I did the same but my grid tells me there's a very slight rotation error
(needs to be tilted very slightly to the right). Then I recalled that
sometimes, when I "correct" the perspective error in a building, I need
to slightly under-correct for it to look natural. I think that's
because the eye sees the perspective distortion just as the camera does
but our brains correct most of it. But if it's perfectly square it may
not look like we see the real world. So I applied a small amount of
vertical distortion to tilt the building very slightly backwards and now
it looks like it should. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 7/15/2012 10:12 PM, Wayne Harridge wrote:
> Peter, I saved #2, viewed it with a grid and it's spot on, however the
> building verticals look like they are diverging !
>
> ...Wayne
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Klein [mailto:pklein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, 16 July 2012 11:17 AM
>> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: You and me at the top of the world
>>
>> Chuck, Jeff and the Oly gang:
>>
>> Thanks for the comments. I this perspective stuff is as much art as
> science in
>> real life. :-)
>>
>> I'm really most interested in the scale of the couple vs. the building,
> and the
>> light. But I'd like the "architectural correctness" of the picture to be
>> acceptable. So I reworked the leveling and keystoning correction again,
> and I
>> *think* I like it better this way. But I've been staring at it so long
> that I
>> wouldn't know a straight line if it bit me where I sit. :-)
>>
>> So, which one do you like better?
>>
>> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/album170/P1060893Sky-w.jpg.html>
>> (the
>> original)
>> <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/album170/P1060893Sky+1-
>> w.jpg.html>
>> (the rework, with a slight crop on the bottom)
>>
>> --Peter
>>
>> ------
>>> You're correct. Regardless of what it looks like the vertical lines
>> all pass my straightedge test.
>>>
>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>>
>>> On 7/15/2012 1:00 PM, List, OM wrote:
>>>
>>> Interesting how quick associations affect how a picture is seen. When
>>> I first saw it I thought the left side of the building was (the part
>> with the
>>> balconies opening to the left) was actually wider at the top. Looking
>> more
>>> carefully the black border prevented me from seeing that the right
>> edge of
>>> the building was also shifted to the left at the top. I think the
>>> picture is just slightly rotated counter clockwise from vertical.
>>>
>>> My wide angle lenses have barrel distortion. I don't think at first
>>> glance I would interpret any but the most obvious pin cushion
>> distortion as
>>> pin cushion distortion.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Chuck Norcutt < chucknorcutt [at]
>>> chucknorcutt.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I think the color version makes it easier to spot the people.
>>>
>>> I thought at first that the camera had been pointed slightly down
>>> giving some perspective distortion but I then realized that I was
>>> probably looking at some pincushion distortion.
>>>
>>> Chuck Norcutt
>>
>> --
>> __________________________________________________________
>> _______
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
