Question....would you adjust the lean?

[Roman Kurywczak]

I am posting 2 versions to ask others how they feel about the old WA lean. A TS (tilt shift) lens would eliminate the need for PP corrections.........but I find that i don't mind it as much in the first post as for me.......it gives a vastness to the sky.........but I am interested in all opinions.......even if you aren't a landscape photographer and just come by to check it out!
Mark 3 and the 17-40mm lens at 17mm and f22 for 1/3 of a sec. at ISO 200. Tripod mounted..with a 3 stop grad ND. Darkned the sky a bit more in PP.

[Roman Kurywczak]

Here the lean was taken out. I had done this a few days earlier.........so the sky doesn't match up! I was also comparing which sky I liked better. Same image but with adjustments made in CS2.

[Dan Brown]

I like the second version best (taken a few days earlier? did you mean a few frames earlier?). In both images, the horizon (looking at the water) doesn't seem level to me, but it's is closer in the second version. Nice shot though. Dan Brown

[Roman Kurywczak]

Hi Dan,
It is the same image just the PP was dne on different days. The water lean in the first is also due to the WA effect.............because I almost always use the hot shoe bubble........but I can't be 100% sure on this one.

[carole wiley]

Yes, I guess I would fix it. I too like the second one, for what it is worth.

[Noel Carboni]

The "lean" of the house isn't a problem, but the ocean surface at the left seems pretty tilted to me.

It's a nice image overall; I especially like the color. The angles can easily be fixed.

-Noel

[Robert Amoruso]

Roman,

I can go either way but agree on getting the water level. You need a tilt-shift lens - they are great.

[Arthur Morris]

I like the first one best, by far. Yes, it is vaster...

[Dave Mills]

The first one is my choice and I would straighten the horizon.

[Gus Cobos]

Nicely done Roman,
I do like the first one posted...:cool: