Compression is Real

Started May 26, 2018 | Discussions
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Re: Compression is Real

richiebee wrote:

JackM wrote:

It’s my rebuttal to a number of recent pedantic articles and posts.

Which ones?

Pretty much any article or post that explains that position and position alone determines perspective, I'd say.

Articles and posts that he didn't understand, apparently.

But everybody needs their windmills...

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 12,216
Re: Compression is Real
2

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts. Compressed The perceived distance ? Absolutely

Don

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5, EM5mk2 my toys.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1

MisterBG Veteran Member • Posts: 6,557
Re: I have a question.

24IS wrote:

Blue Jam wrote:

Oh that's really clever. You're riffing on the phrase, "if you you have to ask, you can't afford it", the implication being that one might not have the wealth required. Only, you are implying that I might be to stupid to understand your point.

Well, lets put that to the test. Indulge me, and elucidate.

You're probably not too stupid to understand. It's hard to figure out what OP is talking about, here. Compression? I expect had the OP used the term 'perspective,' you would have understood the point that he was trying to illustrate.

Changing the focal length of a lens doesn't affect the perspective of the picture. But, subject distance does. As the photographer moves away from the subject, adjusting the focal length to maintain foreground content at the same size, the ratio of the distance between foreground subjects and the background changes. The distance between the subject and the camera controls the size relationships between objects in the picture. The focal length of the lens controls the size of everything in the picture, but as a whole, not individually. Stay in the same spot, and change the focal length, and there is no change in perspective at all.

So he's wasted a large amount of internet bandwidth to prove demonstrate what we already know...

 MisterBG's gear list:MisterBG's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony a6000 Olympus PEN-F Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +14 more
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
No
10

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
It's worse
3

MisterBG wrote:

24IS wrote:

Blue Jam wrote:

Oh that's really clever. You're riffing on the phrase, "if you you have to ask, you can't afford it", the implication being that one might not have the wealth required. Only, you are implying that I might be to stupid to understand your point.

Well, lets put that to the test. Indulge me, and elucidate.

You're probably not too stupid to understand. It's hard to figure out what OP is talking about, here. Compression? I expect had the OP used the term 'perspective,' you would have understood the point that he was trying to illustrate.

Changing the focal length of a lens doesn't affect the perspective of the picture. But, subject distance does. As the photographer moves away from the subject, adjusting the focal length to maintain foreground content at the same size, the ratio of the distance between foreground subjects and the background changes. The distance between the subject and the camera controls the size relationships between objects in the picture. The focal length of the lens controls the size of everything in the picture, but as a whole, not individually. Stay in the same spot, and change the focal length, and there is no change in perspective at all.

So he's wasted a large amount of internet bandwidth to prove demonstrate what we already know...

It's worse. He tried to show, at least until he deigns to explain otherwise, that it's a function of focal length and not of position.

He failed.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 12,216
Re: No
1

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Regards, Mike

Im only commenting on the images posted . And taken ooc not cropped reducing image quality.

Don

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5, EM5mk2 my toys.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1

Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Re: No
1

Donald B wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Im only commenting on the images posted . And taken ooc not cropped reducing image quality.

I’m only commenting on your interpretation of the images posted 😉

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
kiwi2
kiwi2 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,198
Re: No
1

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

So you cannot keep the foreground subject taking up the same area of the frame at the longer distance with the shorter 100mm focal length.

You need the longer 400mm focal length for it to work.

 kiwi2's gear list:kiwi2's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T100 Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +4 more
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Longer lens *or* cropping
2

kiwi2 wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

So you cannot keep the foreground subject taking up the same area of the frame at the longer distance with the shorter 100mm focal length.

Of course you can’t, if you have moved away from the foreground.

You need the longer 400mm focal length for it to work.

Or you crop. The effect on the so-called “compression” is identical. You loose resolution, yes, but the ‘“compression” is identical.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 12,216
Re: Longer lens *or* cropping

Mike CH wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

So you cannot keep the foreground subject taking up the same area of the frame at the longer distance with the shorter 100mm focal length.

Of course you can’t, if you have moved away from the foreground.

You need the longer 400mm focal length for it to work.

Or you crop. The effect on the so-called “compression” is identical. You loose resolution, yes, but the ‘“compression” is identical.

Regards, Mike

Cant remember. Does the dof stay the same as well ?

Don

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5, EM5mk2 my toys.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1

jrtrent Veteran Member • Posts: 5,055
no cropping or stitching

Donald B wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Regards, Mike

Im only commenting on the images posted . And taken ooc not cropped reducing image quality.

