Taking Reference Pictures
Author
So, I decided to take advantage of my Softimage License and do some models while I push my eternal strugle with collision detection to the back of my mind, and I was wondering:
What is the best way to take pictures for 3D reference planes?
Is there such a thing as an orthographic lense in the real world? are they expensive?
What is the best way to set up a perspective digital camera (I have a Powershot G2) in order to take pictures as close as what an ortographic picture would look like? is it even possible?
Is there any kind of way or any specific software to take the perspective out of a picture?
Do my questions make any sence? [smile]
There are lenses with moving parts that skew the image and try to correct for the "taper" effect you get when you point the camera up at a tall building. They are big, heavy and ludicrously expensive and nobody uses them.
"Removing perspective" completely is not possible to achieve, but using a long telephoto flattens the projection and the result looks more orthographic. Take the pixture from far away and zoom in, using a tripod and a remote control to keep the camera perfectly still.
If you're taking a picture of a building that you want to use as a texture, try to get the camera angle perfectly perpendicular to the wall you're interested in. This means no tilting up and down. The more megapixels you have the better, as you'll usually crop out a lot of the picture (the ground for example).
"Removing perspective" completely is not possible to achieve, but using a long telephoto flattens the projection and the result looks more orthographic. Take the pixture from far away and zoom in, using a tripod and a remote control to keep the camera perfectly still.
If you're taking a picture of a building that you want to use as a texture, try to get the camera angle perfectly perpendicular to the wall you're interested in. This means no tilting up and down. The more megapixels you have the better, as you'll usually crop out a lot of the picture (the ground for example).
Author
Thanks,
I was thinking more like taking pictures of people or figurines and props such as bottles, cans, lamps, chairs etc. rather than buildings, do telephoto lens would still work for that?
Thanks again.
I was thinking more like taking pictures of people or figurines and props such as bottles, cans, lamps, chairs etc. rather than buildings, do telephoto lens would still work for that?
Thanks again.
Yes, telephoto will always have less perspective distortion than a wide angle lens. That's why portraits are usually taken with a moderate telephoto lens, for example. (Wide angle makes your nose look big :) )
I'm not an artist nor a photographer but for a normal digital camera, one of our artists told me, you can get good result by using maximal optical (not digital) zoom and then take as much distance to fit the object. It is supposed to remove as much perspective as possible without funky lenses -- but I don't know any of this.
Greetz,
Illco
Greetz,
Illco
Author
Yes, there seems to be some tele options for my camera, or at least they talk about "maximum telephoto setting" on most of the pages I googled about it, getting the telephoto converter would cost me over $170, if I can avoid that, the better [smile], so I'll try RTFM, and doing some test shots.
Thanks.
Thanks.
there are several filters for photoshop for removing lense distortion. but like everyone has said so far, usually zooming in, stepping back, and using a tripod (and making sure you have enough light) will be enough, espically for references.
The only other thing i would suggest is taking twice to three times as many pictures as you think you might need of an object. And don't be afraid to take some close ups of areas which you might think may be hard to model later on. Getting the over-all form is important, but so are some of those tricky little details have give an object a sense of reality and presence. (Think bolts, seams, screws, moldings, lights, dents, scratches, dirt, imperfections.) Taking references is easy, and having too much information is rarely a bad thing.
The only other thing i would suggest is taking twice to three times as many pictures as you think you might need of an object. And don't be afraid to take some close ups of areas which you might think may be hard to model later on. Getting the over-all form is important, but so are some of those tricky little details have give an object a sense of reality and presence. (Think bolts, seams, screws, moldings, lights, dents, scratches, dirt, imperfections.) Taking references is easy, and having too much information is rarely a bad thing.
Author
Ok, I have a tripod and enought flash memory to get more than enought pictures taken [smile]
Quote:Original post by Illco
I'm not an artist nor a photographer but for a normal digital camera, one of our artists told me, you can get good result by using maximal optical (not digital) zoom and then take as much distance to fit the object. It is supposed to remove as much perspective as possible without funky lenses -- but I don't know any of this.
Greetz,
Illco
FYI, this is what "telephoto" means (using a long focal length). Zoom lenses are simply lenses that are adjustable between a wide angle and a telephoto... A tele-converter is an attachment that gives you even more focal length than the range of your zoom, basically magnifying the image by some amount (1.5x and 2x are common).
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement