Tilting wall/buildings (Page 3): does the Sony have on board camera adjustments?? What phase in Photoshop did you go to to get the Bank back up to being straight. No pun intended...

Nikonman44

does the Sony have on board camera adjustments??

What phase in Photoshop did you go to to get the Bank back up to being straight.

No pun intended

StevenG Loc: Long Island, NY

dyximan wrote:

My question is when taking a cityscape with A cro... (show quote)

I am just an amateur, and like you I use a crop sensor camera. Photos of tall or wide buildings do tend to "tilt" inward. If the tilting is "minimal", this can generally be corrected in software such as Lightroom. The greater the tilt, the more difficult it is to correct. The drawback, as has been mentioned, is that the corrections eliminate foreground and background, and require a good deal of cropping. So, for large corrections you need a good deal of foreground and background or you will be left with a large, partial portion of the building and not much else.
Steve

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

I, on occasion (basically only when I remember), I will use keystone compensation on my camera. More often though, I just do it in post using the guided settings in LR or photoshop.
http://thedigitalstory.com/2016/09/keystone-compensation-on-em10-mark2.html

Here's an example of an ultrawide angle lens using keystone comp in camera...and one without. Both shot at 7mm (14mm for you full frame guys and gals).

(Download)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The examples above show why you don't want to take the correction too far, whether you use a tilt in the camera or keystone in the software.

Both images end up with clearly visible distortion near the corners. The top of the lighthouse is less circular and the top of the skyscraper looks skewed and unnatural.

An adjustment somewhere between those extremes would have looked more natural, less distorted.

TBPJr Loc: South Carolina

rehess wrote:

To some degree, vertical walls do actually appear to converge as they recede up from us, just as railroad track rails do appear to converge as they recede towards the horizon.

Not so--parallel lines do appear to converge as they recede into the distance, but that will make individual walls seem to taper, not make two walls converge.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

dyximan wrote:

My question is when taking a cityscape with A cro... (show quote)

It is not a function of sensor size. It only relates to the extent to which the sensor is parallel to the lines of the building. If you take a shot of a building with a FF using a 16mm lens and one using a crop sensor and an equivalent length (for a Canon APS-C it would be a 10mm lens) from the same position using the same framing, the slant of the lines will be the same.

Dik

A big issue with using a DSLR mounted on a view camera is that the internal parts of the camera (mirror box) block light from the lens when it is shifted off center, so you have a very limited useable angle of view.
View camera lenses were not designed to cope with the high degree of enlargement that 35mm, or even worse, APS-C images require.
I suggest the OP buy a 10-18mm, set it to 10mm and hold the camera level, then crop the foreground.
Edit: Oops, for some reason thought the OP had a crop sensor Canon. Never mind.

TBPJr Loc: South Carolina

PixelStan77 wrote:

Tilt-Shift Perspective Control lenses are super super expensive. The good ones run $4,000 to 6,000 dollars. I set my camera on a tripod and use a bubble level to check that my camera is not tilted. Then, I get what I get and if you are handy in Photoshop you can do further corrections.

Not really--the prices are over-stated. Canon has seven tilt-shift lenses currently (three are brand new), and the most expensive is $2,199.00. Nikon has a brand-new one at $3,400, but several others at about the same as the Canon offerings. While still expensive, that is a lot less than $4,000-$6,000.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

The camera has nothing to do with tilting. It is the position of the camera what makes the tilting of the buildings.
There are two ways to avoid the tilting (crop or full frame camera) use a tilt and shift lens or keep the camera parallel to the subject.
Using a 4x5 film camera solves the problem also.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

camerapapi wrote:

The camera has nothing to do with tilting. It is the position of the camera what makes the tilting of the buildings.
There are two ways to avoid the tilting (crop or full frame camera) use a tilt and shift lens or keep the camera parallel to the subject.

or if your camera has it, use keystone compensation like 7 posts above.^^^^^^

Burtzy Loc: Bronx N.Y. & Simi Valley, CA

dyximan wrote:

My question is when taking a cityscape with A cro... (show quote)

Hi dyximan. I do a lot of real estate and architectural photography and what I can tell you is the most important issue when shooting verticals (buildings) is keeping the camera absolutely parallel to the subjects. Any backward or forward tilt will keystone the image. Keeping it absolutely level to the horizontals is equally important, but generally the effect is less noticeable because the vertical keystoning is what grabs the eye. Tilt/shift lenses are useful in helping to correct the effects, but they are expensive and unless you shoot a lot of these types of shots, I recommend using software to correct the shots. I use Corel Paint Shop Pro and it works very well. But you need to be aware that if you are going to use this method, you need to crop loosely when shooting the shot as the software will crop some on its own to correct the keystone. Oh how I long for the days of my old 4X5 Linhof Technica IV. Swings and tilts built right in. But who wants to carry all that stuff around anymore?

pendennis

rehess wrote:

I would think that natural perspective would have to be really bothersome for someone to lug a view camera around and go through the develop-scan process for each image.

No bother at all. I've used view cameras for years, and long ago decided this was they way I wanted to do part of my photography. I shoot 35mm, medium format films, and use Nikon D500 and D750. With large format, I get a lot of "pre-processing" done with the set up (focusing, swings, tilts, etc.).

I guess I'm more of a "horses for courses" photographer. I tend to use the format that best fits my needs for a particular scene.

I use a Graflex Super Graphic as a field camera, and a Cambo SC monorail. The Cambo, especially, provides lots of perspective control.

Now, I only have print film developed. I have a Epson V850 Pro, which does a fine job, and doesn't take much more time than when I spent time going to the film lab, waiting, etc.. After scanning, there's no more post-processing than with digital images.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

selmslie wrote:

The examples above show why you don't want to take the correction too far, whether you use a tilt in the camera or keystone in the software.

Both images end up with clearly visible distortion near the corners. The top of the lighthouse is less circular and the top of the skyscraper looks skewed and unnatural.

An adjustment somewhere between those extremes would have looked more natural, less distorted.

My post refers to Gene51's post of the lighthouse and Bill29707's post of the skyscrapers, not the one from Cdouthitt. I did not notice that Cdouthitt's post showed up immediately before mine.

The distortion in Cdouthitt's post is not apparent because there are no geometrical objects near the corners - just sky, grass, flowers and leaves.

Don's Leica Loc: Asheville, NC

Easy to fix in Adobe Bridge. The tool is called Lens Corrections.

MEB540 Loc: New Jersey

You might want to look at the early Nikor PC lens. I purchased a 35mm f2.8 for $280.00. and it works great on my canon cameras. It is a manual focus lens, but all the ts lenses are manual focus, even the new canon ones. This is a reasonable way to get the perspective correction without having to spend thousands. I also have a canon 24mm TS lens, which works better, but for the money the Nikor was a good way to get into PC lenses while saving thousands.