I've been reading photography books for 50 years that talk about the exaggerated perspective created by wide angle lenses and the compressed perspective given by telephoto lenses. My experience in taking pictures confirms what those books have said, and, typically wanting my pictures to have a natural perspective, I shoot almost exclusively with a focal length that is "normal" for the film or sensor size I am using. I dismiss any argument that depends on cropping or stitching to refute the apparent perspective distortion created by wide angle and telephoto lenses because by doing so they negate the differences in field of view that is the primary property of choosing different focal lengths.

The article the OP referred to starts out with, "We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading," and perhaps that is true, but I prefer some of the articles they had in the more distant past.  Below is an excerpt from one that was primarily discussing what a normal, or standard, lens is, and explains why I prefer using a normal focal length for most of my shots:

"A telephoto lens, for example, renders distant objects larger in the frame, and has the effect of compressing the apparent spatial relationship between objects. A wideangle does precisely the opposite; in squeezing more content into the image, objects appear smaller and more distant. It's in the happy medium between these two extremes that the standard lens lies; the apparent sizes and spatial relationships between image elements appear natural, and much as they did in real life."

Donald B
Donald B Forum Pro • Posts: 12,216
Re: no cropping or stitching

jrtrent wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Regards, Mike

Im only commenting on the images posted . And taken ooc not cropped reducing image quality.

I've been reading photography books for 50 years that talk about the exaggerated perspective created by wide angle lenses and the compressed perspective given by telephoto lenses. My experience in taking pictures confirms what those books have said, and, typically wanting my pictures to have a natural perspective, I shoot almost exclusively with a focal length that is "normal" for the film or sensor size I am using. I dismiss any argument that depends on cropping or stitching to refute the apparent perspective distortion created by wide angle and telephoto lenses because by doing so they negate the differences in field of view that is the primary property of choosing different focal lengths.

The article the OP referred to starts out with, "We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading," and perhaps that is true, but I prefer some of the articles they had in the more distant past. Below is an excerpt from one that was primarily discussing what a normal, or standard, lens is, and explains why I prefer using a normal focal length for most of my shots:

"A telephoto lens, for example, renders distant objects larger in the frame, and has the effect of compressing the apparent spatial relationship between objects. A wideangle does precisely the opposite; in squeezing more content into the image, objects appear smaller and more distant. It's in the happy medium between these two extremes that the standard lens lies; the apparent sizes and spatial relationships between image elements appear natural, and much as they did in real life."

Totaly agree. Im a ooc shooter. And enjoy my 25mm on my m43 camera for the  same reasons. But also love my 14 150 to change the look of my images depending on subject.

Don

-- hide signature --

Olympus EM5, EM5mk2 my toys.
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9412035244
past toys. k100d, k10d,k7,fz5,fz150,500uz,canon G9, Olympus xz1

stevedavidsonphotography Senior Member • Posts: 1,372
Re: no cropping or stitching
4

jrtrent wrote:

Donald B wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

Regards, Mike

Im only commenting on the images posted . And taken ooc not cropped reducing image quality.

I've been reading photography books for 50 years that talk about the exaggerated perspective created by wide angle lenses and the compressed perspective given by telephoto lenses. My experience in taking pictures confirms what those books have said, and, typically wanting my pictures to have a natural perspective, I shoot almost exclusively with a focal length that is "normal" for the film or sensor size I am using. I dismiss any argument that depends on cropping or stitching to refute the apparent perspective distortion created by wide angle and telephoto lenses because by doing so they negate the differences in field of view that is the primary property of choosing different focal lengths.

The article the OP referred to starts out with, "We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading," and perhaps that is true, but I prefer some of the articles they had in the more distant past. Below is an excerpt from one that was primarily discussing what a normal, or standard, lens is, and explains why I prefer using a normal focal length for most of my shots:

"A telephoto lens, for example, renders distant objects larger in the frame, and has the effect of compressing the apparent spatial relationship between objects. A wideangle does precisely the opposite; in squeezing more content into the image, objects appear smaller and more distant. It's in the happy medium between these two extremes that the standard lens lies; the apparent sizes and spatial relationships between image elements appear natural, and much as they did in real life."

When you stand in the same spot and zoom in and out everything in the frame will become equally larger and smaller.

 stevedavidsonphotography's gear list:stevedavidsonphotography's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Re: Longer lens *or* cropping
1

Donald B wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

kiwi2 wrote:

Mike CH wrote:

Donald B wrote:

You have displayed in the images that the background looks closer to the team using longer focal lenghts.

No, he has shown that when he moves backwards and forwards the proportions between foreground and background changes. The lens and its focal length is only responsible for maintaining framing, i.e. size of the foreground subject.

The proof is easy.

In the position where the 400mm shot was taken, also take a 100mm shot. Crop that last shot to the size of the 400mm shot. You will now see that the cropped image show exactly the same "compression" as the 400mm image.

So you cannot keep the foreground subject taking up the same area of the frame at the longer distance with the shorter 100mm focal length.

