A lot of my work relies on precision of geometry. Upright verticals and round circles. Looking for that specific line of sight that makes all of the inherent shapes 'cohere'.
You can do a lot in post-processing to fix any tilt or pitch you may have introduced to the attitude of the camera; but once the 3D world has been projected onto your 2D sensor, there is no true recovery for errors of yaw (z-axis) alignment.
Perhaps the only thing we can't digitally rewrite in post is the picture composition. It might seem as though we can modify the composition post-capture with perspective adjustments and crops; but the truth is, it is extremely rare to be able to do so wholly satisfactorilly. Composition must be right in camera, at the point that the 3D to 2D projection is accomplished.
Here I have used a colour cut-out on top of a black & white base layer to isolate and emphasise the extreme perspective of the close-range wide-angle shot. I think its a treatment that suits the TARDIS, as if and as though it were setting off on a journey and we, the viewer, are being carried along. Look! There's that narrative I insist photographs must have. Sometimes. Mostly.
NB I've never found a consistent set of terms to describe a tilt of the camera in each of the 3 spatial planes. Photographers are used to the terms Tilt and Pan, but that only covers 2 of the 3 cases. Also 'panning' means something quite specific (especially in action shots) and so can be confusing when talking about the attitude of the camera to the subject.
So in this context I use
'Tilt' to mean the lens is off-the-vertical (pointing up or down)
'Pitch' to describe a rotation of the camera between landscape and portrait orientation
'Yaw' to describe a swivel offset, where one side of the camera is nearer the subject than the other.