Modern Industrial buildings

PGD

PGD

Messages
791
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
A few shots of mine from a recent Architectural shoot.

I work at the Architects which designed and built these buildings (that doesn't mean I like the architecture ;)) but I've paid them a visit regardless

I'd love to hear what you think to them or any means to which they could be improved upon. I'd like to do more of this sort of thing in the future so anything to help would be great :)

1.

Knowledge Transfer Centre by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr

2.

Knowledge Transfer Centre - Reception by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr

3.

KTC-Reception by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr

4.

KTC-External Elevation by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr

5.

NAMRC Building by PGDesigns.co.uk, on Flickr

I've taken many many more shots of both the buildings, these are a 'best of' :)

Lets hear what you think to them
 
A lot of distortion going on there and the light is a bit harsh in places but the quality of the images are very good.
 
the glare above the door on the 2nd one has adversely impacted upon the rhs of the shot, and the glare on the final one doesn't add to the image. I usually like sun flare but I don't think it works in these shots. I like the interior shots composition-wise and the blue sky stands out very well. All in all a fine set of images :)
 
PGD said:
Distortion?
Click to expand...

#1 and #4 have clear and visible distortion to the buildings, you may like that and if you do that's fine but it isn't right.
 
I don't mind the distortion, I was replying to your 'question' to Gramps. I take it my first reply wasn't good enough for you?
 
Hmm yeah, there's something odd about the perspective in the first one, I would have also took a step to the right so the lampost didn't cross the edge of the building. Also, shame about the nose of the BMW 5 series in no. 5.

Interiors are nice :)
 
Nice shots. and good view points.

Architectural distortion comes from the viewpoint and is unavoidable, It has nothing to do with camera or lens.
Correcting the verticals is the normal requirement in architectural photography and drawings, and you have corrected this well.

The only thing you have had trouble with is with the highlight areas, especially the skys.
Fusing two exposures for both ends of the light range would help a great deal to solve this. It is very easy to do in technical shots like this..

I see you have used the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L to control the verticals. This is a very quick but expensive way to cope with the problem.
Modern software is just as quick and often more convenient, as is stitching two or more shots, which actual increases the number of pixels in the finished shot.

I had a viewpoint problem with this shot so took two portrait shots and three exposures and fused and stitched them to get this result. This also enabled to hold the edge detail of the lights illuminating the space.

corridor.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm struggling with the distortion comment too. They're pretty well corrected.

Although No. 2 is leaning over to the right a little. ;)
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
The only thing you have had trouble with is with the highlight areas, especially the skys.
Fusing two exposures for both ends of the light range would help a great deal to solve this. It is very easy to do in technical shots like this..
Click to expand...

Is this issue limited to the sky's in your view Terry?

Terrywoodenpic said:
I see you have used the Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L to control the verticals. This is a very quick but expensive way to cope with the problem.
Modern software is just as quick and often more convenient, as is stitching two or more shots, which actual increases the number of pixels in the finished shot.
Click to expand...
Using the TS-E is better though, isn't it?

For shots like this I'd have to either crop a huge amount off the bottom of a landscape picture, take many portrait shots or apply a huge amount of vertical correction. The TS-E lens made all this very quick and easy imo, with superb sharpness and colour straight out of the camera. The cost of the lens is a very valid point though
 
PGD said:
Is this issue limited to the sky's in your view Terry?


Using the TS-E is better though, isn't it?

For shots like this I'd have to either crop a huge amount off the bottom of a landscape picture, take many portrait shots or apply a huge amount of vertical correction. The TS-E lens made all this very quick and easy imo, with superb sharpness and colour straight out of the camera. The cost of the lens is a very valid point though
Click to expand...

I am not sure that a TS-E is better just different, It make life very easy. But within their adjustment range and for their focal length they are very good indeed. They take the place of some of the movements possible with a LF camera.

However the software solution works for any focal length or any number of stitched images, so has some serious advantages as well.

A specialist architectural photographer would do well to have both methods in his repertoire, or some jobs might pass him by.

You have a problem in all the highlight areas, but it is most obvious in the sky, and around the lights.

Some could be recovered in lightroom or photoshop if you are shooting Raw, and other light areas improved or balanced by burning in in Photoshop.
 
Using a shift lens is generally a better way than post production to get sharpness and remove converging verticals.

I've found though that it is almost impossible to get the camera perfectly level in both pitch and yaw, so even when you use a shift lens a bit of post production is still required to remove all the distortion. When the camera is more than about 0.3 degrees out of level it is normally quiet visible in image. The small spirit levels you get on tripod heads are nowhere near accurate enough to do this. I use the Nikon artificial horizon level and still struggle to get every thing better than 0.3 degrees.

The other issue is that you can't apply pincushion or barrel distortion corrections directly to the image. Before applying the correction you need to add a bit blank image to the bottom or top of of the photo depending on the shift direction, before applying the distortion correction. Then you can crop it away after you have performed the correction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top