Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
 Author Topic: how to deal with converging horizontal lines?  (Read 6592 times)
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

 « on: December 18, 2009, 05:50:19 AM » Reply

How to deal with converging horizontal lines?  I often see pictures that would be beautiful if it wasn't for the awkward horizontal lines. People look at the picture below and go "look the ground is tilted, you should have leveled the camera". My reply, its worse its horizontal convergence and I do not know how to avoid it!

Why is horizontal convergence so much more difficult to handle compared to vertical? Is the problem in the way I am approaching the scene??

Abdulrahman
 Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
ced
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 262

Abdul you can correct that in PS with "perspective transformation" Edit>Transform>Perspective and grab the leftside and pull upwards and it should straighten out.
 Logged
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 1730

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
How to deal with converging horizontal lines?  I often see pictures that would be beautiful if it wasn't for the awkward horizontal lines. People look at the picture below and go "look the ground is tilted, you should have leveled the camera". My reply, its worse its horizontal convergence and I do not know how to avoid it!

Why is horizontal convergence so much more difficult to handle compared to vertical? Is the problem in the way I am approaching the scene??

Abdulrahman
To keep vertical line parallel, you use the bubble level to get your back vertical (parallel to the line you want parallel) - it is the bubble level that makes it easy.

To get horizontal line parallel, get your back parallel to the line s you want parallel.

If there is a mirror on the wall (or put one there) adjust side shift to zero, point the camera at it's reflection, shift for shot.

Or measure from camera to wall ¿laser? mark a point the same distance from the wall, and line your back up with it.

or use a grid focusing screen

or use an overlay grid on your live view screen

or correct it in the computer afterwards.
 Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
LiamStrain
Full Member

Offline

Posts: 116

To keep vertical line parallel, you use the bubble level to get your back vertical (parallel to the line you want parallel) - it is the bubble level that makes it easy.

To get horizontal line parallel, get your back parallel to the line s you want parallel.

...

or correct it in the computer afterwards.

Yup. View camera swings to get your camera back parallel, is what I would do. Or make the angles converge even more, so it looks deliberate.
 Logged

Roskav
Full Member

Offline

Posts: 245

I would roll the big ball to the left to balance it a bit more.  Also I like Liam's suggestion of making it more deliberate... sometimes more effective that trying to straighten everything....  Here are 2 shots from exactly the same point .. both using shift.  One to straighten the lines .. one to exaggerate the perspective.

 Logged

CBarrett
Guest

Abdul,

I take it from the framing that you are shooting dslr.  Are you using PC lenses?  If so then you need to first line up the camera in a one point perspective and then shift the lens along a diagonal movement to obtain the composition you desire.  For the given shot, it's likely that you would need to move the camera to your left quite a bit due to the limitations on just how far you can actually shift.

To obtain perfect one point perspectives you need two things.... For verticals, the camera needs to be perfectly perpendicular to the ground, horizontals are the same... the camera needs to be perpendicular to the scene (usually a far wall) if you think about it like that it may simplify things.  I think there's nothing wrong with shooting 2 point perspectives, though. I feel you're shot might be stronger if the perspective was a little stronger (more to the right and rotated left to compensate) and with more ceiling and less floor.  The wide angle of your lens is also contributing to the effect of convergence.

That all make sense?

-CB
 Logged
sinar444
Newbie

Offline

Posts: 15

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
How to deal with converging horizontal lines?  I often see pictures that would be beautiful if it wasn't for the awkward horizontal lines. People look at the picture below and go "look the ground is tilted, you should have leveled the camera". My reply, its worse its horizontal convergence and I do not know how to avoid it!

Why is horizontal convergence so much more difficult to handle compared to vertical? Is the problem in the way I am approaching the scene??

Abdulrahman

The easiest way is using large format camera where you can correct all the distorted perspectives. Try it.

Best regards
sinar44
 Logged
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 1730

Quote from: sinar444
The easiest way is using large format camera where you can correct all the distorted perspectives. Try it.

Best regards
sinar44
Of course, if you do not have a proper Sinar then it might not be possible to use front tilt forward to get the foreground in focus at the same time as useing shift left to stop the horizontal line converging. Most of the modern view cameras are very limiting to someone used to a P2.
 Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

Quote from: ced
Abdul you can correct that in PS with "perspective transformation" Edit>Transform>Perspective and grab the leftside and pull upwards and it should straighten out.

you mean like this? (left corrected, right old)

never noticed it was tilting until I tired your suggestion. I was too focused on the converging horizontal lines. That being said this correction does not seem to address converging lines, right?
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 09:11:17 AM by Abdulrahman Aljabri » Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

To get horizontal line parallel, get your back parallel to the line s you want parallel.

