I took this other day. Like most of my airborne photos it was a complete accident, but I liked the arrangement of lines. At least until my eye was drawn to the water tower. Now I can't not look at it. I realize the problem is parallax, but how to correct for doing photography in an open cockpit aircraft is beyond me. As I recall I was about 900 feet and the water tower is about a mile and a half distant so the angle was roughly six and a half degrees. Any ideas?
lsaguy wrote:
I took this other day. Like most of my airborne photos it was a complete accident, but I liked the arrangement of lines. At least until my eye was drawn to the water tower. Now I can't not look at it. I realize the problem is parallax, but how to correct for doing photography in an open cockpit aircraft is beyond me. As I recall I was about 900 feet and the water tower is about a mile and a half distant so the angle was roughly six and a half degrees. Any ideas?
Not sure where parallax comes into play. Looks like perspective distortion. I would imagine your PS can easily correct it as it does for my shots.
Tried PS perspective warp for the first time.
Don't really know what I'm doing.
Helped some.
Tried perspective warp in PS for the first time
Don't really know if it is the way to do it
Architect1776 wrote:
Not sure where parallax comes into play. Looks like perspective distortion. I would imagine your PS can easily correct it as it does for my shots.
Architect1776 got it! Parallax not the issue. Note:
Perspective distortion: Is a warping or transformation of an object and its surrounding area that differs significantly from what the object would look like with a normal focal length, due to the relative scale of nearby and distant features. Linear perspective changes are caused by distance, not by the lens. Thus, the Leaning Tower of Water.
.
Parallax: The way an object’s position or direction seems to change depending on viewing angle (vertical or horizontal). Back in the day, as they say, before the nearly universal use of digital SLR’s the relationship between view finder and lens images was slightly different on the vertical plane with a non-SLR; the lens, obviously, the dominating. Some camera view finders compensated for this. There were also lens compatible view finders for the camera’s shoe mount to compensate for parallax.
.
Try this: Stand or sit viewing a near object (view the top edge of your computer monitor with an observable line or object few inches behind the monitor), alternately move your line of sight up and down from your viewing position. Notice the apparent "movement" of the background. Now you're not relaxing, you are "Parallaxing".
.
Linear perspective: Parallel lines that recede into the distance appear to get closer together or converge.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
lsaguy wrote:
I took this other day. Like most of my airborne photos it was a complete accident, but I liked the arrangement of lines. At least until my eye was drawn to the water tower. Now I can't not look at it. I realize the problem is parallax, but how to correct for doing photography in an open cockpit aircraft is beyond me. As I recall I was about 900 feet and the water tower is about a mile and a half distant so the angle was roughly six and a half degrees. Any ideas?
Not parallax.
This is what happens when you "tilt" the sensor down - it is sometimes referred to as "keystoning." You create a vanishing point that causes lines, in this case vertical lines to converge, much like railroad tracks do when you look down the tracks. The only way to fix this is to keep the camera level or use a shift lens, or correct for keystoning in post processing.
G Brown
Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK
This may be the 'trouble' with zooming in on the computer. lots of Ariel Photo's exhibit some of this but are printed at a size that 'it becomes less noticeable' or of a subject that shows minimal effect.
Having straightened the tower the Silo's are leaning! At what point do you say enough.
Like all 'non mainstream' subjects, Look at what others do and what is an acceptable image within that genre. EG Macro is 1:1 but people take bigger or lesser macro photographs.
Do you just try to avoid photographing 'pointy up' things. Do you photograph between optimum altitudes or look at more vertical view or have more sky (Level).
I would explore the genre and see what / how/ when and the composition rules others follow/do ..
With the explosion of Drone photography - I am certain that this issue will be discussed a lot!
Have fun
It can be done in software.
I wouldn't fix it. The water tower is too small and the OP possibly didn't see it when he took the picture.
Gene51 wrote:
Not parallax.
This is what happens when you "tilt" the sensor down - it is sometimes referred to as "keystoning."
Right. Obviously, the plane was flying much too high.
I also shoot guns equipped with telescopic sights. To get a good idea of what parallax is, and the limitations Google "scope parallax correction" or similar topic to get a good discussion of what parallax is , the optic settings, and what if any correction is available. In a camera it's likely all about distance.
Perspective distortion is the issue with the photograph, not parallax.
Thinking about my earlier reply, I agree that parallax is not the problem. Lenses are complex devices that have multiple characteristics and I believe that the proper place to look is spherical aberration. In some inexpensive cameras an example would be looking at a photo of something that in real life is a straight line, but in the photo has a curve. to get a better idea of the problem again would be to look at Google "spherical aberration" to see some examples. It is a condition that as a user you cannot correct the problem, it is designed into the optics used in that camera lens.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.