Daniella68313
Veteran Member
it's more than just that..but if you read the article you will understand.
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Enough of this perspective non sense..
- Thread starter Daniella68313
- Start date
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
remi176129
Well-known member
I agree with jlfinger.
If you want, I can prove it matemathically, I can make you a 3d model or I can show you some photos. If you don't change your location, the perspective remains the same.
If you want, I can prove it matemathically, I can make you a 3d model or I can show you some photos. If you don't change your location, the perspective remains the same.
takitimu
Leading Member
It's worth having a look at the explanations on how they made similar sized actors appear hobbit/dwarf sized on camera, one of the neater tricks was the pivoting table so that as the camera tracked around the relative perspective scale was retained.
It does not talk about relative lens length per se, but explains how cameras potray perspective & how you can "manipulate" this.
Nigel
P.S. The best way I think to play with perspective is in a 3D programme, how different lens lengths work becomes real obvious then.
Pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/sgidude
It does not talk about relative lens length per se, but explains how cameras potray perspective & how you can "manipulate" this.
Nigel
P.S. The best way I think to play with perspective is in a 3D programme, how different lens lengths work becomes real obvious then.
--
Pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/sgidude
because you are turning some basic photography facts into contentious "arguments".
Fact 1 - FOV is key in framing a scene. A wide angle lens allows you to get physically closer to a scene and take it all in because of a wider field of view. To frame the same scene with a telephoto, you must move away from the subject.
Fact 2 - Perspective is dependant upon distance from the subject (and not focal length). By moving the camera away from the subject to accomodate the framing, you are changing perspective and foreground objects appear smaller relative to the background.
You started this argument, initially, in a different thread by saying that Fact 1 proved that the lens changed the perspective - WA was "deep perspective" and Telephoto was "flat perspective". Others went to great lengths to explain why "perspective" was different only because of the change of subject/camera distance.
Now you have morphed your argument to agree that perspective is about distance and not focal length (though you do not seem to have convinced yourself!) and are trying to "prove" that Fact 1 is true. You gradually dropped the incorrect use of the word "perspective" and replaced it with "feel", BUT still titled your new, provocative thread as being about "Perspective".
Since you seem to have reluctantly agreed the the lens doesn't change perspective, then the argument has dissolved. No one will argue that you will not change perspective by moving away from a subject and changing the lens (ie. if framing is constant - WA equal "deep" appearance/Tele equal "flat" or compressed appearance).
Fact 1 - FOV is key in framing a scene. A wide angle lens allows you to get physically closer to a scene and take it all in because of a wider field of view. To frame the same scene with a telephoto, you must move away from the subject.
Fact 2 - Perspective is dependant upon distance from the subject (and not focal length). By moving the camera away from the subject to accomodate the framing, you are changing perspective and foreground objects appear smaller relative to the background.
You started this argument, initially, in a different thread by saying that Fact 1 proved that the lens changed the perspective - WA was "deep perspective" and Telephoto was "flat perspective". Others went to great lengths to explain why "perspective" was different only because of the change of subject/camera distance.
Now you have morphed your argument to agree that perspective is about distance and not focal length (though you do not seem to have convinced yourself!) and are trying to "prove" that Fact 1 is true. You gradually dropped the incorrect use of the word "perspective" and replaced it with "feel", BUT still titled your new, provocative thread as being about "Perspective".
Since you seem to have reluctantly agreed the the lens doesn't change perspective, then the argument has dissolved. No one will argue that you will not change perspective by moving away from a subject and changing the lens (ie. if framing is constant - WA equal "deep" appearance/Tele equal "flat" or compressed appearance).
sure..but each time I point this out here..it is always a mess.... we're done. Thus concludes this edition of "DPReview Pointless
Debates"
Back when I was still a complete photography newbie, I read some
basic photography books and they described the flatness that you
get from a telephoto lens compared to a wide angle. This is a
universally accepted concept as old as exchangable lenses, and can
be witnessed in every day photography.
maybe it is my fault and I don't have the correct way of saying
this..why the article is a better way. if it was not useful for
you..then too bad..at least it was useful for some people and for
that only it was worth it.
yeah..problem like that happen when you try to find catchy title
LOL
yes you, but some people did find something new from it. I did not
post this only for you you know
remi176129
Well-known member
Daniella, please take a PhD in physics and we'll talk about it later
perspective depends only on the point of view.
Tony Hall
Veteran Member
I just read the article and the article would make sense if the author mentioned the viewing size and distance of the finished print. Like I said above, a telephoto shot can be just as natural as a 50mm shot if it's viewed from father away or printed smaller. If you want an example, just take a print from a 50mm lens and use your hands to crop the picture down to a small area. It's the same thing as having shot the picture with a longer lens.
