|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 8,116
|
![]()
Took this with my Canon 20D and new Tokina 12-24 f4. Here is the original, showing the normal distortion you would get from an ultra wide-angle lens.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 8,116
|
![]()
Then I did some PP in Corel PhotoPaint X3 with this result. Which do you prefer?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,374
|
![]()
I prefer the corrected version. I also noticed a tiny bit of vignetting in top corners of the original.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
Very successful, PP, Walter.
As long as the edifice was not originally designed conically:!:, I'd also prefer the edited second version, as with Ladyhawk. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA USA
Posts: 8,116
|
![]()
Bahadir
No, it's not conical, but straight sided. Here's another angle. In this one I masked out the sky and replaced it with a cloudy sky that I thought matched the clouds reflected in the building that day. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Izmir, Turkey
Posts: 6,263
|
![]()
Oh, so sorry conveying you wrong message, Walter.
I did not intend to mean that I doubt if the the building was conical, but just wanted to emphasize my favour for your PP version. And for your following photo, I'd say, you've undoubly done the best thing that could ever happen to a glass building such as this.. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,451
|
![]()
I like the last one. ah to have a 12mm lens
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|