Parallax correction (Page 2): I like the lines too. I don't know what you mean by parallax errors, but in the first image, the wide view, the horizon is noticeably tilted to the right.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

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?

I like the lines too.

I don't know what you mean by parallax errors, but in the first image, the wide view, the horizon is noticeably tilted to the right. Try straightening the horizon first, and then see if that helps with the tower.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

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?

This looks like an image made with an ELECTRONIC SHUTTER. This appears to be the dreaded ROLLING SHUTTER effect you get when photographing something that moves, or when you're moving relative to a stationary subject. It's common in video made with dSLRs and mirrorless cameras, as well.

This happens because the shutter is actually a frame scan that takes place over time, from top to bottom. The plane was probably flying left, since the tower is leaning right. The image started recording at the top of the frame, and the plane moved as the scan went down the frame, pixel row by pixel row.

Doowopa Loc: Connecticut

s

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Like many others stated, it's not parallax. However, there's nothing like flying in an open holer to really experience flying.
--Bob

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?

JD750 Loc: SoCal

burkphoto wrote:

This looks like an image made with an ELECTRONIC S... (show quote)

Interesting. So what I am hearing, from what you said above, is that the shutter speed was too slow. Is that correct?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

JD750 wrote:

Interesting. So what I am hearing, from what you said above, is that the shutter speed was too slow. Is that correct?

No. There are two types of shutter in many modern digital cameras --- mechanical and electronic. You don't get much of that effect with a mechanical shutter. But the scan time of the electronic shutter is slow enough that moving the camera or the scene tilts objects.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rolling+shutter+effect&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#scso=uid_WJ_M_AABZy4KJitL-AA5Eg_1:163

JD750 Loc: SoCal

burkphoto wrote:

No. There are two types of shutter in many modern digital cameras --- mechanical and electronic. You don't get much of that effect with a mechanical shutter. But the scan time of the electronic shutter is slow enough that moving the camera or the scene tilts objects.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rolling+shutter+effect&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#scso=uid_WJ_M_AABZy4KJitL-AA5Eg_1:163

Interesting. Thanks Burk!

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

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?

Do a 360 and get the hell out of there.......

JD750 Loc: SoCal

rmalarz wrote:

Like many others stated, it's not parallax. However, there's nothing like flying in an open holer to really experience flying.
--Bob

I flew a PT-19 Stearman once upon a time. With the goggles and leather cap, and THAT is an aeroplane, a pilots aeroplane. What a magnificent flier.