Mixing
How can I get the horizon and the lighthouse both level in my photo?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I took the following photo on on a recent holiday in southern Italy:
I was pleased with the picture, but I could see that the horizon wasn't level, so I adjusted it (a simple rotation). The result was this:
Now, my horizon looks level, but my lighthouse isn't!
Note that there is some land very faintly visible in the left half of the photo (which would be Albania, I think), but I don't think that affects the horizon. The original photo with a horizontal line on it looks like this:
What's going on here!?? How do I make the photo look 'right'?
For those that are interested, the photo was taken here
perspective image-alignment
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I took the following photo on on a recent holiday in southern Italy:
I was pleased with the picture, but I could see that the horizon wasn't level, so I adjusted it (a simple rotation). The result was this:
Now, my horizon looks level, but my lighthouse isn't!
Note that there is some land very faintly visible in the left half of the photo (which would be Albania, I think), but I don't think that affects the horizon. The original photo with a horizontal line on it looks like this:
What's going on here!?? How do I make the photo look 'right'?
For those that are interested, the photo was taken here
perspective image-alignment
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I took the following photo on on a recent holiday in southern Italy:
I was pleased with the picture, but I could see that the horizon wasn't level, so I adjusted it (a simple rotation). The result was this:
Now, my horizon looks level, but my lighthouse isn't!
Note that there is some land very faintly visible in the left half of the photo (which would be Albania, I think), but I don't think that affects the horizon. The original photo with a horizontal line on it looks like this:
What's going on here!?? How do I make the photo look 'right'?
For those that are interested, the photo was taken here
perspective image-alignment
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I took the following photo on on a recent holiday in southern Italy:
I was pleased with the picture, but I could see that the horizon wasn't level, so I adjusted it (a simple rotation). The result was this:
Now, my horizon looks level, but my lighthouse isn't!
Note that there is some land very faintly visible in the left half of the photo (which would be Albania, I think), but I don't think that affects the horizon. The original photo with a horizontal line on it looks like this:
What's going on here!?? How do I make the photo look 'right'?
For those that are interested, the photo was taken here
perspective image-alignment
perspective image-alignment
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
edited 2 hours ago
mattdm
116k37339630
116k37339630
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
asked 2 hours ago
bornfromanegg
1111
1111
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
bornfromanegg is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Because you are shooting with the camera pointing down, you have convergent verticals. This can be fixed with the perspective tool in your image editor:
In theory, you should fix the perspective before you rotate the image to fix the tilt, but when you do it in that order, your have no good reference to fix the perspective, so straightening the horizon first will give a better (if less accurate) result.
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Ever notice when you try to take a photo of a building from the ground, when you aim up to get the entire building into frame, the building appears to taper towards the top? That happens because the camera is tilted vertically upwards.
When the camera is held level (in both the vertical and horizontal axes), all vertical and horizontal lines parallel to the plane of focus appear parallel. That is, they don't appear to converge (possibly somewhere outside the frame).
In your image, the camera is aimed slightly down, so vertical lines will converge at a point far below the image.
So, to get the horizon level and the lighthouse vertical (perpendicular to the ground) in the same image, you have to hold the camera level. The easiest way to do that, especially in this scene, is to aim the center of the camera at the horizon.
Unfortunately, that might not be the most desirable composition. Crop the result to suit your desired framing.
Note that this is exactly what perspective control lenses (also called tilt-shift lenses) do — rather than cropping in post, a PC lens aimed at the horizon, with an off-center shift "selects" the part of the scene in view, while keeping the perspective orthogonal.
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Sometimes it's easier to do in post with "PhotoShop" or other similar software.
At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame edge itself as a reference edge by tilting down (or up) until the camera viewfinder frame is near the horizon.
Then, I level the head and lock it in one direction and tilt-up in the orthogonal direction to place the horizon in the best vertical position of "thirds" or whatever floats my boat, um or ship, for the exposure.
It's a quick two-step procedure.
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
Because you are shooting with the camera pointing down, you have convergent verticals. This can be fixed with the perspective tool in your image editor:
In theory, you should fix the perspective before you rotate the image to fix the tilt, but when you do it in that order, your have no good reference to fix the perspective, so straightening the horizon first will give a better (if less accurate) result.
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
Because you are shooting with the camera pointing down, you have convergent verticals. This can be fixed with the perspective tool in your image editor:
In theory, you should fix the perspective before you rotate the image to fix the tilt, but when you do it in that order, your have no good reference to fix the perspective, so straightening the horizon first will give a better (if less accurate) result.
