on 12/16/02 9:29 PM  Rick Lee wrote:

> Yeah... I would have thought that the "Perspective Correcting Crop" in PS
> would have done this automatically to approximate the effect of shifting the
> front standard of a view camera.  I was rather surprised to see things
> getting squished out of shape when "correcting" the perspective.

That's why I just use skew. It may not be the "right" way, but always seems
more straightforward to me. Like you, when I use the proper tool, things
seem to get horribler and horribler. Plus you can correct each side
individually and unequally if needed.

> When you shoot with the
> camera back tilted (due to lack of shift available) and you try to fix it in
> Photoshop using crop with "Perspective" checked, the job is more difficult
> than a simple lens shift, but it would be nice if the math were worked out
> to make it happen as if you had simply shifted the lens instead of ending up
> with a building that's 2x3 inches and then needs to be stretched back to 3x3
> inches.

May or may not be possible. If, for instance, the software detects there to
be a 5 degree taper in the sides of a building, the amount of correction to
be applied to the height may be different if that taper is caused by a
camera with wide angle tipped slightly back or a longer lens tipped back
somewhat more. But that's just a guess - I'm no optical guru.

Dealing with products more than buildings, I've usually got the item at hand
for reference, and just try to match it visually, figuring that "if it looks
good, it is good."

-- 
Jay Busse



===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE

Reply via email to