nearly wore out from overuse.

- DL

The idea of a level horizon took a real beating when street shooters started working with wide-angle lenses. Look through Robert Frank's (35mm) or Garry Winogrand's work (28mm) and you find them orienting the frame to its content, lining up figures or structures on one side of the frame then twisting the camera to grab action that relates to these. The horizon is secondary when you are trying to orchestrate as many things as some of Winogrand's best pictures contain. And sometimes the slant just looks right, as in the images each of them took of a priest in white, carrying a cross along a river.

But I can't see Dutch angles (the video term, I think) as a very good way to start organizing a picture. Certainly not for 100' yachts gliding across a crystal clear sea. And look at Art Sinsabaugh's life work, mostly taken with a 12x20" banquet camera in the midwestern plains. The almost level horizon was his theme and subject.

A different way to escape the tyranny of the horizon is to shoot down. No horizon. Can that work in the horse settings, for example in an inside ring?

scott