Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] distortion figures real vs photoshop
From: Johnny Deadman <lists@johnbrownlow.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:13:58 -0500

iI's easy to see barrel distortion in PS because you are comparing 
before/after with the same image.

Subjects with lots of straight lines at the edge of frame will clearly 
show barrel distortion in the 1-2% range.

Many people will find 4% unacceptable.




On Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 06:07  AM, Javier Perez wrote:

> Gee I'm full of questions today.
> Was wondering. Assuming you ar photographing a subject
> with lots of straight lines, at what point does
> optically induced distortion start to become apparant
> in terms of percentage. I'm asking because I've seen
> lots of wideangles with figures quoted in the 1 - 2%
> region and I can't detect any distortion, barrel or
> pincusion. On the other yhand if I add 1 percent
> distortion to an image in photoshop it's easy to tell.
> Is photoshop using optically faithful simulations of
> distortion or is it something else. One of the reasons
> I'm interested in knowing this is that I'de like to
> undistort some images taken with my slightly better
> than mediocre tokina 24-200 AT-X zoom which distorts
> at almost every focal length but PS won't really
> flatten them out properly. 

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html