Perspective (was Re: Has ultrawide angle become an overused cliche?)
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Bruce on 9 Aug 2010 06:29 On Mon, 9 Aug 2010 02:31:13 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: > >A valuable lesson learned with my own material. > >Hoisted on my own petard so to speak. ;-) You are being too hard on yourself. In terms of your own practical ability, I don't think anyone needs to teach you much about perspective. ;-)
From: bugbear on 9 Aug 2010 09:22 Savageduck wrote: >> >> I just performed a simple resize of the second image and laid it on >> top of the first: >> >> http://www.mike-warren.net/play/savageduck.jpg >> >> Perspective is unchanged. > > Damn! I should have thought of doing that. > > So it seems the eye is easily fooled by focal length changes. Thanks for > the proof you provided, I kind of takes the wind out of my sails, but > there it is. Here's all of the above, all mixed up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_zoom BugBear
From: Savageduck on 9 Aug 2010 11:28 On 2010-08-09 06:22:13 -0700, bugbear <bugbear(a)trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> said: > Savageduck wrote: >>> >>> I just performed a simple resize of the second image and laid it on >>> top of the first: >>> >>> http://www.mike-warren.net/play/savageduck.jpg >>> >>> Perspective is unchanged. >> >> Damn! I should have thought of doing that. >> >> So it seems the eye is easily fooled by focal length changes. Thanks >> for the proof you provided, It kind of takes the wind out of my sails, >> but there it is. > > Here's all of the above, all mixed up > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_zoom > > BugBear That really does mess with perspective due to the changing camera/subject distance. Now that would really have been a problem for me since my idea was to keep the camera/subject distance constant to see if there is a perspective change due to focal length change. ....and my own shots have proved to me that there is no perspective change due to focal length change. It is a good thing I wasn't able to finance a major production, complete with track and a dolly zoom pull crew. I would still be trying to figure it out. ;-) -- Regards, Savageduck
From: David Ruether on 9 Aug 2010 12:05 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010080818434227544-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-08-08 18:27:40 -0700, "Mike Warren" <miwa-not-this-bit(a)or-this-csas.net.au> said: >> I just performed a simple resize of the second image and laid it on >> top of the first: >> >> http://www.mike-warren.net/play/savageduck.jpg >> >> Perspective is unchanged. > Damn! I should have thought of doing that. > > So it seems the eye is easily fooled by focal length changes. Thanks for the proof you provided, I kind of takes the wind out of > my sails, but there it is. > > -- > Regards, > > Savageduck This shows that there actually *is* one more ingredient to the conditions-list, the specification of sensor size relative to FL, which then gives angle of view and an indication of what perspective "look" might be expected. As I pointed out before, a 10mm lens (for instance) can be a super-wide on one format, and a tele on another format with a much smaller sensor... --DR
From: Neil Harrington on 9 Aug 2010 12:06
"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:klfu561gfbchtjar4d7l6pehdq8dcv0kll(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 16:43:55 -0400, "Neil Harrington" > <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote: >>"Bruce" <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:ugar46dfhpou4nimibd86jm53iqo459f99(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 09:54:10 -0400, Shiva Das <shiv(a)nataraja.invalid> >>> wrote: >>>>In article <5k2r46pe2t2t7tsjn802pa3o5v7lla946f(a)4ax.com>, >>>> Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> It also doesn't help when people associate perspective with the lens's >>>>> focal length. Perspective is purely a function of viewpoint and its >>>>> relationship with the subject. The focal length of the lens is >>>>> irrelevant. >>>> >>>>In "Photographic Lenses: Photographer's Guide to Characteristics, >>>>Quality, Use and Design" Ernst Wildi has two sets of photographs using >>>>progressively longer lenses from 38mm to 500mm Hasselblad lenses (20mm >>>>to 255mm equivalentin 35mm film format). >>>> >>>>The first sequence, one shot per lens, is taken standing in the same >>>>spot looking at the same scene. The second sequence is of a lovely lady >>>>on the beach and he moved the camera to keep her the same size in each >>>>image. >>>> >>>>It does a great job of showing how focal length and distance affect >>>>perspective. >>> >>> >>> Yes, that is the classic method of demonstrating that perspective is >>> independent of focal length. >>> >>> It is to be found in many books on photography, yet people still keep >>> making the same mistake over and over again, thinking that perspective >>> is dependent on focal length. >> >>But perspective *is* largely dependent on focal length. >> >>The the other poster mentioned ". . . how focal length and distance affect >>perspective." >> >>Focal length is not "irrelevant." Both are important: focal length *and* >>camera position. A shot taken with a wide-angle lens has wide-angle >>perspective, which (assuming there are enough objects arranged in the >>scene >>to establish perspective at all) is easily recognized by anyone looking at >>the resulting photo. To say that focal length is irrelevant is to deny >>what >>anyone can see with his own eyes. >> >>(Sorry for being more than a week late in replying to this, but I only saw >>the thread just now. The misunderstanding is important enough to correct. >>The "many books" that support the idea are mistaken, as are the several >>people who have repeated it over the years.) > > > The "misunderstanding" is entirely yours, Neil. It is a very common > misunderstanding. However, it doesn't matter how many people repeat > it, nor how many times, it is still wrong. There is no such thing as > "wide angle perspective". Are you really telling me that you can look at a photo of, say, an interior, taken with a 20mm (equiv.) lens, and NOT be able to tell BY THE PERSPECTIVE that it was taken with a wide angle lens? Again, to deny this is simply to deny the evidence of your own eyes. > > Perspective is purely a function of viewpoint and its relationship > with the subject. The focal length of the lens is irrelevant. Simply not true. Yes, I have seen all the alleged "proofs" of this fallacy and it remains a fallacy. |