Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Photography
Portrait
How your lens selection controls portrait outcome
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="J-see" data-source="post: 541967" data-attributes="member: 31330"><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Help lines for perspective are evidently heavily used in painting and drawing but it's not different for photography since they all have one thing in common: being a two-dimensional medium and thus suffering from "flatness". That's where perspective comes in to try and present an illusion of depth.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">That's why I used the cube; it’s a very simple shape to show what perspective is about. That perspective is also present in the before shared images, at least in the ones with a shorter focal length. There you could draw the lines until they intersect and define the vanishing points and horizon. Those of course do not necessarily need to be "in" the shot.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">So even if we get back to photography, the exact same perspective rules apply. We show depth by showing “imaginary” lines leading towards vanishing points. That’s the only way to create an illusion of depth in a two-dimensional medium.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">The camera evidently only records what is in front of the lens but the lens affects what is shown in the photo and that does not need to correspond to what we actually see while taking the shot. I do not see the compression a 600mm lens shows nor do I see the “increased” distances extreme wide-angle lenses display so well. If I take a shot of my dogs with my 14mm; the shot shows an almost cartoon-like version. The camera does only record what we "see" while using a very limited focal length. All the rest is a distortion of the reality we perceive.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">The lens defines the magnification of our subject which in turn defines the exact distance between the sensor and our subject when framing. If I want to take a portrait filling 2/3th of my sensor using a 135mm lens, I will have to stand at an exact distance from my subject to accomplish that. The compression of my lens will in turn define the perspective I can include within my shot. Even if there’s a building behind my subject, when using a long enough focal length I will not be able to include enough vanishing points because of compression while such is easy as pie when using a wide-angle lens.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Btw, I start to wonder if what you call perspective isn’t "angle of view" which depends upon where we point the lens yet, while it can affect the perspective of a shot, has little else to do with it.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">To add some shots showing perspective in photography. Both wide angle, both different perspective.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #232323"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"></span></span>[ATTACH]203203[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH]203204[/ATTACH]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="J-see, post: 541967, member: 31330"] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]Help lines for perspective are evidently heavily used in painting and drawing but it's not different for photography since they all have one thing in common: being a two-dimensional medium and thus suffering from "flatness". That's where perspective comes in to try and present an illusion of depth.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]That's why I used the cube; it’s a very simple shape to show what perspective is about. That perspective is also present in the before shared images, at least in the ones with a shorter focal length. There you could draw the lines until they intersect and define the vanishing points and horizon. Those of course do not necessarily need to be "in" the shot.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]So even if we get back to photography, the exact same perspective rules apply. We show depth by showing “imaginary” lines leading towards vanishing points. That’s the only way to create an illusion of depth in a two-dimensional medium.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]The camera evidently only records what is in front of the lens but the lens affects what is shown in the photo and that does not need to correspond to what we actually see while taking the shot. I do not see the compression a 600mm lens shows nor do I see the “increased” distances extreme wide-angle lenses display so well. If I take a shot of my dogs with my 14mm; the shot shows an almost cartoon-like version. The camera does only record what we "see" while using a very limited focal length. All the rest is a distortion of the reality we perceive.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]The lens defines the magnification of our subject which in turn defines the exact distance between the sensor and our subject when framing. If I want to take a portrait filling 2/3th of my sensor using a 135mm lens, I will have to stand at an exact distance from my subject to accomplish that. The compression of my lens will in turn define the perspective I can include within my shot. Even if there’s a building behind my subject, when using a long enough focal length I will not be able to include enough vanishing points because of compression while such is easy as pie when using a wide-angle lens.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana] [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#232323][FONT=Verdana]Btw, I start to wonder if what you call perspective isn’t "angle of view" which depends upon where we point the lens yet, while it can affect the perspective of a shot, has little else to do with it. To add some shots showing perspective in photography. Both wide angle, both different perspective. [/FONT][/COLOR][ATTACH=CONFIG]203203._xfImport[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]203204._xfImport[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Photography
Portrait
How your lens selection controls portrait outcome
Top