Architectural Photography: The Most Important Element You Need to Know

[@rafaelmollica6048]

This is a truly gift for someone who wants to improve their skills. You're so kind to share this with us in such a easy/clear way to understand. Thank you so much!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

You’re very welcome.

[@omarshalaby1526]

I love the image treatment; I like the way of how correcting the perspective in the right way with no pushing and with no magic buttons, Thank you

[@kapurar]

Your lessons are outstanding. I am not a professional photographer but an amature. I am now starting from the beginning of your series and using your book to accompany my learning journey. Thank you!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you for your note. Much appreciated.

[@lukz6103]

This is truly one of the greatest video out there on yt. Great explanation, a lot of useful knowledge! Thank you.

[@plasmadlite8661]

I’m so glad to see someone dedicating a channel full of so many insights to architectural photography! Really love the approach, focusing on the art of the genre!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you. Gratified to know that you are finding these videos of value. Hope you’ll subscribe and check out the other topics.

[@Bishnu_Deb]

One of the best videos I've seen on architectural photography and editing. Thanks for sharing this video with us.

[@training7574]

Fascinating, especially with the comparison to old masters of painting. Thanks!

[@kolapyellow7631]

Need a keeeeen eye to see the change. I cant see it. U r a amazing. Great explanation. .

[@liam_dawson]

great explanation and examples !

[@jacktoddy9783]

Best to use a Shift Lens in preference to Photoshop as PS just distorts the image's pixels. The Shift Lnes is more: 'what you see is what you get', but very much detailed and sharper.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Yes, if you have a shift lens. But many students and amateur photographers can not afford one.

[@danthegeetarman]

Excellent

[@209lapko]

Live long and prosper 🖖Steven Brooke...Oh yes Thank you.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

You're very welcome.🖖

[@ohnoflicks]

Have finally found the architectural learning channel I have been looking for. Thank you. Looking to hone my skills. Your first video here is brilliant and I look forward to viewing them all.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Glad you have found the channel. Hope the videos help you with your work.

[@renoholland7090]

Excellent video. Thank you.

[@johngiannini697]

This video is worth my time that is for sure very well done and informative, thanks.

[@hanapen7681]

Thanks for the good explanation

[@thomaseriksson6256]

Thank you for the lecture

[@PaulDharmaratne]

Great advice Steven, I am about to undertake an assignment to photograph an iconic building for a calendar having never done it before it. Very helpful, thanks.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Glad this video is going to be helpful. Please check out the others for additional pointers. Good luck with your project.

[@ekpunjabi38]

Thank you for the lesson Sir ! Very well explained !

[@jojopilar5180]

What great info and delivered quickly to the point...loved it

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for the feedback, Jojo. Hope you'll check out the other videos.

[@remimomo]

I learned a lot from this, thank you!

[@JDM_000]

U r a truly amazing individual for doing this! Maximum respect!

[@richardpcrowe]

I have always had an aversion to vertical lines that are not parallel to the sides of the frame. However, I always made the horizontal lines parallel to the bottom of the frame first and then straightened the vertical lines. However, I really like the procedure that you delineate in this video...

[@HartponderJr]

First time viewer, you had me at Star Trek!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

LOL Welcome to our community. I hope you find the other videos helpful in your work.

[@toburton15]

Thank You, Sir

[@gregsimmons1709]

Fantastic!

[@louhautdavid6451]

Thanks for this tutorial really helpful to me, even though I don't practice architectural photography. I noticed that this principle could be applied to unexpected subjects, way far from such a specialized or academic domain. Not to the point of getting systematic, but more often than I could imagine. It's a powerful way to emphasize or solemnize the commonplace.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you for your note. When I photographed the first small, vernacular cottages built in Seaside, Florida (ground zero for the New Urbanism movement), it was this very exacting, formal approach that I used to intentionally ennoble these humble structures, giving them the same dignity and presence that I would give more architecturally significant projects. You may see some of them here: www.stevenbrooke.com/books-architecture/seaside-2/

[@louhautdavid6451]

@@stevenbrookephotography Thank you. I really love this work. I also appreciate Cape Light by Joel Meyerowitz

[@Lukavichiano]

What a fantastic video. So clear, concise and well explained. Thank you, Steven 🙏🏼

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks, Luke. Hope you’ll subscribe and check out the other videos.