Secondly, I don't think that people are ever really aware of the perspective in a two dimentional peice. Any impressions of depth and scale are pretty subconcious and I think that it takes an extreme distortion of reality for the viewer to notice.
I'm not sure that I agree with his persective types D and E either. I would have to expiriment myself with a wide angle shot and the actual scene to see if what he says is true. Right now though, it appears to be based on his subjective interpretation of human perception.
Regardless, I really don't think any of this stuff matters outside of extreme cases. I can't think of a single situation that a "theory of perspective" would outweigh my own intuition.
Tony
blog: http://www.tonyhall.name
Secondly, I don't think that people are ever really aware of the perspective in a two dimentional peice. Any impressions of depth and scale are pretty subconcious and I think that it takes an extreme distortion of reality for the viewer to notice.
I'm not sure that I agree with his persective types D and E either. I would have to expiriment myself with a wide angle shot and the actual scene to see if what he says is true. Right now though, it appears to be based on his subjective interpretation of human perception.
Regardless, I really don't think any of this stuff matters outside of extreme cases. I can't think of a single situation that a "theory of perspective" would outweigh my own intuition.
--
Tony
blog: http://www.tonyhall.name
Tony Hall
Veteran Member
First, I don't think any LENS could ever duplicate human vision. Like you said, it's very complicated.
However, it is possible to take a photograph that matches the scene before you if you use the right combination of lens, printing size, and viewing distance.
Now according to the article that Daniella linked to, it's impossible to get perfect similarity, depth, and scale with a lens, but I'm not sure that's true. The only way to find out is to take a photo with a camera on a tripod, take it to your computer and print it out on a peice of transparency film. Then take the print and stand exactly where the center of your lens was and hold the paper up in front of you. Bring it closer and father until it matches the scene and see if everything matches up in terms of shape, depth, and scale. I don't have any transparency film, so would anyone like to try it?
Tony
blog: http://www.tonyhall.name
However, it is possible to take a photograph that matches the scene before you if you use the right combination of lens, printing size, and viewing distance.
Now according to the article that Daniella linked to, it's impossible to get perfect similarity, depth, and scale with a lens, but I'm not sure that's true. The only way to find out is to take a photo with a camera on a tripod, take it to your computer and print it out on a peice of transparency film. Then take the print and stand exactly where the center of your lens was and hold the paper up in front of you. Bring it closer and father until it matches the scene and see if everything matches up in terms of shape, depth, and scale. I don't have any transparency film, so would anyone like to try it?
--
Tony
blog: http://www.tonyhall.name
Frank Weston
Veteran Member
I can't help but wonder why anyone would take the time to construct such a complicated and confusing explanation for such an uncomplicated subject.
Simply stated:
To change perspective, you must move either yourself or the subject.
To shoot with different focal lengths and maintain the same frame, you must move, therefore perspective will change.
The "correct" perspective for any given subject depends on human perception (which is way more complicated than perspective). "Correct" perspective is an artistic choice, not one governed by physics. It is total nonsense to claim that one particular focal length gives the "correct" perspcective in all situations or to every eye.
--
Frank Weston - http://www.weston.smugmug.com
Simply stated:
To change perspective, you must move either yourself or the subject.
To shoot with different focal lengths and maintain the same frame, you must move, therefore perspective will change.
The "correct" perspective for any given subject depends on human perception (which is way more complicated than perspective). "Correct" perspective is an artistic choice, not one governed by physics. It is total nonsense to claim that one particular focal length gives the "correct" perspcective in all situations or to every eye.
--
Frank Weston - http://www.weston.smugmug.com
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
i know that very well..that was not what I was talking about so please read the article and we'll talk later.Daniella, please take a PhD in physics and we'll talk about it
later
perspective depends only on the point of view.
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
I did not say it was changing the perspective, but the look of it..how it feel. that's not the same.
and Telephoto was "flat perspective".
read the article, it explain pretty much what I wanted to say..and much better that I could say it.
I bet you have not read the article at all..or you woudl know what I was talking about.
--Now you have morphed your argument to agree that perspective is
about distance and not focal length (though you do not seem to have
convinced yourself!) and are trying to "prove" that Fact 1 is true.
You gradually dropped the incorrect use of the word "perspective"
and replaced it with "feel", BUT still titled your new, provocative
thread as being about "Perspective".
