for landscapes, do you use a bubble level?

[Mattg]

Sometimes in printing I have trouble choosing between visually level and actually level, because really level doesn't look level. After going around on this, I've decided that actually level usually looks better in the end, so I check.

And this is one reason I always level the camera; so I know once I get to the stage of enlarging what actually level actually is.

It's also handy if you want to make the most of your negative and not crop too much as any levelling done under the enlarger means a crop.

For urban landscapes I level the camera in both directions. For scenes with no recognisable geometric shapes I still level the horizon.

[Brad Rippe]

I start with the camera level, but then rotate as needed for the best composition. I'm extra careful if there's a horizon in the image, but for most non horizon scenes, you should feel free to adjust the image as you want, without worrying too much about level.
-Brad

[Ben Chase]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

Some of us are overly anal Frank

If I see that my image is off level even slightly it irritates me to no end, even though "fixing" it in PS is pretty trivial - it's just extra work to do later that I wouldn't normally have to do.

[Frank Petronio]

Actually I'm anal too and I figure the film shifting in the holder and the holder introduce a degree or so of possible shift.... so you're going to be fixing it and checking the guides in PS anyway.

And I've been know to tilt the camera down, line up the horizon with the horizontal edge of the ground glass and know I have that axis lined up, optically at least.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I use a level with my medium format camera when it's important, and I have a level more or less permanently in the flash shoe of my 35mm camera (if I use flash, it's on a bracket, and connected to the PC contact).

David Muench is often pointed down, but his horizons are usually level.

But all this talk of level horizons makes me want to experiment with some non-level horizons. Of course there's the "Dutch angle" used in film to create a feeling of motion, but it's got to be way tilted to be convincing or it just looks like a mistake. But does anyone use the subtle tilting of the horizon--just enough to make the whole thing disturbing and not quite right--as a conscious effect?

[Frank Petronio]

Landscapes with rivers should always be tilted towards the downstream end of course.

[Doremus Scudder]

Using the gg is certainly a possibility, but I find it faster to get the camera into "starting position" by using the level. I do, however, often check horizon against the grid or by panning down to check it against the top edge. Often slight adjustments are necessary, even though I have used the level to get things straight to begin with.

Of course, if there is nothing in the composition that needs to be level (horizon, verticals, etc.) then I simply make the best composition. And, nowhere is it carved in stone that the horizon must be level (or verticals for that matter), it depends on you vision for the photograph. That said, level is often the best starting point, especially if you anticipate lots of movements...

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[ljb0904]

It sort of depends on what I'm photographing. If the focus is down (like the classic near/far comp), I just point the camera down using grid lines to fix the horizon right. If it's trees or other things sticking up, I start level (using levels) and shift from there. Plus, it depends on whether I'm using the Arca or the Osaka. I like to be precise, but I'm not anal about it :-)

[Clay Turtle]

As a matter of fact I also use the leveling of the tripod head then move to the on camera frame levels. Part of the ritual of setting up of setting everything square & plumb . . . then I go on viewing & composure which like construction sometimes things have to be eye balled to look square or level

[mrladewig]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

Frank, It especially comes into play in my experience when there is water in the scene. If it is a mountain lake, misaligned reflections often give the viewer a feeling of something being wrong (like Kirk mentioned), though its sometimes difficult to place. And with open water like the ocean, it can give a feeling like the world is slipping to a side even if its only a degree or two of tilt.

If there isn't a body of water or any other indicator of level then I tend to not worry about it, just setup and use my eyes to level.