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
Because you are shooting with the camera pointing down, you have convergent verticals. This can be fixed with the perspective tool in your image editor:
In theory, you should fix the perspective before you rotate the image to fix the tilt, but when you do it in that order, your have no good reference to fix the perspective, so straightening the horizon first will give a better (if less accurate) result.
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
Because you are shooting with the camera pointing down, you have convergent verticals. This can be fixed with the perspective tool in your image editor:
In theory, you should fix the perspective before you rotate the image to fix the tilt, but when you do it in that order, your have no good reference to fix the perspective, so straightening the horizon first will give a better (if less accurate) result.
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
answered 38 mins ago
xenoid
1,265210
1,265210
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
"convergent verticals". It took me a paragraph to say that... =)
– scottbb
2 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Ever notice when you try to take a photo of a building from the ground, when you aim up to get the entire building into frame, the building appears to taper towards the top? That happens because the camera is tilted vertically upwards.
When the camera is held level (in both the vertical and horizontal axes), all vertical and horizontal lines parallel to the plane of focus appear parallel. That is, they don't appear to converge (possibly somewhere outside the frame).
In your image, the camera is aimed slightly down, so vertical lines will converge at a point far below the image.
So, to get the horizon level and the lighthouse vertical (perpendicular to the ground) in the same image, you have to hold the camera level. The easiest way to do that, especially in this scene, is to aim the center of the camera at the horizon.
Unfortunately, that might not be the most desirable composition. Crop the result to suit your desired framing.
Note that this is exactly what perspective control lenses (also called tilt-shift lenses) do — rather than cropping in post, a PC lens aimed at the horizon, with an off-center shift "selects" the part of the scene in view, while keeping the perspective orthogonal.
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Ever notice when you try to take a photo of a building from the ground, when you aim up to get the entire building into frame, the building appears to taper towards the top? That happens because the camera is tilted vertically upwards.
When the camera is held level (in both the vertical and horizontal axes), all vertical and horizontal lines parallel to the plane of focus appear parallel. That is, they don't appear to converge (possibly somewhere outside the frame).
In your image, the camera is aimed slightly down, so vertical lines will converge at a point far below the image.
So, to get the horizon level and the lighthouse vertical (perpendicular to the ground) in the same image, you have to hold the camera level. The easiest way to do that, especially in this scene, is to aim the center of the camera at the horizon.
Unfortunately, that might not be the most desirable composition. Crop the result to suit your desired framing.
Note that this is exactly what perspective control lenses (also called tilt-shift lenses) do — rather than cropping in post, a PC lens aimed at the horizon, with an off-center shift "selects" the part of the scene in view, while keeping the perspective orthogonal.
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Ever notice when you try to take a photo of a building from the ground, when you aim up to get the entire building into frame, the building appears to taper towards the top? That happens because the camera is tilted vertically upwards.
When the camera is held level (in both the vertical and horizontal axes), all vertical and horizontal lines parallel to the plane of focus appear parallel. That is, they don't appear to converge (possibly somewhere outside the frame).
In your image, the camera is aimed slightly down, so vertical lines will converge at a point far below the image.
So, to get the horizon level and the lighthouse vertical (perpendicular to the ground) in the same image, you have to hold the camera level. The easiest way to do that, especially in this scene, is to aim the center of the camera at the horizon.
Unfortunately, that might not be the most desirable composition. Crop the result to suit your desired framing.
Note that this is exactly what perspective control lenses (also called tilt-shift lenses) do — rather than cropping in post, a PC lens aimed at the horizon, with an off-center shift "selects" the part of the scene in view, while keeping the perspective orthogonal.
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
Ever notice when you try to take a photo of a building from the ground, when you aim up to get the entire building into frame, the building appears to taper towards the top? That happens because the camera is tilted vertically upwards.
When the camera is held level (in both the vertical and horizontal axes), all vertical and horizontal lines parallel to the plane of focus appear parallel. That is, they don't appear to converge (possibly somewhere outside the frame).
In your image, the camera is aimed slightly down, so vertical lines will converge at a point far below the image.
So, to get the horizon level and the lighthouse vertical (perpendicular to the ground) in the same image, you have to hold the camera level. The easiest way to do that, especially in this scene, is to aim the center of the camera at the horizon.
Unfortunately, that might not be the most desirable composition. Crop the result to suit your desired framing.
Note that this is exactly what perspective control lenses (also called tilt-shift lenses) do — rather than cropping in post, a PC lens aimed at the horizon, with an off-center shift "selects" the part of the scene in view, while keeping the perspective orthogonal.
