Photography

  • Eye-level (Natural view): This is the “default” perspective—putting the camera at the subject’s eye level creates a natural, empathetic feel.  It lets viewers connect directly with subjects (humans or animals) and often conveys familiarity or intimacy .  For example, a portrait shot at eye-level (with the subject looking into the camera) “allows viewers to feel more connected” and evokes empathy .  Many street and documentary photographers (e.g. Henri Cartier-Bresson) favored eye-level framing to capture life as it is seen, making moments feel candid and relatable.
  • Bird’s-eye (high/overhead): Shooting from above detaches the viewer and abstracts the scene.  Overhead “bird’s-eye” views turn ordinary landscapes into graphics or patterns .  From this angle people and objects appear smaller, which can make the viewer feel superior or removed from the subject .  For example, aerial drone shots of a city or crowd place the viewer above the action, emphasizing scale and context rather than personal drama.  Such high angles often create a sense of isolation or surveillance: as NYFA notes, photos from above can make the viewer feel “superior to the subject” or protective of it .
    A bird’s-eye/drone view of a shoreline – overhead angles like this make scenes look abstract and small-scale .
  • Subject-point (first-person POV): Framing a shot from a subject’s own viewpoint (often including hands or body parts in the frame) deeply immerses the viewer.  NYFA calls this “becoming the subject” – for example, photographing a chef’s hands cooking as if you were the chef.  This puts the audience directly in the action, making them “feel as though they are experiencing the scene themselves” .  Such shots are common in documentary or lifestyle photography to create intimacy (e.g. a photographer’s camera arm in-frame) and can feel “captivating, heartwarming, or even slightly disturbing” depending on context .  In portraiture, shooting over a subject’s shoulder to include what they see can similarly draw viewers into the subject’s personal world (as if looking through their eyes).
  • Worm’s-eye (low ground view): Shooting from ground level (looking up) makes the subject loom large.  Subjects shot this way “look very large…as though they hold power over the viewer” .  This angle tends to be dramatic or even intimidating – by photographing up at a person or building, the viewer feels small or vulnerable.  In practice, a low-angle portrait gives the subject a heroic or menacing presence.  As one tutorial notes, low-angle street photos have a “moody feel” and make subjects tower over the camera .  In our road photo below you see the world from near the ground, exaggerating scale.
    A worm’s-eye view of a road – the low camera angle makes nearby objects loom and emphasizes height .

In street photography, varying the POV adds narrative. Eye-level candid shots feel authentic, while stepping up or crouching down yields unusual lines or contexts. In portraiture, photographers may favor eye-level (to flatter) or a slight high-angle (to make sitters appear smaller and more vulnerable) or low-angle (to empower them).  In documentary work, POV choice sets mood: e.g. wartime aerial photos (aerial POV) show battlefield scope, whereas a photographer getting “down in the dirt” (ground-level POV) can highlight an individual’s dignity or ordeal.  Overall, changing the camera height/angle in photography can dramatically alter mood: high angles depersonalize or diminish the subject , eye-level humanizes it , and low angles aggrandize it .

Storytelling (Literature)

  • First-Person: The narrator is “I,” so readers see the world through one character’s eyes.  This POV creates intense intimacy and immediacy.  As one writing guide explains, first-person narration feels like the story is told by a confidant, which “makes you care more about the protagonist” .  Every event is filtered through that character’s feelings and biases, so readers are fully inside their head.  For example, Dickens’s Great Expectations is told by Pip in first person – as one critic notes, Pip’s voice “immediately puts the reader into his shoes” , forcing us to experience his loss and hope directly.  First-person often comes with an unreliable narrator twist (e.g. The Great Gatsby, Gone Girl), adding intrigue.  Its strength is empathy: readers feel the narrator’s world from the inside .
  • Third-Person Limited: The narrator uses “he/she” but sticks to one viewpoint at a time.  This balances intimacy and scope.  We see a main character closely (often with access to their thoughts) but not through their eyes.  Writers like J.K. Rowling and J.R.R. Tolkien often use limited third-person: for example, Harry Potter stays tightly with Harry’s perspective (thoughts and feelings) each chapter, while still describing things he can’t see.  Third-person limited allows richer exposition (the narrator knows more than one person’s POV at different times) but still keeps readers emotionally engaged.  George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire is a classic example: each chapter is from one character’s third-person view, letting Martin “span vast gaps” of geography and personality .  Martin can “play a scene through the eyes of a [character]” and then switch to another, giving both intimacy and broad world-building .
  • Third-Person Omniscient: An “all-knowing” narrator who can dip into any character or the world at large.  This is like a cinematic camera that can pan anywhere.  It offers the widest scope but less personal immediacy.  The narrator may describe any character’s thoughts or setting details and isn’t limited to one psyche .  As one guide says, third-person can “pan over to any character or situation, adjust for any angle” .  Classic epics and older novels often use this POV to cover large casts (e.g. Tolstoy’s War and Peace or Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings).  The drawback is emotional distance: readers watch characters rather than fully becoming them.  Nevertheless, omniscient narration excels at sweeping storytelling and dramatic irony (knowing what characters do not).

Summary: First-person POV gives maximum intimacy and immediacy (you hear directly from a character), while third-person limited provides a close focus with narrative flexibility .  Third-person omniscient grants the broadest scope (like a movie camera) , at the cost of reduced personal immersion. Well-known examples: Great Expectations (Pip’s first-person narrator) , Harry Potter (Rowling’s tight third-person limited), and The Lord of the Rings (Tolkien’s more omniscient style).

