What’s Your Preference?

wulf · #1 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 03:58 PM

Here is a shot I took on my recent trip to Santiago de Compostela in Spain:

# Exposure: 0.002 sec (1/500)
# Aperture: f/6.3
# Focal Length: 38 mm (18-55mm kit lens)
# ISO Speed: 200

It was still quite early in the morning and the sun imparted a warm yellow colour to the towers of the cathedral, which I emphasised by slightly underexposing the picture to make both blue and yellow darker (further emphasised by using copy of the image in overlay mode, enriching contrast and colours still further).

The main operation I had to do though was rotating the picture to get a pattern of lines I was happy with (I took a couple of alternatives but neither quite did it). Normally my rotation is minimal but here it was almost ten degrees, which set the cross and lightning rod at the top to be vertical. That meant I had to do some patching up. If you look in the bottom left corner, you can see that I rushed the cloning job due to lack of time.

I was wondering what rules of thumb people use when photographing buildings like that to get a pleasing set of lines (do you like the choice I have made) and thus avoiding having to do so much rotation after? Feel free to illustrate with shots that show good - or bad - results.

Thanks,

Wulf

Major_Small · #2 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 04:50 PM

Very nice - At this size, I don't really think the cloning misstep is too obvious. I love the depth of the colors.

As for what I do when shooting architecture, I just do what I usually do - I think about what I want the final image of the thing to look like while I shoot. If I can match that, great. While I'm coming up with that final image in my mind, I'll refer to some of the "rules" of composition, but I don't get too hung up on trying to meet every one. What I'm going for is an image that looks good. Not necessarily an image that follows rules. I see the rules as guidelines derived from studying appealing images. They didn't create the images, the images created them

peeperita · #3 (**permalink**) 03-21-2008, 02:38 AM

your question forced me to go through my images to see what it is that i do most often.....

i think you made a good choice of defining your vertical with the cross...probably, because it's what i tend to do most often.....i seem to choose the centermost vertical to align my frame with......otherwise i am losing my mind with the side verticals.....and aligning my horizontals almost never pleases me as much......

i tried to find a good example on my flickr account....so many follow that same self imposed rule of thumb.....these aren't the best images, but i think they'll suffice as arguements of what i mean....

by the way, this set of yours is lovely....

peeper

richb14 · #4 (**permalink**) 03-23-2008, 08:39 AM

Hi Wulf

I'd also be interested in what people do or a rule of thumb, I have in the past been very unhappy with the shots I end up with when photographing tall building/structures. I was told once to find a distinctive line and ensure thats parallel to border of the frame (either vertical or hortizonal, typically the side of the building.

The only picture I have that I was remotely happy with was a shot I took in New York a while ago below, although it didn't really follow the rule I was given

. I guess if you take a lot of these you could invest in a Tilt Shift lens like the Canon TS-E range. I've never used one, but they allow you to shift lens to compensate for the angle.

Rich

wulf · #5 (**permalink**) 03-23-2008, 01:29 PM

What I should do is go out and shoot some tall buildings that are nearer me. I can't think of anything quite as decorated as the cathedral from Santiago de Compostela but it would be good to practise on something that I can go and reshoot after reviewing the results and playing with rotations back on my computer.

Wulf

mountaintreker · #6 (**permalink**) 04-23-2008, 08:24 PM

Technically correct architectural photography generally requires level horizon and vertical lines that don't converge. Vertical lines converge when your camera is pointed upwards giving the impression that the bldg. is falling over backward or leaning to one side. The key to making buildings stand up straight is leveling the camera back and keeping it parallel to the vertical lines in the bldg. Often you will find that once you level the camera you have cut off the top of the building. Four things to correct that problem. 1-you can move the camera farther away from the subject. 2-try a wider angle lens. 3-or move the camera higher like from a second story of an adjacent structure. 4-Or the expensive way is to use a tilt/shift lens.

ellie mac · #7 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 01:26 PM

Hi Wulf - great shot,

I think for this particular subject definitely the rotation you've chosen is the way to go - i would generally always have the vertical of a cross vertical IYKWIM. I'd possibly have tried to pull back a bit further to include the whole of the decorative sill under the balcony/window though.

I think you'll find it interesting (& even harder) to have a go with some buildings that are less decorated. The decorative elements can serve to distract the eye from the converging verticals & reduce the dominance of that aspect.

Seeing as I'm an architect you'd think I'd have some images of tall buildings on my computer - but it's a while since I've taken any so I don't have any examples for you. Most of my architectural shots are on slide or film. Technicalities required by 'correct' architectural shots aside, I think that it's mostly a matter of considering what you think will work for a particular shot and give you the sense you get from a particular building.

I tend to try and get the best technically correct shots (as per the suggestions by mountaintreker) I can first - and then I just go with my gut and often end up focussing on specific small details of the building. Sure would love to get my hands on a tilt/shift lens though!

wulf · #8 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 02:19 PM

Yes - building decoration can cover a lot of defects. If you go into a massive old stone building, like a cathedral, and look closely, you can often see how the stonework has distorted over time due to the weight. Meanwhile, the casual observer only sees the glorious stained glass and intricate vaulting!

Wulf

Pshorten · #9 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 02:23 PM

Wulf, I like your photo and think the rotation works well...for the photo I attach here, I could not get any further back from the building and it has pretty serious keystoning - I used the stretching in PS to help it some, still it has the feeling of falling backward and not being quite straight enough.

Taallyn · #10 (**permalink**) 04-24-2008, 03:11 PM

When you tilt the camera like this the perspective starts going all wonky. Your Lensbaby may have helped by allowing you to keep the camera parallel to the ground and adjusting the perspective. Or as another poster said you could get a really expensive tilt/shift perspective control lens.

Or a wideangle lens and your own manlift would help you get closer to the middle to be able to include all of the facade. You do have a manlift, don't you?