Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Analysis
Vatican Snapshot - Vertical correction or not?
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
Sep 1, 2019 09:34:02   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
R.G. wrote:
Normally I would suggest not getting rid of all of the perspective-related convergence because the eye expects it and it's a natural part of how we see things. As a general rule it only becomes a problem if it's extreme due to the exaggeration caused by a wide angle lens. A line of sight (i.e. the tilt of the camera) that's well away from horizontal will also exaggerate the convergence. However......

In this case what makes it problematic is the vertical lines close to the edges of the frame, and that is aggravated by the bright triangles that are formed between the verticals and the edges of the frame. You need to decide if those white areas are important to the shot, and if they're not you need to lose them, or alternatively use enough perspective correction to make those verticals parallel with the edges of the frame.

As a general rule, convergence near the centre of the frame is far more acceptable visually than convergence near the edges of the frame, because the edges of the frame accentuate any tilt. Not only is moderate convergence a natural phenomenon, it can also be used to create a visually dramatic effect which emphasises height and/or depth.

Also, if you have lens corrections as an option, use that first, because if you don't you could end up trying to correct what is in reality lens-induced curvature by using the linear corrections of the perspective tool (which would not produce good results).

Perspective distortion correction will cause the top of the image to be stretched but the bottom of the image will be left more-or-less alone, so don't be too concerned about losing details in the immediate foreground like the edges of the steps.
Normally I would suggest not getting rid of all of... (show quote)


Thanks so much for detail explanation on this subject R.G.! I will save this post for future reference.

Appreciated.

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 09:34:59   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
par4fore wrote:
I put it through ACR distortion and finished with a free transform.


Thanks par4fore! Much appreciated....

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 10:29:10   #
jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ
 
PixelStan77 wrote:
All I would do is crop that light area on left. It distracts from the main image.In double download, I like the cropping of the image


I agree with this. Snap shots don't need much as they are simply a record of good times you had when you were out and about with friends or family. But that doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't improve the photo after you get it on your computer. So yes, I think cropping this would really improve this photo but keep a copy of the original too in case you need to frame it or forward it to someone....

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2019 10:34:56   #
StanMac Loc: Tennessee
 
bpulv wrote:
I would not crop the left. Instead, I would crop a little of the right only removing a little of the whitest part of that piler. The converging lines of the two foreground pilers (like a railroad track) help lead the eyes to the door area where you want the pilers to be parallel.


It’s “pillars”.

Purists would say correct the receding line distortion in architectural images. I think it’s a personal decision. Go ahead and correct the converging lines and see if you like that way. No harm in trying both ways for something that is quite easy to do.

Stan

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 11:15:35   #
Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC
 
PixelStan77 wrote:
All I would do is crop that light area on left. It distracts from the main image.In double download, I like the cropping of the image



Reply
Sep 1, 2019 11:49:37   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
jeep_daddy wrote:
I agree with this. Snap shots don't need much as they are simply a record of good times you had when you were out and about with friends or family. But that doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't improve the photo after you get it on your computer. So yes, I think cropping this would really improve this photo but keep a copy of the original too in case you need to frame it or forward it to someone....


Thanks so much for your input jeep_daddy..... Cheer

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 11:52:41   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
StanMac wrote:
It’s “pillars”.

Purists would say correct the receding line distortion in architectural images. I think it’s a personal decision. Go ahead and correct the converging lines and see if you like that way. No harm in trying both ways for something that is quite easy to do.

Stan


Thanks StanMac! It is a personal decision which I will try it both ways to see which way is more pleasing.

Much appreciated.

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2019 13:52:49   #
CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida
 
I like the shot framed by pillars on both sides. I would straighten it but keep some pillar on the left, even if I had to put some back with PS.

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 15:01:51   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
This one is as close to great as you're going to get. I'd have preferred a bit more symmetry in the original. As far as perspective, I think you've captured it nicely and any fooling around will destroy the feeling of depth.
--Bob
Saigon wrote:
Is this better bpulv (darkening)? Thx

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 15:28:53   #
photogeneralist Loc: Lopez Island Washington State
 
Saigon wrote:
Hi,

This is just a snapshot which I took during Rome visit. Do you think I need straighten out the vertical line a little bit more or just keep it this way to reserve the dome on the top of the picture?

Thanks for your help in advance....

Cheer


Post processing is inherently subjective. I tried playing with your photo, Increased parallelness of verticals, remove white eye snags left and right, brighten, sharpen increase saturation etc. Unfortunately, increasing the parallelness of the verticals also cropped out some of architectural interest of the vaulted nave.
I offer it here as an aid in your answering of your own question , You must be the "decider-in-chief.


(Download)

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 15:41:01   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
CPR wrote:
I like the shot framed by pillars on both sides. I would straighten it but keep some pillar on the left, even if I had to put some back with PS.


Thanks you Sir.....Appreciated your input!

Reply
 
 
Sep 1, 2019 15:43:26   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
rmalarz wrote:
This one is as close to great as you're going to get. I'd have preferred a bit more symmetry in the original. As far as perspective, I think you've captured it nicely and any fooling around will destroy the feeling of depth.
--Bob


Thanks rmalarz! You guys have provided a variety of constructive opinions which I've learned a whole lot. I love to keep the depth of the picture as well.

Reply
Sep 1, 2019 15:44:06   #
Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA
 
photogeneralist wrote:
Post processing is inherently subjective. I tried playing with your photo, Increased parallelness of verticals, remove white eye snags left and right, brighten, sharpen increase saturation etc. Unfortunately, increasing the parallelness of the verticals also cropped out some of architectural interest of the vaulted nave.
I offer it here as an aid in your answering of your own question , You must be the "decider-in-chief.


Thanks you photogeneralist! Great help and encouragement.

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 10:14:58   #
raymondh Loc: Walker, MI
 
Much better!

Reply
Sep 2, 2019 19:07:30   #
cascoly Loc: seattle
 
photogeneralist wrote:
... Increased parallelness of verticals, remove white eye snags left and right, brighten, sharpen increase saturation etc. Unfortunately, increasing the parallelness of the verticals also cropped out some of architectural interest of the vaulted nave. ….


note in the perspective wrap shown earlier, you get the parallel columns while preserving the vault and steps

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Analysis
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.