Our Lady of Perpetual Help

[ShaneS]

Thanks Binnur and Bill. Bill, thank you for taking the time to show me your perspective adjustment but I'm not so sure that I want to lose that much of the bottom arch as I think that it adds a sense of height to the overall composition. I will definitely take another look though before I print this one...

[William W]

. . .thank you for taking the time . . .

No Problem.

. . .I'm not so sure that I want to lose that much of the bottom arch as I think that it adds a sense of height to the overall composition. I will definitely take another look though before I print this one...

About losing the Church’s Length – it depends how you feel about ‘authenticity’ and other similar matters – it is not all that difficult to grow extra length to the Church at the bottom of the frame.
For example, the RH edge of the roof of this house required “extending”.

SOOC:


FINAL:


If you want any more help, just give a yell.

Once again - good shot.

WW

[bnnrcn]

Hi Bill, very good work, may I ask how you did it

No Problem.



About losing the Church’s Length – it depends how you feel about ‘authenticity’ and other similar matters – it is not all that difficult to grow extra length to the Church at the bottom of the frame.
For example, the RH edge of the roof of this house required “extending”.

SOOC:


FINAL:


If you want any more help, just give a yell.

Once again - good shot.

WW

[William W]

. . .may I ask how you did it

Answering as to what pertains to this thread:

The straightening was done on Photoshop using similar to as how I previously advised above.

Straightening I do often, because I am constantly make Architectural Images (façades mainly) using a moderately wide angle lens whilst standing at street level - and inevitably one has to contend with the CONVERGENCE (often wrongly terms ‘Perspective Distortion’). That image was made with a Fuji x100s (23mm lens on APS-C)

I did a stint working with Architects and am quite capable at Technical Drawing, as a result I think that I ‘see’ quite easily what corrections are required in Photoshop and the Photoshop Correction’s Menu made adequate sense to me when I first opened it: so now with a few years practice I am very quick at straightening buildings and correcting Convergence.

Notwithstanding that fact, I learnt how to (limitedly) correct similar images when printing from a negative by placing the base board containing the paper at angle to the perpendicular; also we learnt how to cut and then montage large format negatives - mentioned only to inform that such manipulations are not the sole aegis of the digital medium, though digital makes it a hellava lot easier.

Anyone wanting to attempt these corrections just needs to take the time and record the results; doing so one will surely get a feel for what is happening and in time the technique will become second nature with practice, discipline and adequate (brain) focus to the task.

The addition/extension of the eaves and the trees at the RH side and the side edge of the roof was done with the CLONE TOOL adding small portions.

With the Shane’s image this could be done on a bigger scale, because the image is not diverse or detailed in the body of what requires extending: a big slab simply need be extended.

*

What does not pertain to this thread – and we don’t wish to deviate from the main reason for the thread, so briefly:

The removal of the excess material (power lines; street signs . . .etc.) were done mainly with: CLONING; DODGING and BURNING, paying particular attention tho the direction of the light and the shadows which would have been cast and which had to be removed when items were removed. These techniques were also used to repair any damage done when removing excess material (for example repairing the window at street level behind the street sign).

I, having been used for forensic investigation of images, have reasonable experience in knowing what to look for in a manipulated image: so the reciprocal is also true - I am also skilled at making those changes. It is akin to a puzzle for me and I enjoy the practice as well as enjoying collecting the technical images of many different Houses, Churches and just Buildings, generally, but without all the distracting visual elements around them, which I usually remove if I really like the building to add to my collection.

WW

[Otavio]

Very nice image, Shane. You managed to controle de exposure quite well, under difficult conditions! I just wonder how this shot would look like under a 12:00 sun (mode evenly diffuse light). Maybe that is an idea for your next time there.

Well done!

[ShaneS]

Thank you Otavio. It's never a bad thing to have a 'good' excuse, er, reason for me to revisit Arizona and I think there are a lot of lighting angles on this church that would be really fun to explore. I can imagine that a raging orange and red dessert sunset with great, well positioned clouds, would make a stunning image. Timing is everything