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
answered 1 hour ago
scottbb
17.5k75184
17.5k75184
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
Some object to the distortion caused after "correcting" perspective. You can't please all the people all of the time.
– Stan
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
This makes a lot of sense, but I’m not sure how cropping is going to resolve it. I’ve already tried cropping around the lighthouse (i.e. the right side of the picture) but the horizon still looks at odds with the lighthouse. Am I missing something?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg Scott was referring to a kind of lens that can "correct" for some optical effects caused by placing a three-dimensional image onto a flat image plane. They are referred to by different names as suggested in Scott's "note" in his answer. Cropping alone doesn't work as you've discovered.
– Stan
1 hour ago
2
2
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
@bornfromanegg You can't fix your existing image by cropping. My answer is about how to take an image that doesn't exhibit the problem in the first place. Step 1: take the image with a level camera. Step 2: crop to get the view. Alternately: Step 1: take the image with a level camera, with a PC lens, shifted to get the desired view. Step 2: there is no step 2.
– scottbb
52 mins ago
1
1
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
@Stan Certainly, there is some art involved in using PC lenses / techniques. Many photos with PC lenses actually have a small amount of upward aiming of the camera intentionally, to provide a very slight amount of building tapering. 100% straight buildings in photos usually look unnatural, as if they are actually leaning outwards (because the eye expects some amount inward leaning). Not all architectural photography, of course. There are several shots, especially of buildings like the flatiron building in NYC, that people shoot 100% orthogonal, to accentuate its form.
– scottbb
49 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Sometimes it's easier to do in post with "PhotoShop" or other similar software.
At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame edge itself as a reference edge by tilting down (or up) until the camera viewfinder frame is near the horizon.
Then, I level the head and lock it in one direction and tilt-up in the orthogonal direction to place the horizon in the best vertical position of "thirds" or whatever floats my boat, um or ship, for the exposure.
It's a quick two-step procedure.
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Sometimes it's easier to do in post with "PhotoShop" or other similar software.
At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame edge itself as a reference edge by tilting down (or up) until the camera viewfinder frame is near the horizon.
Then, I level the head and lock it in one direction and tilt-up in the orthogonal direction to place the horizon in the best vertical position of "thirds" or whatever floats my boat, um or ship, for the exposure.
It's a quick two-step procedure.
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Sometimes it's easier to do in post with "PhotoShop" or other similar software.
At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame edge itself as a reference edge by tilting down (or up) until the camera viewfinder frame is near the horizon.
Then, I level the head and lock it in one direction and tilt-up in the orthogonal direction to place the horizon in the best vertical position of "thirds" or whatever floats my boat, um or ship, for the exposure.
It's a quick two-step procedure.
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
Sometimes it's easier to do in post with "PhotoShop" or other similar software.
At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame edge itself as a reference edge by tilting down (or up) until the camera viewfinder frame is near the horizon.
Then, I level the head and lock it in one direction and tilt-up in the orthogonal direction to place the horizon in the best vertical position of "thirds" or whatever floats my boat, um or ship, for the exposure.
It's a quick two-step procedure.
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
answered 2 hours ago
Stan
3,398820
3,398820
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
Thanks for the response. I’m not sure what you mean though - you say “easier to do in post†but the process you describe seems to be something I should have done when taking the photo in the first place?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg By "post" I was referring to using something such as PhotoShop after the fact.
– Stan
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
So you’re describing a process I can perform in post then? “camera viewfinder†is something in Photoshop?
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
@bornfromanegg At the location, I use the camera viewfinder frame as a reference edge to align the horizon so that it appears horizontally in the original photo. I've found that a level horizon is preferable over other lens distortion effects. I think a tilted horizon will be noticed before the lighthouse will be seen out-of-plumb (vertical). We deal with distortions with our normal vision but the brain compensates. The brain will also accommodate this in photos too, to some degree.
– Stan
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
bornfromanegg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bornfromanegg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bornfromanegg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bornfromanegg is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f101844%2fhow-can-i-get-the-horizon-and-the-lighthouse-both-level-in-my-photo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
It's hard to tell because of the haze in the distance, but it almost looks to me like there are mountains, etc above the water line at the horizon, in which case the "tilted" horizon might be an illusion due to the water-to-land interface being closer on the left side of the frame than the right, in which case your actual horizon is closer to being straight than it appears to be.
– twalberg
2 hours ago
@twalberg That did occur to me, hence the third image. Doesn’t look to be enough though, to me.
– bornfromanegg
1 hour ago
@twalberg That would be Albania on the horizon.
– Stan
1 hour ago