That is the problem facing those horizontal lines parallel makes for flat perspective, coming from the side spices things up but introduces awkward convergence

Or measure from camera to wall ¿laser? mark a point the same distance from the wall, and line your back up with it.

I am not sure I understand this suggestion?

Quote from: Roskav
I would roll the big ball to the left to balance it a bit more.  Also I like Liam's suggestion of making it more deliberate... sometimes more effective that trying to straighten everything....  Here are 2 shots from exactly the same point .. both using shift.  One to straighten the lines .. one to exaggerate the perspective.

Yes I like the side shot more and think it looks completely natural. For some reason I notice the convergence problem in interior shots not exterior.
 Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

Quote from: CBarrett
Abdul,

I take it from the framing that you are shooting dslr.  Are you using PC lenses?  If so then you need to first line up the camera in a one point perspective and then shift the lens along a diagonal movement to obtain the composition you desire.  For the given shot, it's likely that you would need to move the camera to your left quite a bit due to the limitations on just how far you can actually shift.

Yes I am using the 24mm ts-e mounted on a 5DII. To achieve one point perspective I would have to face the space in front of me face on where everything is parallel, perhaps stand in the middle also, correct? What do you mean by shifting the lens diagonally? My lens only shift on one axis, either horizontally or vertically, but not both.

Quote from: CBarrett
To obtain perfect one point perspectives you need two things.... For verticals, the camera needs to be perfectly perpendicular to the ground, horizontals are the same... the camera needs to be perpendicular to the scene (usually a far wall) if you think about it like that it may simplify things.  I think there's nothing wrong with shooting 2 point perspectives, though. I feel you're shot might be stronger if the perspective was a little stronger (more to the right and rotated left to compensate) and with more ceiling and less floor.  The wide angle of your lens is also contributing to the effect of convergence.

That all make sense?

-CB

This part is clear. Based on this I should restate my question, how do I photograph interiors in two point perspective and maintain natural looking converging horizontals? Emphases placed on interior because I do not seem to have a problem shooting natural looking two point perspective exterior pictures (architectural).
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 09:14:53 AM by Abdulrahman Aljabri » Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
CBarrett
Guest

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
Yes I am using the 24mm ts-e mounted on a 5DII. To achieve one point perspective I would have to face the space in front of me face on where everything is parallel, perhaps stand in the middle also, correct? What do you mean by shifting the lens diagonally? My lens only shift on one axis, either horizontally or vertically, but not both.

But you can rotate the lens to achieve shift on both axis, kind of a pain but workable.

This part is clear. Based on this I should restate my question, how do I photograph interiors in two point perspective and maintain natural looking converging horizontals? Emphases placed on interior because I do not seem to have a problem shooting natural looking two point perspective exterior pictures (architectural).

Ah... if you intend to shoot the interior  as a 2 point, then your horizontals are going to diverge, no way around that.  You can alter the angles of divergence to what feels acceptable by adjusting camera height as well as your rotation to the scene.  The trick is often just to get the divergence to feel balanced to avoid "falling-off-the-edge-of-the-world syndrome"  You're probably not seeing this being so exaggerated on your exteriors simply because of your proximity to the scene.

Also, on this interior, while your low camera angle adds drama to the shot, it also exaggerates the awkward, tilted feel. Then again, you could have compensated for that by shifting up.  The ceiling is interesting and your composition leaves me wanting to see more of it.  All that floor in the foreground is just dead space.  "If it's not adding to the composition then its taking away from it." -to quote one of my mentors.

Too much floor, not enough ceiling... lacks balance... unbalanced compositions disorient the viewer, creating spatial confusion... even if the camera IS level.

Recommendations:  Study Chinese landscape paintings and Zen-Taoist poetry : )

-CB
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 09:42:56 AM by CBarrett » Logged
stewarthemley
Guest

It's all down to taste but I would either go lower or higher. Ie, more ceiling or more floor. At the moment it's too balanced for me. We don't have to slavishly follow the rule of thirds but here, for me, it would be good to do so. I like the floor patterns so I'd be happy with that but I agree with Chris that the ceiling also looks interesting. And I would certainly bring that left ball much closer to be a dominant feature.  Just my 2c's.
 Logged
tesfoto
Full Member

Offline

Posts: 137

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
you mean like this? (left corrected, right old)

Perhaps like this, just a suggestion:

[attachment=18761:41942613...2e54c63a.jpg]

 Logged
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

Quote from: tesfoto
Perhaps like this, just a suggestion:

[attachment=18761:41942613...2e54c63a.jpg]

how did you do this? use lens correction filter? probably not because it does not seem you lost much of the picture to the correction

edit: never mind my last comment, I just managed to pull off the same crop with 55 points of horizontal correction and then followed your lines for cropping
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 12:01:51 PM by Abdulrahman Aljabri » Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
Abdulrahman Aljabri
Sr. Member

Offline

Posts: 260

Quote from: CBarrett
Ah... if you intend to shoot the interior  as a 2 point, then your horizontals are going to diverge, no way around that.  You can alter the angles of divergence to what feels acceptable by adjusting camera height as well as your rotation to the scene.  The trick is often just to get the divergence to feel balanced to avoid "falling-off-the-edge-of-the-world syndrome"  You're probably not seeing this being so exaggerated on your exteriors simply because of your proximity to the scene.

