I think it's a great shot but I believe the building is slightly
over-corrected, ie, it's a tiny bit fatter at the top than the bottom.
But my old CRT has some size distortion across the screen and it's
difficult for me to tell without laying a grid over the image.
When I first started doing perspective corrections I realiazed after a
number of images that I wasn't really satisified with what I was
producing. It finally dawned on me that to look real a building image
needs to be slightly undercorrected. I have no data to back me up but I
surmise that we readily recognize the camera's awkward portrayal of
tapered buildings. I think our eyes and brain correct such images for
us but... not completely. I think the eye and brain are correcting
(mostly) but we still realize that there is some amount of perspective
distortion present... we just perceive it as much smaller than it
actually is. I think slightly under-correcting a building leaves the
building image looking like what the brain sees with the eyes.
That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/8/2011 8:42 PM, Fernando Gonzalez Gentile wrote:
>
> BTW - what do you List, think of this KM, exposed on April 1990?
> Don't tell me it's too blue, I've just finished my first calibration
> of my new Samsung SM P2370H :-)
>
> Chuck, I made a little Transform> Perspective but I had my new
> monitor too much tilted back (it didn't fit into the space I had for
> it), and now the buiding seems ... well, I can't find the word for it
> ....
>
> <http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernando_gonzalez_gentile/5697638058/in/photostream/lightbox/>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|