Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/09/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]interesting discussion around the various "approaches" in photography. I, like Ted, believe "architecture" should be photographed with a level on the camera whenever possible and preferably with the use of PC rise, fall, shift; all of which preserve the integrity of the building. at the same time I have no problem with artistic license and wild interpretations if they work to help me understand the building or in some way go beyond it to say something else. I feel the same way about many wide angle distortions even beyond architecture. True camera level perspective control is quite difficult with digital cameras and backs; requiring expensive wide angle lenses and PC devices. Photoshop "works" yet not quite in the same way that a plumb camera does. One way to tackle NM churches or Gaudi buildings is to shoot a reference photo with a level camera and use it to compare with your photoshop corrections. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Sep 13, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Ken Carney wrote: > in the case of the NM churches, a question would be: what would > you correct it to? I don't think I've ever seen one with a > straight line > anywhere.