Try it! Of course this is a very particular way of looking at a photo. This squashing cancels out the previous stretching so the people then seem normally proportioned. This makes them appear foreshortened (squashed). The faces in the middle of the photo are in that case seen straight-on, while the ones at the sides of the photo are seen at an acute angle, off to the sides of your vision. With what the camera "saw", and also with what you saw in the viewfinder, when looking at the group of people in the first place. If you look at the centre of the photo from a sufficiently close distance (this is easier if you display it at a large size) then what you see WILL Looks different from a close distance, than it does from further away. Quite the same as if you had photographed the same group of people from further awayįor related reasons, your wideangle photo Things look different from a close distance, than they do from further away.Ī very wideangle lens allows you to get close to a group of people, and still fit everybody in - but this cannot ever Often this aspect is not so important, though (say, in street or journalism photography) where one just has to accept that working close with a wide lens gives a particular "look" inherently. Where this is important, as in formal portraits, that is what people need to do - and this may require a very large space, a stepladder, taking care to light everyone evenly, etc. The only way to get normally proportioned facesĪ normal-looking context for a group of people, is to photograph them from quite far away using a longer lens. You're saying things that I don't fully understand, but when I get some more time for this I'll see if I can get my brain around it.ġ Warp is the tool that will best adjust for this stretched look, but it will cause straight lines in the background etc to bend, and this may also look strange. That's fine for some subjects, but certainly not for all. When you warp an image to correct "wideangle distortion", these straight lines go all over the place. We pay a lot of money for, and lens manufacturers struggle hard to achieve, straight lines in our pictures. Put your eye quite close to the centre of the image, and magically, the corners are foreshortened by your proximity to the 2D plane, so the stretched-out appearance disappears - but the lines are still straight. the stretched-out-ness is because we are viewing a 2D plane and not a 3D scene, and the projection by which this 2D image was made in different than the one we are using to look at it by. If you print a picture from a wideangle lens quite large, or view it on a large screen, from the same relative viewing distance as we are accustomed to use with more moderate fields of view, it looks stretched out - but the straight lines are staight.
I would think this is a fairly simple thing based on the known property of a wide angle lens of a certain focal length and field coverage angle to expand the image as you move from the center. So if you want to do this for certain subjects, I would persevere with Warp. Transform works on the whole selection when you move the corner handles, Warp works (when you move the corner handles) progressively inward, with maximum effect at the edge and less further in, zero at the centre. In effect, you are talking about a Warp, as well visually illustrated on the PTLens website. Warp also didn't let me do what I wanted, although I admit to not spending too much time at it.
Ptlens edit free#
As I said, Free Transform compressed the face of the center person as well as the outer ones, just not as much. Their website says PTLens doesn't correct for that they suggest Photoshop's Transform.
0 kommentar(er)