Of course you can’t, if you have moved away from the foreground.

You need the longer 400mm focal length for it to work.

Or you crop. The effect on the so-called “compression” is identical. You loose resolution, yes, but the ‘“compression” is identical.

Regards, Mike

Cant remember. Does the dof stay the same as well ?

Absent effects from loss of resolution, I'd say yes.

FingerPainter is correct, DoF changes due to the magnification.

Loss of resolution is of course the reason why you’d rather use the longer lens than crop in real life.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
TeddyD Contributing Member • Posts: 781
Re: I have a question.

Blue Jam wrote:

What is your point, caller?

There's no point IMHO..

Thou the same pictures could be taken with MF, FF, APS_C, MFT and 1" formats all with the same 100mm lens and say the compression is in the sensor size.. which has no point either

Teddy

 TeddyD's gear list:TeddyD's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Sony a7R Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Sony a6300 Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 Nokton SL II +17 more
Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Re: no cropping or stitching
1

jrtrent wrote:

The article the OP referred to starts out with, "We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading," and perhaps that is true,

It is. It’s the position, not the lens.

"A telephoto lens, for example, renders distant objects larger in the frame, and has the effect of compressing the apparent spatial relationship between objects. A wideangle does precisely the opposite; in squeezing more content into the image, objects appear smaller and more distant. It's in the happy medium between these two extremes that the standard lens lies; the apparent sizes and spatial relationships between image elements appear natural, and much as they did in real life."

Preferences aside, that explanation is wrong, physically, geometrically and optically.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Brian_Flex Forum Member • Posts: 66
Re: Compression is Real

Spot on. Here's a similar test we did, but only the focal length changed. These are just screen grabs.

Mike CH Veteran Member • Posts: 9,631
Zooms...

stevedavidsonphotography wrote:

When you stand in the same spot and zoom in and out everything in the frame will become equally larger and smaller.

I think that is part of the problem. Many of those older, accepted, but nevertheless wrong explanations come from a time where zooms weren’t as available, or at all, as they are today.

Performing the experiment you suggest was thus not possible, and the wrong attribution of cause and effect - “it’s the lens” - was thus much easier to do.

Regards, Mike

-- hide signature --

Wait and see...
I hardly ever speak for anybody but myself. In the cases where I do mean to speak generally the statements are likely to be marked as such.

 Mike CH's gear list:Mike CH's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +14 more
Brian_Flex Forum Member • Posts: 66
Re: I have a question.
1

24IS wrote:

Blue Jam wrote:

Oh that's really clever. You're riffing on the phrase, "if you you have to ask, you can't afford it", the implication being that one might not have the wealth required. Only, you are implying that I might be to stupid to understand your point.

Well, lets put that to the test. Indulge me, and elucidate.

You're probably not too stupid to understand. It's hard to figure out what OP is talking about, here. Compression? I expect had the OP used the term 'perspective,' you would have understood the point that he was trying to illustrate.

Changing the focal length of a lens doesn't affect the perspective of the picture. But, subject distance does. As the photographer moves away from the subject, adjusting the focal length to maintain foreground content at the same size, the ratio of the distance between foreground subjects and the background changes. The distance between the subject and the camera controls the size relationships between objects in the picture. The focal length of the lens controls the size of everything in the picture, but as a whole, not individually. Stay in the same spot, and change the focal length, and there is no change in perspective at all.

Incorrect. The focal length changes perspective.

stevedavidsonphotography Senior Member • Posts: 1,372
Re: I have a question.

Brian_Flex wrote:

24IS wrote:

Blue Jam wrote:

Oh that's really clever. You're riffing on the phrase, "if you you have to ask, you can't afford it", the implication being that one might not have the wealth required. Only, you are implying that I might be to stupid to understand your point.

Well, lets put that to the test. Indulge me, and elucidate.

You're probably not too stupid to understand. It's hard to figure out what OP is talking about, here. Compression? I expect had the OP used the term 'perspective,' you would have understood the point that he was trying to illustrate.

Changing the focal length of a lens doesn't affect the perspective of the picture. But, subject distance does. As the photographer moves away from the subject, adjusting the focal length to maintain foreground content at the same size, the ratio of the distance between foreground subjects and the background changes. The distance between the subject and the camera controls the size relationships between objects in the picture. The focal length of the lens controls the size of everything in the picture, but as a whole, not individually. Stay in the same spot, and change the focal length, and there is no change in perspective at all.

Incorrect. The focal length changes perspective.

This will explain it for you.

https://cornicello.com/itfigures/2015/3/16/its-all-about-distance

And this.

https://www.amazon.com/Ansel-Adams-Camera-Photography/dp/0821221841

 stevedavidsonphotography's gear list:stevedavidsonphotography's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads