Purple Door

[greybeard]

Sitting in the mall parking lot waiting on the wife to finish shopping. Across the road is this kids play equipment display. The play house with the purple door caught my because of the color contrasts.View attachment 132582

 

[tirediron]

Nice! I like the symmetry here, but there is some perspective distortion that I think could be mitigated with LR fairly easily.

 

[Derrel]

Nice! I like the symmetry here, but there is some perspective distortion that I think could be mitigated with LR fairly easily.

I saw the original image, with the lens barel distortion above the door being clear and obvious, and expected...the "mitigation" eliminated the yellow line above the door and both of thr windows, and hurt the shot pretty badly by eliminating the one, single element that figuratively and literally, bridged all three parts of the building...

A good example of correcting something in software and spoiling the original image...which was just fine.

The picture, and its concept, was better WITH the barrel disortion left in. The "mitigation" of a tiny bit of barrel distortion really hurt this shot. This is one of the biggest problems with software correction of tightly-composed images...things at the edges of the frames are very often eliminated when the so-called corrections are applied in software. I had a similar issue with a famous Oregon Coast lighthouse and my 70-200 VR-I...using Adobe's Lightroom lens "correction" profiles ruined many tightly-framed shots, by eliminating the very top of the lighthouse...I went with un-corrected images.

Same thing with wide-angle lens shots: sometimes, correcting an image spoils it, eliminates the wide-angle look, and well...

 

[greybeard]

Nice! I like the symmetry here, but there is some perspective distortion that I think could be mitigated with LR fairly easily.

I saw the original image, with the lens barel distortion above the door being clear and obvious, and expected...the "mitigation" eliminated the yellow line above the door and both of thr windows, and hurt the shot pretty badly by eliminating the one, single element that figuratively and literally, bridged all three parts of the building...

A good example of correcting something in software and spoiling the original image...which was just fine.

The picture, and its concept, was better WITH the barrel disortion left in. The "mitigation" of a tiny bit of barrel distortion really hurt this shot. This is one of the biggest problems with software correction of tightly-composed images...things at the edges of the frames are very often eliminated when the so-called corrections are applied in software. I had a similar issue with a famous Oregon Coast lighthouse and my 70-200 VR-I...using Adobe's Lightroom lens "correction" profiles ruined many tightly-framed shots, by eliminating the very top of the lighthouse...I went with un-corrected images.

Same thing with wide-angle lens shots: sometimes, correcting an image spoils it, eliminates the wide-angle look, and well...

View attachment 132606
Better?

 

[Derrel]

Better?
Heck YES!!!!

Now you've got a good, big, solid yellow line across the top of all three, AND a yellow line that runs below the door, AND nice, white, symmetrical boards on the left and right edges of the rame! This is signifantly better than the second (the mitigated) frame! The little things can matter, and this latest image is the best of the three I've seen today.

 

[tirediron]

...A good example of correcting something in software and spoiling the original image...which was just fine...

Well, in fairness, I didn't anticipate the need to crop the top of the image, just remove the barrel distortion, which IMO wasn't helping the image, but at the end of the day, it's whatever makes the OP happy.

 

[DriedStrawbery]

For the untrained eye (like mine), other than major distortions, are the issues being discussed in this thread more in the "nit picking" category? Or are these part of routine for all professional pieces?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Derrel]

Removing barrel right at the edge of an image....will in effect, often "crop" the picture. This is one of the big ,big issues to keep in mind if a lens has bad barrel distortion: you'll need to allow plenty of extra space for correction in software, and the margins are likely to be...off the map of the corrected image. Same with correcting wonky keystoned images...that type of software correction often realllly cuts into the image left over at the end.

And this, the idea of manipulating an image LATER, in software, came up earlier today. One of the biggest issues with digital imags is that many,many times, the image will be corrected with software, and that can cause tightly-framed shots like the OP's shot, to be mangled by the software correction profiles.

For strawberry: this type of picture is based on very precise framing...it is not nit-picking in a very simple image like this. The yellow at top and bottom MAKES the image 'work"....removing it top and bottom makes it much,much less interesting visually. These types of shots are very commonly done by serious shooters; the margins of the scene actually form the "borders" for the image content. Good question though!

Also: many people are a bit OCD about horizons, and distortions, and cannot see past these issues, so for them, this is a big deal. I can handle a horizon 1, 2 degrees off if the image is good, if THE PICTURE is good; some people can not deal with that.

Depends: we have some TPF members here who will correct minor rotational errors in other peoples' images, errors as little as 0.5 to 0.8 degrees. Srsly. Not talking about Tirediron either. When it gets to 1 or 2 degrees off, they freak and make noise about how awful it is. I guess to some people, the devil is in the details.

Keystoning, barrel distortion, horizon lines, foreshortening, etc: some people want these things corrected. Others let them be. We USED to see correct wine bottles and candles sticks in pro pictures. Today? They often keystone like hell even in pro images.

 

[greybeard]

One of the big reasons I need a camera with a lot of pixels is that I shoot real loose and then crop out the picture in PP. This D750 really does the job for me. At first I didn't even notice the distortion, then I had no idea that the yellow border above the doors and windows added so much to the image. So, between tirediron and Derrel, I got what I needed and that is good constructive criticism. "it takes a village to raise a child"..............lol

 

[DriedStrawbery]

@Derrel : thanks for the info! Really dint think about corrections eating into the in-camera-composition!

Good point about organic borders.

Learnt significant subtle things from a very simple/nice pic




Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Derrel]

Organic borders are cool. It's kind of "a thing", in which elements within the pciture help to form the impression/sensation of the border of the frame.

And yeah, RE the Nikon D750 and its 24 million pixels: heck of a sensor. What used to be called "medium format image quality"...but at higher ISO levels AND in full color!!! And with almost unlimited "digital film', with no need for a film lab for color positives, no need for a darkroom for B&W, and just amazing dynamic range, in both color and in black and white. We've never had it so good, now images can be shot loose, then cropped, and there's still a LOT of image left, with good quality.

 

[astroNikon]

World of a differences with the edges there

Good to see you putting the d750 through a good workout.

 

[astroNikon]

.. now if it wasn't tilted that 1/2 degree to the left .... LOL j/k

 

[Gary A.]

I agree with Derrel the second image is much better than the corrected.