Discussion on: Image 1034 - "Full Moon Steps"

Discussion, revisions and constructive criticisms of Image 1034 - "Full Moon Steps"

Original - Bob Wallace (BobTrips)
full image

Camera	»
Original Date	2006-08-15 23:50:02
Focal Length	50mm
Aperture
ISO
Exposure Time
Flash
Tripod	No
[Full Exif]

Photographers Note:
Pulled this one out for a Thorn Tree post.  Thought I'd add it here as well.

These are the steps that used to be set up for the night of the full moon at the Taj Mahal.

On that night thousands of people would ascend the stairs to the main platform of the Taj and silently cross the area and walk down the stairs on the other side.

The next day the stairs would be disassembled and stored until the day before the next full moon.

This practice was halted several years ago due to terrorist worries.

Agra, India.  1982.

Adrian Warren (AdrianW)
Msg: #1

August 16th 2006
08:19:43

The thing I find most interesting here is the contrast between the ancient, but well built structure - and the higgledypiggledy modern temporary one. My only slight nit is that the Taj almost looks like it's diverging at the top right - did you skew it? If so, might be worth checking the verticals... If not, consider skewing it ;)

(StraightnoChaser)
Msg: #2

August 16th 2006
14:33:04

Thought the same bit of relative distortion between the straight left and the skewered frontal pillar. Reminds me of the contrast of bamboo scaffolding and hyper modern buildings under construction you still see in SE Asia.

Bob Wallace (BobTrips)
Msg: #3

August 16th 2006
15:53:16

You guys caught me out.

That was a late night sloppy job done just to get the shot up for the travel forum. I didn't pay enough attention to detail.

I'll work up a better version later. Thanks for (trying) to keep me honest. ;o)

Bob Wallace (BobTrips)
Msg: #4

August 17th 2006
15:14:17

This any better?

Revision: 1
Bob Wallace (BobTrips)

Adrian Warren (AdrianW)
Msg: #5

August 17th 2006
17:24:44

Yes and no. It looks sharper, which is cool. Still not sure about the geometry though...

Did you rotate it so that the vertical centreline was straight first? Then skew? How about you post the original uncropped/unskewed version, and then we have a go?

Bob Wallace (BobTrips)
Msg: #6

August 18th 2006
12:52:03

Here you go. Just trimmed and resized. Even left you some slide mount. ;o)

Revision: 2
Bob Wallace (BobTrips)

Adrian Warren (AdrianW)
Msg: #7

August 20th 2006
16:35:47

Slide mount, eh - excellent :)

OK - here's my revision, see what you think. I suspect that the top right corner may always appear to lean out a little due to perspective effects, but anyway.

Loaded into LensCorrection (grid ON), first Rotate 1.14°CCW based on the midline verticals, then pincushion +1, Vertical Perspective -20.

Revision: 3
Adrian Warren (AdrianW)

Bob Wallace (BobTrips)
Msg: #8

August 21st 2006
02:24:34

Looking at Rev 1 vs. Rev 3 I just don't see much difference in 'straightness'. A bit of difference in cropping and some difference in shadows/highlights.

What am I missing?

Adrian Warren (AdrianW)
Msg: #9

August 21st 2006
19:13:31

Maybe everything, maybe nothing, who knows. Try overlaying them in PS though, they're definitely quite different.

Number Users: 3
Number of Posts: 9

To Reply Join Jeber Photo Clubs - you will be required to join this club

Versions

Revision: 3
Adrian Warren (AdrianW)

Revision: 2
Bob Wallace (BobTrips)

Revision: 1
Bob Wallace (BobTrips)