someone once asked me if converging verticals bothered me with respect to photographing buildings. he felt that they diminished the image, but he avoided them by shooting buildings straight one, which in my mind dimishes the image by including too much foreground. unless the foreground brings something to the image, i would rather have some convergence than a huge featureless swath making up the bottom half of the image. good foregrounds are fine - those that are there purely as a function of the distance you are to your subject, less so. the straight-on approach also tends to put the subject matter smack on a mid-image horizon, which i just don't like except in certain circumstances (i dropped a contact once because every single one of his images was centered). my sense is that it is easier for the eyes to ignore convergence than a drab foreground. on the other hand, i really do like my horizontals to be horizontal ....

thoughts?