lost impavt in resampling

[swazon]

Hi Folks,

1. This photo of the atrium seems to have lost its impact when resampled - what can be done to keep the "perceived" quality when shrinking it?

2. Not sure if the tilt is wrong - the glass appears to be leaning back, and the pillae is not vertical.

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

This better?


Using Photoshop I rotated it a bit then used the transform/perspective tool, straightened the ceiling tiles, cropped to centre the atrium, auto-levels, a touch of USM and voila. I may have overdone the perpective slightly but then I have mentioned on a post elsewhere that I tend to lean a bit to the left!
Cheers
Chris

[theMusicMan]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

With this type of wide angle shot it's never going to be easy to get the perspective right. The edited image looks just a tad curved in the z-plane to me now.

Cracking image though, wish I could think up images like this...

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Had another go, this time using the PT Lens plugin in Photoshop which recognizes the E-510 and 7-14mm lens and autocorrects distortion. It also has a perspective tool. Had to lower the atrium in order to get the ceiling lights in though.

Chris

[swazon]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

This better?


Using Photoshop I rotated it a bit then used the transform/perspective tool, straightened the ceiling tiles, cropped to centre the atrium, auto-levels, a touch of USM and voila. I may have overdone the perpective slightly but then I have mentioned on a post elsewhere that I tend to lean a bit to the left!
Cheers
Chris

Wow that's a big improvement!

But is it cheating to post process?

My only gripe with the E-510 is that the viewfinder does not give the full picture.
Also I rarely seem to get the horizon correct, even when there are guides like the ceiling tiles and pillars.

[art frames]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

A nice picture and I think Chris has improved the distortions. I don't think photoshop work is a problem for most of us and I enjoy fiddling. However, for some specialist buyers and users they don't want any (eg picture editors). And they frown upon additions (like ministers who weren't there).

I spend lots of time making one picture out of two and correcting the others. I'm never sure if I'm just making up for my original mistakes or am just very fussy.

With the bent horizon issue sometimes you rotate the camera as you push with your finger to take the shot. Maybe a monopod would help? It did for me.

[theMusicMan]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Hey BW that most certainly is much better, cracking edit I'd say.

Can I ask - what's the PT lens plugin...?

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Take a look here: http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/

[theMusicMan]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

I did a google after I posted (d'oh) and came across the site you linked to. That looks a very impressive plugin for Photoshop indeed. I may purchase that too, thanks for informing me of it.

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

But is it cheating to post process?

My only gripe with the E-510 is that the viewfinder does not give the full picture.
Also I rarely seem to get the horizon correct, even when there are guides like the ceiling tiles and pillars.

No its not cheating as long as you don't deliberately try to mislead the viewer. I would hazard a guess that most of the images posted on fora (I love that word!) such as this have been post processed to a lesser or greater degree - if only sharpened and cropped. If you are typing one of these posts and you make an error then correct it, does that make the post any less informative - of course not. Its the same with an image. If you correct an error in an image you improve it for the viewer. The trick is not to overcorrect!

I also have problems getting horizons and vertical lines straight. With the 510 try lining up horizontal lines with the focus points or the rectangles around them.
Cheers
Chris

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Having thought about this a bit more, I don't think it's always wrong to mislead the viewer. After all, if for example, you use a telephoto lens you are giving the impression that you were closer to the subject than you actually were but if the result is an attractive image then there is nothing wrong with that.

Here is an example of misleading the viewer. Looking at this you would think I was at death's door:

When, in fact the beautiful tiger was safely behind a mesh fence. Here is the original (out of focus) image:

I cloned out the fence mainly to see if I could do it. The end result is oversharpened and crude but I like it.

Does anyone else have any images that are "misleading"?
Cheers
Chris

PS. Sorry Barr1e you must be fed up with this image!

[swazon]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

No its not cheating as long as you don't deliberately try to mislead the viewer. I would hazard a guess that most of the images posted on fora (I love that word!) such as this have been post processed to a lesser or greater degree - if only sharpened and cropped. If you are typing one of these posts and you make an error then correct it, does that make the post any less informative - of course not. Its the same with an image. If you correct an error in an image you improve it for the viewer. The trick is not to overcorrect!

Sorry, I was being a bit provactive
Your PostProcessing is excellent and has resulted in what I thought I saw in the viewfinder

I also have problems getting horizons and vertical lines straight. With the 510 try lining up horizontal lines with the focus points or the rectangles around them.
Cheers
Chris

Thanks for the tip.

Robin

[catkins]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Another good piece of software to have on your computer is ShiftN http://www.marcus-hebel.de/foto/index.html (free but donations welcome) - there is a link on the above webpage to extra information in English if needed. This does a similar job to the examples shown above in a very quick simple way, and has certainly made life a lot easier for me in certain situations.

Chris

[Ian]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Having thought about this a bit more, I don't think it's always wrong to mislead the viewer. After all, if for example, you use a telephoto lens you are giving the impression that you were closer to the subject than you actually were but if the result is an attractive image then there is nothing wrong with that.

Here is an example of misleading the viewer. Looking at this you would think I was at death's door:

When, in fact the beautiful tiger was safely behind a mesh fence. Here is the original (out of focus) image:

I cloned out the fence mainly to see if I could do it. The end result is oversharpened and crude but I like it.

Does anyone else have any images that are "misleading"?
Cheers
Chris

PS. Sorry Barr1e you must be fed up with this image!

Wow - that's a superb example of post processing!

Ian

[beardedwombat]

Re: lost impavt in resampling

Thank you for your kind words. I did it as an exercise after learning how to use the clone tool. It looks good as desktop wallpaper!
Chris