>I just figured you always showed a full frame image Well, that's not completely true ... though most of my shot's are indeed generally framed in camera. The last big example I submitted to the gallery was the "Tea Shop" photo (of the Orangery at Kew) where I used the same technique as in this one: conciously planning the crop at the base at the time I took the photo. Thinks: do you remember when APS came out and people were saying how clever it was that you could take panoramic prints with it ... without realising that cropping has al;ways been a possiblity. >Plus of course, I wanted to inspire some chat... HAHAHAHA You're remebering the old days when anyone gave a damn. I bet you could even say sommat controversial about copyright and it would pass without menetion today ... [Thinks: at least the EU threw out the bill to allow Software Patents: yet another scourge of freedom ...] > I shot a whole house full of architectural photos with my film EOS and >a 20-35mm lens. I managed to keep all verticals straight using your >method. Interesting assignment and the clients loved it. Well, it's hardly my method: it's mentioned in Clerc's Manual of Photography!!!!! Apart from striving to keep the horizon level I concentrate these days on the height (vertically) at which I place the "Look-At-Point". The problem with perspective "correction" is it's not correct ... nor can it ever be without additional input. The shape of the trapezium (resulting from converging verticals) you end up with does not have a unique solution: it depends on the angle you tilted the camera up at. Unless you actually know the aspect ratio of some feature in the building (height v width of a door for instance) you cannot apply the "correct" degree of vertical stretch needed to get it right. Most "perspective corrected" images look a tad squat for this reason. >Maybe if you have something round it might have gone oval That's one of the things. The other is when you can see the end of a house - for instance - when the picture tells you you are looking square on at it ... Bob