Since you seem to have reluctantly agreed the the lens doesn't
change perspective, then the argument has dissolved. No one will
argue that you will not change perspective by moving away from a
subject and changing the lens (ie. if framing is constant - WA
equal "deep" appearance/Tele equal "flat" or compressed appearance).
sure..but each time I point this out here..it is always a mess.... we're done. Thus concludes this edition of "DPReview Pointless
Debates"
Back when I was still a complete photography newbie, I read some
basic photography books and they described the flatness that you
get from a telephoto lens compared to a wide angle. This is a
universally accepted concept as old as exchangable lenses, and can
be witnessed in every day photography.
maybe it is my fault and I don't have the correct way of saying
this..why the article is a better way. if it was not useful for
you..then too bad..at least it was useful for some people and for
that only it was worth it.
yeah..problem like that happen when you try to find catchy title
LOL
yes you, but some people did find something new from it. I did not
post this only for you you know
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
you have to have some sort of reference in order to realize it. probably not obvious in just one photo. If you see the scene with your eyes, it would be a good reference.
It's better to be aware of this though..for your choice of lens.
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
another who have not read the article...just read it and you'll understand.
it is not about the perspective changing from the same distance..we all know it does not. period.
sigh..
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
yes, I am a 3d artist so I know that pretty well.
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
not correct, but closer to reality.
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
I think how something looks and how it feels are not the same, but we can't get into that. You did speak of the different look as "perspective" - go look at your comments in the other thread. You said:
"...wide angle shot and a telephoto shot, they have a very different feel for perspective."
and
"The perspective feel a lot different if you look at a full size wide angle image compared to a full size telephoto image. One look deep and the other look flat."
You incorrectly used the term perspective and people tried to straighten you out in a constructive manner. Now you claim you never thought of it as perspective - fine, there is no point of contention.
I did read it and commented on it in your other thread - it contains
nothing new on the subject. It is rather obtuse and has factual errors, but I have no general argument with it.
I did not have to read that article to know WHAT you are talking about. The question is WHY are you talking about it and the author doesn't get into that!
I think there is a language issue here that is complicating the communications. You seem to have trouble understanding that, given what appears to be your current position, no one is arguing your points - as I said the argument has dissolved!
Frank Weston
Veteran Member
Daniella68313
Veteran Member
yes..and if you only take the time to read the article, you woudl understand what I meant.
just read the article and you will understand..otherwise I am done with this.
--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel
i ve done some perspective drawings of buildings. this is what i understood.
the closer you bring your camera to the object the more distortion you get. i think the feeling you r talkin about is not perspective. its distortion. distortion disapear when distance increased. for example distortion from 200m to 100m is a lots less than from 100m to 20m.
hope it make sense to you guy..
the closer you bring your camera to the object the more distortion you get. i think the feeling you r talkin about is not perspective. its distortion. distortion disapear when distance increased. for example distortion from 200m to 100m is a lots less than from 100m to 20m.
hope it make sense to you guy..
with it.
As I have clearly stated multiple times - I have read the article you are so enamored with and there is nothing there to explain your odd behavior. Also, I understand your points. They are neither earth shattering or insightful - simply common photography knowledge.
I have to draw the conclusion that you either are unable to comprehend these written words or you are simply a gadfly wishing to argue meaningless points. In either case, further discussion is futile and I agree that being done with it is the most prudent path.
I checked out your galleries and there is some very nice art there. Your time would be much better spent creating more of that than this, and I mean that as a compliment!
As I have clearly stated multiple times - I have read the article you are so enamored with and there is nothing there to explain your odd behavior. Also, I understand your points. They are neither earth shattering or insightful - simply common photography knowledge.
I have to draw the conclusion that you either are unable to comprehend these written words or you are simply a gadfly wishing to argue meaningless points. In either case, further discussion is futile and I agree that being done with it is the most prudent path.
I checked out your galleries and there is some very nice art there. Your time would be much better spent creating more of that than this, and I mean that as a compliment!
Actually, the same aperture on a 15m lens and a 70mm lens of the same format, will give the same depth of field. This has also been demonstrated before. It only looks different because of the relative "size" difference.
"If the subject image size remains the same, then at any given aperture all lenses will give the same depth of field." Check out the rest of this test here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml
It's an interesting read, and it has the pictures to demonstrate the concepts.
klinux
"If the subject image size remains the same, then at any given aperture all lenses will give the same depth of field." Check out the rest of this test here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml
It's an interesting read, and it has the pictures to demonstrate the concepts.
klinux
Isn't is a function of DOF? At the same aperture the DOF of 15mm
lense is far greater than 500mm lense.
--
KEG
All comments should be taken as shameless plugs for me and my
equipment
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum