Establishing the cam / vanishing point height in this sort of thing is critical, imo, so that you can then do the ncessary scaling.
Do you know where this is for the BG pic?
pp
Edit
Looking at this on a small tablet, I'd say it's been taken by someone standing ..with cam level somewhere between the top and bottom of the fence surrounding the pitch.. say 5ft above grass level. This 5ft high horizon is going through the guy's right leg, somewhere below his knee ... so I suspect he' s had a spinach rich diet from birth ... big time
Taking it for what it is, a senior photo, it is great. Maybe for a magazine for Nike it may require more working but for what it is it is more than fine. A working senior photographer has 15 to 20 minutes to do a great many shots with variety but Joel Grimes has many hours and many other hands.
Thanks Sam, I'm done with it now and I do seem to be a bit calmer..
Thanks puzzledpaul, yes if the image is closely looked at he is a bit big, mater of fact if he were lying down he would fit in between three of the hash marks that are on the field as he truly is about 5'7'' but this image is not intended to be real it is strictly fantasy land. I have heard the term vanishing point but I honestly don't know what it is or how to apply it. I will have to give it a read or maybe there is a short version that you would share here or a long version if you like
Hackbone, yeah Joel Grimes. I saw on Creative live a workshop he did and at the end he went through some of his photoshop techniques for doing composites. He seems like a great guy and I think he is a fantastic photographer and instructor. I have been studying on youtube the work of Glyn Dewis, another fantastic photographer and retoucher. He seems to be a bit more free with sharing his knowledge. Anyway thanks for the look and feedback.
J - I assumed that you were going for a particular 'look / feel' to the shot - which you're achieved to a considerable degree. I had a quick look at JG's site and agree with his comments re creativity over technicals - but from the quick shufties I had he gets the technicals correct too.
Vanishing Points - check out perspective drawing basics too.
Imagine you're taking one of the standard clichéd shots - standing between a pair of straight railway lines on level ground. Cam lens is approx 5ft above the rails. The rails will appear to touch on the horizon - which we'll assume to be uncluttered with buildings etc and is a straight, horizontal line going across the frame.
This 'horizon' line also becomes a '5ft high' line ... for any object placed between the cam and the horizon.
So, if you imagine placing another person anywhere in frame, who's also standing between the tracks - or on the level ground to either side - then this 5ft high 'horizon line' should also go through their head / eye level ... because people are (approx) the same height.
If you have them standing between the tracks and scale the comped person such that the horizon line passes through their knee, that makes their lower leg (foot to knee) height 5 ft
I think its a great shot. There are few things that stand out to me that have probably already been mentioned so sorry if its a repeat.
The two images look to be shot at two different heights
The scale of the boy looks off. Hes too big compared to location and angle of the background
The sky to me is a little too much for the image. Was it added later because the lighting on the roof of all the structures dont match what would be expected from a cloudy day.
Watch the halo effect around the buildings when doing HDR
All in all though I think the kid would love it and the image is sharp. I really want to roll this type of stuff into my senior portraits but havent had the time to do it yet.
Thanks puzzledpaul, that all makes sense and in a way I suppose naturally I gave some thought to his size as compared to the BG and also how large he was to be in the frame BG excluded. Normally I think he would have filled the frame a bit more but that would have made him appear here even larger and more ungodly . I did do some measuring. The shot of the field was taken on my tripod with the legs retracted and that would have made the camera height around 2.5 ft. BG @~35mm full frame camera and runner @ ~275mm crop frame and I was crouching. So I guess that puts the vanishing point at around 3 or so feet. Anyway, I do see that I need to be more mindful of perspective in future.Thanks
Thanks Dooginfif20, Yes the clouds were an add on. The halo effect around the buildings is due to a somewhat poor masking job while placing the clouds.
Well, with the info now given - cam @ 2.5ft and subject @ 5ft 7in - that puts the 'horizon' line just below half his height.
I agree that a crop would greatly improve the image, btw - although it wouldn't obscure the issues I've raised, because - to my eyes - there are too many obvious perspective and scaling guides in the pic.