[@liz2959]

This was incredibly helpful and just what I needed! Thank you!

[@burtonhersh9720]

Thank you Steven. I enjoy a great lesson.

[@michaelmaxwell5247]

In these videos, Stephen offers a Master Class in architectural photography. As one of America's most noted architectural photographers, he presents clear, concise instruction in composition and image design. His examples from the world's greatest painters of perspective and light, illustrate the how's, why's and how-to of excellent image creation. Follow these KZbin courses to master the art and science of professional architectural photography.

[@vegasrealestatephotography]

With current cameras Is there any difference in using a perspective control lens vs using a wider angle lens shooting straight verticals and then cropping in? I was going to purchase a 17mm canon tilt shift and use with the rf adapter but now I'm wondering if I get the rf 10-22 and crop in, is there any noticeable difference compositionally? Maybe just resolution if I'm shooting a tall building and have to crop out 50% to remove the excess foreground?

[@girlperson1]

I read his digital book. Excellent. Thank you for this great video.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for your note. Glad you enjoyed the book and video.

[@Fujik1966]

To vertically correct a building, it is necessary to stretch the transformation at the top by 1/2 and compress it at the bottom by 1/2. Good lecture for beginners.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

This really depends on the project, the lens you're using, and the distance from which you took the photograph. There is no set amount. After you make the vertical corrections you can decide if it needs readjustment to correction proportions. If there was a significant amount of vertical correction, you can refer back to the uncorrected image to determine how much you need to readjust the building to correct the overall proportion.

[@Fujik1966]

@@stevenbrookephotography I proceed from the possibility of minimal actions for transformation and its fixation. After all, every fixation of a change spoils the quality of the entire image. (Interpolation action) Thank you for your work

[@Fujik1966]

@@stevenbrookephotography I started making deep transformations back in 2001. In the photographer's opinion, the photos had a disgusting result. Either I left it as is or didn’t do it at all. I prefer tilt-shift lenses.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

As do I

[@Fujik1966]

@@stevenbrookephotography Sorry, I'll tell this only to you. A year ago I bought Fuji GFX100s and during the year I bought additional GF lenses, t/s Canons, and new adapters. All this cost me $12,000. My wife is jealous of my Fuji, although she doesn't know how much it costs. Now we are sitting in an apartment in different rooms. Please pat me on the head, it will make me feel better.

[@BenjaminLawSmith]

Hi Steven, bought your ebook and I am so pleased with it, thank you for sharing your extensive knowledge with the world! Just a couple of quick questions 1. You say the wider the lens the lower the viewpoint should be, but in a normal situation if you lower the viewpoint you often need to tilt the lens up further creating more extreme keystone effect and needing more correction in post? It is my understanding you should try to limit the correction as it is stretching the image and degrading the quality 2. With high rise buildings shot with a wide angle lens 100% verticals often look very unnatural, I often try to keep some minor convergence, I didn't see a note on real-world examples of visible convergence that need to be kept to some degree, what are your thoughts? This is all fairly new to me so apologies if the answer is more complicated than you would like!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

These are excellent questions, and probably should be the subject of a separate video. IMAGE DEGRADATION: Today’s cameras/lenses/sensors (even relatively inexpensive ones) are of such good quality that normal post-production corrections introduce little, if any, perceptible degradation of the image. EXTERIORS: If you don’t have the coverage, you can back up, knowing you may have to crop out extraneous foreground. My suggestion about lowering the camera with wide-angle lenses is to avoid, for example, foreground patterns (tiles, street grids, furniture, etc) that will have exaggerated distortion if your camera is up too high. If the foreground is just grass, then it’s not that critical. INTERIORS: Here is where lower camera height is particularly important with wide-angle lenses. Foreground elements show exaggerated distortion with wide-angles the higher you place your camera. My rule: go only as high as necessary to see all the elements clearly-and no higher. Also, the wider the lens, the more you should consider an axial composition (horizontals parallel to the picture plane) as that reduces foreground distortion considerably. CONVERGENCE: If you are shooting directly up at a high-rise, or a group of high-rises, and aiming for a one-point perspective, then convergence is obviously inescapable, and is part of that particular aesthetic. Otherwise, I am absolutist when it comes to properly aligned verticals. Slight convergence, to me, is like a misspelled word or playing out of tune. As architectural photographers, we are attempting to render the structures as accurately as possible, while still leaving room for artistic expression. If the building verticals are true, then the verticals in the photographic representation should be correspondingly true.