Also, on this interior, while your low camera angle adds drama to the shot, it also exaggerates the awkward, tilted feel. Then again, you could have compensated for that by shifting up.  The ceiling is interesting and your composition leaves me wanting to see more of it.  All that floor in the foreground is just dead space.  "If it's not adding to the composition then its taking away from it." -to quote one of my mentors.

Too much floor, not enough ceiling... lacks balance... unbalanced compositions disorient the viewer, creating spatial confusion... even if the camera IS level.

Recommendations:  Study Chinese landscape paintings and Zen-Taoist poetry : )

-CB

I had the camera laying on the ground, and the lens shifted vertically several mms. I wish I could go back and redo the shot with your and others suggestions in mind, but I can't. Therefore, let me ask you doesn't extra floor add a sense of spaciousness to the gym? That was my reasoning behind including more floor, otherwise I would have addedd more ceiling as you suggest. What do you think?

Quote from: stewarthemley
It's all down to taste but I would either go lower or higher. Ie, more ceiling or more floor. At the moment it's too balanced for me. We don't have to slavishly follow the rule of thirds but here, for me, it would be good to do so. I like the floor patterns so I'd be happy with that but I agree with Chris that the ceiling also looks interesting. And I would certainly bring that left ball much closer to be a dominant feature.  Just my 2c's.

yea I agree especailly on the ball. The problem is that it just would not stay still at any spot except there and another distant spot so I settled for this one. Maybe I should use double sided gaffer tape next time.
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 11:24:49 AM by Abdulrahman Aljabri » Logged

MY SITE: ALJABRI MEDIA PRODUCTION

Abdulrahman - and yes its a long name but has a meaning "servant of the merciful". you can also call me abdul
CBarrett
Guest

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
I had the camera laying on the ground, and the lens shifted vertically several mms. I wish I could go back and redo the shot with your and others suggestions in mind, but I can't. Therefore, let me ask you doesn't extra floor add a sense of spaciousness to the gym? That was my reasoning behind including more floor, otherwise I would have addedd more ceiling as you suggest. What do you think?

Don't worry about a redo, what's important is making pictures, looking at them (A LOT), listening to what others say about them and taking to heart what you feel is valid and remembering all that the next time you go shoot.  It's what all of us should always be doing!

Look at your shots as you set them up and ask yourself, what here is important?  You've given half the composition to the floor, that means you think the floor is significantly more important than anything else in the shot.  Is that the case?  I probably would of raised the camera to about 18" high (still really low), moved the dumbells more to the foreground so that your eye can move beyond them rather than fixating on them and shown more ceiling to balance the shot spatially.  Of course I wasn't there, so this is all speculation.

Lastly, digital perspective correction can be a really helpful tool, but on this image, generating a one point perspective involves a whole lot of interpolation!

CB
 Logged
AlexM
Full Member

Offline

Posts: 136

Come on. Tilted horizontal lines add dynamics to an image and in many cases are added on purpose. This image looks dead with straight lines.
 Logged

Kbro
Newbie

Offline

Posts: 3

Abdulrahman,

I beleive that the Canon 24mm TSE is capable of diagonal shift, as mentioned by Chris.  As you rotate the base of the lens to switch from horizontal to vertial orientation, just stop the lens in the half way rest position.  I often use mine this way when stitching.

Keagan
 Logged
tesfoto
Full Member

Offline

Posts: 137

Quote from:  Abdulrahman Aljabri
how did you do this? use lens correction filter? probably not because it does not seem you lost much of the picture to the correction

edit: never mind my last comment, I just managed to pull off the same crop with 55 points of horizontal correction and then followed your lines for cropping

It can be done in many ways, you found your own.

What I did was the following:

1. Perspective control: transform, skew
2. Free transform, to compensate for the stretching
3. Lens correction, to compensate for barrel distortion

As CB state it does involve a whole lot of interpolation.

Cheers

T
 « Last Edit: December 18, 2009, 12:58:04 PM by tesfoto » Logged
 Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page