Thanks Bryce. I think I will leave it as it is and do better with the next one. I know the perspective is off but the image as it is works well enough for me. I think if I did make adjustments to it I would be more inclined to stretch the background to scale it rather than crop it. I still have the PSD file so that would be fairly easy to do.
.... I know the perspective is off but the image as it is works well enough for me. I think if I did make adjustments to it I would be more inclined to stretch the background to scale it rather than crop it. I still have the PSD file so that would be fairly easy to do.
I'd disagree about the 'perspective' being off - from the info you've given, you've done a good job of tying to match povs used - it's the scaling of of the guy - compared with the background, that's the main issue.
Scaling the BG to match the subject is a good idea ... have you also considered sliighly blurring it too?
Thanks PP, I guess I used the term perspective where I should have used the term scaling. But still I think I loose to much of the background if I scale it correctly. I can overlook the scaling on this image but for the next one I will surely be more conscious. Its not that I don't appreciate what you are saying, I do, I learned something valuable. As far as blurring goes and I think you are referring to blurring the background I think that would make him appear sharper and cause him to stand out more as a cutout figure. I read a tutorial by Tom Di Maggio on an image he created named Samuri Girl and in the tut he used the tilt shift filter to align the average depth of field of the subject with the background. I might try out the method on my next project
Comments
Sam
Do you know where this is for the BG pic?
pp
Edit
Looking at this on a small tablet, I'd say it's been taken by someone standing ..with cam level somewhere between the top and bottom of the fence surrounding the pitch.. say 5ft above grass level. This 5ft high horizon is going through the guy's right leg, somewhere below his knee ... so I suspect he' s had a spinach rich diet from birth ... big time
Flickr
www.cameraone.biz
Thanks puzzledpaul, yes if the image is closely looked at he is a bit big, mater of fact if he were lying down he would fit in between three of the hash marks that are on the field as he truly is about 5'7'' but this image is not intended to be real it is strictly fantasy land. I have heard the term vanishing point but I honestly don't know what it is or how to apply it. I will have to give it a read or maybe there is a short version that you would share here or a long version if you like
Hackbone, yeah Joel Grimes. I saw on Creative live a workshop he did and at the end he went through some of his photoshop techniques for doing composites. He seems like a great guy and I think he is a fantastic photographer and instructor. I have been studying on youtube the work of Glyn Dewis, another fantastic photographer and retoucher. He seems to be a bit more free with sharing his knowledge. Anyway thanks for the look and feedback.
Vanishing Points - check out perspective drawing basics too.
Imagine you're taking one of the standard clichéd shots - standing between a pair of straight railway lines on level ground. Cam lens is approx 5ft above the rails. The rails will appear to touch on the horizon - which we'll assume to be uncluttered with buildings etc and is a straight, horizontal line going across the frame.
This 'horizon' line also becomes a '5ft high' line ... for any object placed between the cam and the horizon.
So, if you imagine placing another person anywhere in frame, who's also standing between the tracks - or on the level ground to either side - then this 5ft high 'horizon line' should also go through their head / eye level ... because people are (approx) the same height.
If you have them standing between the tracks and scale the comped person such that the horizon line passes through their knee, that makes their lower leg (foot to knee) height 5 ft
hth
pp
Flickr
The two images look to be shot at two different heights
The scale of the boy looks off. Hes too big compared to location and angle of the background
The sky to me is a little too much for the image. Was it added later because the lighting on the roof of all the structures dont match what would be expected from a cloudy day.
Watch the halo effect around the buildings when doing HDR
All in all though I think the kid would love it and the image is sharp. I really want to roll this type of stuff into my senior portraits but havent had the time to do it yet.
If you are worried about the perspective issue, I think a tighter crop takes care of it, at least in my eyes.
I agree that a crop would greatly improve the image, btw - although it wouldn't obscure the issues I've raised, because - to my eyes - there are too many obvious perspective and scaling guides in the pic.
pp
Flickr
Thanks M38A1, Mathcbox
I'd disagree about the 'perspective' being off - from the info you've given, you've done a good job of tying to match povs used - it's the scaling of of the guy - compared with the background, that's the main issue.
Scaling the BG to match the subject is a good idea ... have you also considered sliighly blurring it too?
pp
Flickr