What's the deal with during the camera sideways to take a shot?

londonandlawson wrote in post #7091229
I see people doing this all the time, what purpose does it serve?

He made a funny! I Lol'ed

I thought this was about that annoying trend where people shoot cars on 30 degree angles as though almost defying gravity in the shot lol

20droger wrote in post #7109461
If you shoot with a 6×6 MF camera or a 126 Instamatic, there is no portrait or landscape orientation. Problem solved.

Old thread, I know . . . but Roger asks/states a great point that I have often wondered myself. All the hubbub about "full frame" or "cropped sensor" often spawns debate about EF vs EF-S lenses, and why the crop factor affects "effective reach" of the lenses, etc. What does this have to do with orientation? Roger's comment about a 6X6 MF camera can easily be asked, "Why not a square sensor?" If you think about it, a round lens mated to a 2:3 ratio sensor drives an orientation problem. If the "full frame" sensor is 36MM on the long axis, then the biggest it can be on the short side is 24MM. Why not a 32MM square sensor? 32MM is more than enough for excellent resolution, as evidenced by the crop sensor models. And a 32MM square would maximize the round lens, avoid the necessity of holding sideways, avoid the need for goofy jurry rigs for turning the camera and keeping the flash on top, etc. When was the last time anyone saw a medium format camera photographer turning his rig on the side? A high density sensor of 32MM square would still allow plenty of flexibility in cropping and printing in portrait or landscape. Anyone else think this is a good idea??

Canon, are you listening???

Brypan wrote in post #7091276
To get a landscape or portrait picture. Landscape=horizontal, portrait=vertical.

Wrong.

Landscape and portrait are print orientations. They refer to which way the paper is loaded into the machine, or which way the printer will put the image on the paper.

Landscape and portrait are also types of images (photographs, paintings, sketches, etc.). Landscapes are usually images of, um, the landscape, and portraits are images of people aware of being photographed (or painted or whatever) and cooperating in the process (as opposed to a "candid" image which usually refers to a photograph of a person or people that was taken without the subject's cooperation).

As types of images, both landscapes and portraits can be either vertically or horizontally oriented (taller than they are wide, or wider than they are tall).

Since it would sound stupid to take a landscape portrait, or a portrait landscape, we don't use those terms to refer to camera orientation. We use the terms "vertical" or "horizontal."

So if you want to make it easier to shoot with the camera in vertical orientation, you get a vertical grip.
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …rip&N=0&Initial​Search=yes
Not a "portrait grip."

golfecho wrote in post #13004029
"Why not a square sensor?"

Because Wal*Mart doesn't offer square print sizes.

golfecho wrote in post #13004029
When was the last time anyone saw a medium format camera photographer turning his rig on the side?

Last weekend? And pretty much any other time I've seen somebody shooting with a digital MF or shooting any of the -many- MF film cameras that are not 6x6?

Curtis N wrote in post #13005271
Wrong.

i love when people correct posts that were made 2 1/2 years before

You can't take vertical/portrait photos unless you have a + $2000 tripod set up, including L brackets. If you can't afford that, don't bother... just shoot landscapes.

<sarcasm dripping>

Phoenixkh wrote in post #13005761
<sarcasm dripping>

Very unecessary sarcasm, at that. Are you insecure about your gear or something?

^ I find that not funny at all.

I thought the OP was asking how people shoot cars at certain angle that forces you to tilt your head to see what the car is about. lol

DreDaze wrote in post #13005648
i love when people correct posts that were made 2 1/2 years before

Sorry. I was on vacation.

I read the whole thread... I guess I thought the OP was typing tongue in cheek from the beginning. My post was a failed attempt at humor. My equipment is fine for now. I can't see buying a very expensive (though amazingly beautiful) tripod/head setup that costs 4 times what my camera did. I was sort of poking fun at my own equipment at the same time.

I do have an odd sense of humor.... It was not my intention to offend anyone. I'm sorry to those I offended.

Kim

Curtis N wrote in post #13006058
Sorry. I was on vacation.

What, for 2 1/2 years?

Roy Mathers wrote in post #13007856
What, for 2 1/2 years?

Best vacation ever!

Well, this is a pretty funny resurrection!

I'm reminded of the time I was shooting at a family event with a P&S. I was used to shooting in either orientation, whatever worked.

Then at one point, I decided to shoot some video with it, something I was not in the habit of.

So, I'm doing this and decided to switch to the "vertical orientation" to get the composition I wanted.

Imagine my disappointment that the dang video was "ruined" by being shot sideways!