01-16-2012, 11:37 AM
|
#1
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
Posts: 8,295
|
Levelling using poles vs buildings as verticals.
Just a little example that I came across while screening to show why you should not use poles as a vertical reference for levelling. This shot clearly shows how poles have different degrees of lean in the same image.
Food for thought ?
__________________
If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 12:09 PM
|
#2
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianw999
Just a little example that I came across while screening to show why you should not use poles as a vertical reference for levelling. This shot clearly shows how poles have different degrees of lean in the same image.
Food for thought ?
|
Brian,
This is food for thought, for sure !
That's what I saying for a long time !
And therefore in many cases we have difficulty to edit the photos on level, because almost each person thinks differently from another person.
Best regards,
Erez.
|
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 12:13 PM
|
#3
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: LIPX/VRN
Posts: 40
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianw999
Just a little example that I came across while screening to show why you should not use poles as a vertical reference for levelling. This shot clearly shows how poles have different degrees of lean in the same image.
Food for thought ?
|
Brian,
My opinion says that after leveling the horizontal lines.
You must give a correct picture of the whole!
In my graphic work is said to halve the fault!
But there is one option with CS "distorts" this can help??
Tks+ kiss 
Monica
__________________
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 02:54 PM
|
#4
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tunbridge Wells, Kent. UK.
Posts: 8,295
|
Trouble is Monica, horizontal lines are not accurate unless they are directly in front of you and you know that they are flat.
Building verticals are by definition vertical. That's why builders use plumb lines to ensure that their work is vertical.
__________________
If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 09:41 PM
|
#5
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oeteldonk, the Netherlands
Posts: 1,060
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianw999
Building verticals are by definition vertical. That's why builders use plumb lines to ensure that their work is vertical.
|
Not necessarily. There are plenty of buildings that have been designed not to be vertical. For instance of Heathrow T5, Schiphol between pier E and F and the new terminal currently under construction at Moscow Vnukovo slope outwards. Zurich's main terminal slopes inwards between gates A and B. For AMS and ZRH there are sufficient areas around the terminal that can be used to horizon a photo, but from what I´ve seen at VKO there is no straight line. In fairness, when I was there it was still under construction.
Here's a photos with the VKO terminal.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=7035911
|
|
|
01-17-2012, 03:55 AM
|
#6
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petertenthije
Not necessarily. There are plenty of buildings that have been designed not to be vertical. For instance of Heathrow T5, Schiphol between pier E and F and the new terminal currently under construction at Moscow Vnukovo slope outwards. Zurich's main terminal slopes inwards between gates A and B. For AMS and ZRH there are sufficient areas around the terminal that can be used to horizon a photo, but from what I´ve seen at VKO there is no straight line. In fairness, when I was there it was still under construction.
Here's a photos with the VKO terminal.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=7035911
|
Again, if you'll allow me, all this discussion just proves to me again and again, that all you need during the screening it's just a bit of flexibility when there is a slight doubt with leveling.
That's the word: Flexibility.
It's so easy to make it, just needs a little good will with thinking out of the box, to find flexibility.
All the best to all.
|
|
|
|
01-17-2012, 06:14 AM
|
#7
|
|
JetPhotos.Net Crew
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Zurich Kloten - LSZH
Posts: 11,700
|
Erez, we are flexibel, as proven by our acceptance rate of some >66% and the appeal histories. But just because you continuosly fail to edit your photos properly doesn't mean we have change anything at all. Remeber, even you had appeals accepted.
All the best.
|
|
|
01-17-2012, 08:35 PM
|
#8
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 678
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErezS
Again, if you'll allow me, all this discussion just proves to me again and again, that all you need during the screening it's just a bit of flexibility when there is a slight doubt with leveling.
That's the word: Flexibility.
It's so easy to make it, just needs a little good will with thinking out of the box, to find flexibility.
|
Sorry. Had to do that.
I don't know what you're talking about flexibility. I have yet to have a photo rejected due to bad leveling caused by an object of questionable leveling. All the times it's been due to a slip of the ruler tool or simply carelessness on my part.
That said, I always mark if I used my 12-24 which does tend to show distortion and have never had a rejection due to a leaning pole.
|
|
|
01-17-2012, 02:50 PM
|
#9
|
|
Resident Photo Geek
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bradford, UK
Posts: 2,331
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petertenthije
Not necessarily. There are plenty of buildings that have been designed not to be vertical.
|
Of course, but it's very obvious when a building is designed like that and naturally that would be taken into account. I don't think Brian was implying trying to level to such buildings.
__________________
Seeing the world with a 3:2 aspect ratio...
My images on Flickr
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 04:09 PM
|
#10
|
|
Resident Photo Geek
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bradford, UK
Posts: 2,331
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianw999
Food for thought ?
|
Absolutely, and a great example of using logic to arrive at a decision rather than sticking rigidly to a pre-conceived idea of how things should be.
__________________
Seeing the world with a 3:2 aspect ratio...
My images on Flickr
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 04:36 PM
|
#11
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La Jolla - KSAN
Posts: 219
|
Apart from all these you also have to take barrel distortion into considering, if the picture was taken with a small "mm." In such a case you would have to decide how to crop the picture and use whatever building / pole / vertical in the centre to level your shot.
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 04:47 PM
|
#12
|
|
Resident Photo Geek
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bradford, UK
Posts: 2,331
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
Apart from all these you also have to take barrel distortion into considering, if the picture was taken with a small "mm." In such a case you would have to decide how to crop the picture and use whatever building / pole / vertical in the centre to level your shot.
|
Barrel distortion affects both sides of the frame equally but in the opposite sense (at least it usually does), so in those cases the centre of the frame is the only place that can be used as a true reference. This particular image is way beyond the point where barrel distortion needs to be considered. You're quite right though, in certain cases it does affect things and in these cases logic must again be used in forming a judgement.
__________________
Seeing the world with a 3:2 aspect ratio...
My images on Flickr
|
|
|
01-16-2012, 05:26 PM
|
#13
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La Jolla - KSAN
Posts: 219
|
Oh no I wasn't talking about this picture; hence the reason I said when the picture was taken with small "mm." But yeah, you're right about barrel distortion. When you are cropping an image out of a barrel distorted image, you have to level the image again using whatever is in the centre...
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:37 PM.
|