Filmmaking

Directors use camera POV creatively to draw viewers into a character’s experience or to orient them in a scene:

  • First-Person (Subjective) Shot: The camera literally shows exactly what a character sees.  This is rare but extremely immersive.  A famous example is Halloween (1978): the film opens with Michael Myers’s POV looking through a window, so we see what he sees.  This “killer’s POV” shot places the audience behind his mask and creates immediate tension .  Pixflow notes that such first-person shots make viewers feel involved in the horror: “placing viewers directly behind the mask… creates a sense of unease” .  Other examples include The Blair Witch Project (found-footage POV camera) or the entirely first-person movie Hardcore Henry (2015).  These shots blur the line between viewer and character by making the screen our own eyes .
    First-person POV shot (from Halloween, 1978) – the camera acts as the killer’s eyes looking through a doorway.  Such shots put the viewer inside the character’s perspective, heightening suspense .
  • Over-the-Shoulder (OTS): The camera is placed just behind one character so we see the scene from their perspective, often with their shoulder/head at the edge of frame.  This is very common in dialogue and action shots.  OTS naturally orients the audience (“you’re right there in the scene”) and suggests a connection between the camera’s character and the subject .  As StudioBinder explains, OTS shots “orient your viewer” and imply an emotional alignment between characters .  Directors like Hitchcock and Tarantino use OTS to manipulate viewpoint: for instance, Hitchcock’s Rear Window famously shows Grace Kelly’s character through Jimmy Stewart’s OTS perspective, so the audience meets her from his eyes .  Tarantino’s Kill Bill uses OTS to put us in The Bride’s shoes, showing her enemies through her sightlines and thus gaining our sympathy .
    An over-the-shoulder shot (camera behind the passenger, focusing on the driver) – the viewer sees what the passenger sees of the driver.  OTS shots like this are ubiquitous in film, serving to “orient” the viewer and share one character’s perspective .
  • Wide/Establishing Shots: These are objective, often distant shots that show the environment or multiple characters from a god-like angle (e.g. cranes, drones).  While not a character’s POV per se, they set context or convey emotion on a large scale (a lonely figure dwarfed by vast landscape, a bustling city overhead, etc.).  Directors use these to contrast with close subjective shots.  For example, Stanley Kubrick often opened scenes with wide symmetrical shots to set a dispassionate tone, then cut to close-ups for character emotion.  There are fewer formal citations for this, but broadly directors combine subjective (first-person, OTS) shots to immerse us in a character’s world, and wide/overhead shots to remind us of the bigger picture .

In summary, POV cinematography actively manipulates audience engagement: first-person or OTS shots pull viewers into a character’s experience , while wide/establishing shots position the camera like an omniscient observer .  Horror and thriller directors (Carpenter, David Fincher) have mastered the spooky POV shot, whereas auteurs like Hitchcock and Tarantino famously slide between viewpoints to align the audience with characters or to shock them (e.g. seeing “the other side” through their eyes) .

Gaming

  • First-Person (In-Game Camera): The game shows the world through the player-character’s eyes (no visible avatar on screen).  This maximizes immersion: players often report feeling “inside” the game world.  Empirical studies confirm this: players were more immersed when playing in first-person, regardless of preference .  First-person view gives a clear, close-up view of the world as if you were the character, which “provides the most immersive feel” .  It also makes gameplay mechanics (aiming, timing) feel direct and personal.  Examples include most first-person shooters (e.g. Call of Duty, Halo) and survival/horror games (Half-Life, Resident Evil).  In these, you see weapons, hands, and sights on the screen, enhancing the sense of agency and tension.
  • Third-Person (Chase Camera): The camera follows behind (or around) the player-character, showing the avatar on screen.  This gives a broader spatial awareness (you can see obstacles or enemies around you), but distances the player a bit from the avatar’s identity.  Players don’t feel like the character as directly, but they see themselves in action.  Third-person suits games where character appearance or movement is important (e.g. Grand Theft Auto, Dark Souls, Tomb Raider).  As the VR study notes, third-person view provides better situational awareness at the cost of embodiment .  In practice, many games let players choose: for instance, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim or Mass Effect can switch between perspectives.  The tradeoff is clear: first-person emphasizes immersion and personal connection ; third-person emphasizes overview and combat/parkour mechanics.
  • Virtual Reality (VR): VR games by necessity use first-person (the headset is your eyes).  This amplifies immersion and embodiment: studies find that first-person view in VR strongly induces users to feel ownership of their virtual body .  In VR you can look around naturally, and first-person perspective enables very accurate interaction with the world (e.g. grabbing, aiming) .  Some VR games experiment with a 3rd-person camera (showing an avatar), but this usually reduces presence.  Overall, VR takes first-person to the extreme: users often report a profound sense of “being there” that third-person cannot achieve.  The best response for ultimate immersion (e.g. in RPGs or simulations) is indeed VR’s first-person view, because it aligns player agency (head/hand movements) directly with the virtual world .

Comparison: In gaming, first-person generally offers greater immersion and agency (the world “feels real” to the player) , while third-person offers better visibility and expression of the avatar.  VR augments first-person immersion even further by physically involving the player, confirmed by research showing higher embodiment with first-person VR .

Sources: Across all these fields, the choice of POV is a deliberate creative decision with psychological effect.  (All specific claims above are supported by the cited sources.)