[@BenjaminLawSmith]

​@@stevenbrookephotography Ah that makes lots of sense, thank you for clarifying all those points on question 1! The DxO Viewpoint tutorial website has some interesting thoughts on 100% aligned verticals, it seems it is a subject where 20th century pictorial conventions and reality collide with each other. Perhaps also taste comes into it; I find correctly exposed windows on interior shots unnatural in a photo but you see this technique done a lot in real estate photography. I think when you come into a new photographic area you bring your own set of ideas about what looks good, which of course is mostly subjective. Thank you again for taking the time to reply, I eagerly await new videos on this channel!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

This is a great question and I want to go into it in more detail. Thanks for bringing it up. I am planning a video specifically about how to handle views out of windows. Briefly, in the days of film, the time available to see the view was very limited: early morning or the last bit of evening light. We died to get those shots and usually planned the whole day around them! Or, of course, you could pound artificial light in to balance, which usually ended up looking like a furniture ad. The great architects and designers consider the view as part of the interior. Thus, it's important to show it. (The off-handed and regrettably popular aesthetic of blown-out windows is, I believe, a flawed approach.) Now, with layered exposures, you can really adjust the density of the view to one that looks real: not painted on (which happens if window and room densities are equal) nor blown out. More to come.

[@dhnguyen68]

Nice piece of advice. How about Pisa tower. Do we need to adjust the vertical parallel to the frame ? I am just kidding !

[@SomebodyWoW70]

This was amazing!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you, Eric.

[@randyfox5317]

Great information and it was a nice touch to use something 'generational' like the Prime Directive as a key phrase to help us remember your points. Personally speaking, I had tried using the Perspective tool in PS with mixed results and your explanation showed me WHY I was getting less than satisfactory results. I will use your method from here on out. Thanks so much for this video.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Glad this was helpful. And you’re right: the perspective tool does not work well, especially if the verticals are off by differing degrees, which can easily happen if the camera is not perfectly level. Hope you’ll check out the other videos and that they, too, will be helpful to you.

[@haimygv]

You are a really good teacher!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you for your note. Glad you are enjoying the videos.

[@leonardgrant6876]

Well, you may not come back to a film and love the DSLR, however, there are too many people shooting DSLR a lot and making horrible pictures because they think in a way "more pictures I will take the higher the chance that some of those pictures will be good". At the and of the day work of those is mediocre at best because when you have 35mm film and 24 or 36 pictures you have to think before you hit the shutter and when you are forced to think magic will happen and progress is made.

[@pedroreimaophotography]

Hi Steven. First i would like to thank you for sharing your time, knowledge and experience. I saw your method in this video and have a doubt. What is the advantage of this method versus using an automated tool like the guided transformation of Camera Raw? With this method i have less crop in my images? Thank you so much, Steven.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

(Sorry. I just now saw this note.) Yes, Pedro, you can use the Camera Raw corrections if they are very minor. However, if the verticals are off to differing degrees, this will not work any more than the EDIT>TRANSFORM>PERSPECTIVE will work in Photoshop. Further, if the verticals are very misaligned, the auto function in Camera Raw comes up short. In the end, it is better to do this manipulation in Photoshop, one side at a time. And, following the alignment of the verticals, you are ready to reestablish the proportion if the vertical corrections "flatten out" the height of the building; and, then you are ready to correct any WARP once you've aligned the verticals. I prefer to keep this part of the workflow entirely in Photoshop.

[@apusista]

Very often, I would use the rear standard to distort the converging lines further. My Brooks professors would have freaked! Sometimes in Photoshop today I don't straighten the verticals. I feel one should not be in 'no man's land', neither straight nor dramatic. Either use converging lines for good effect, or straighten them. If you're shooting for a client, whether it's an Architect or an Art Director, it is seldom up to you. I personally feel one should learn the rules, (as explained here) and only after that, break them. And even then, not just for the sake of it. This applies to shooting anything. Even angling your camera for a fashion shot, learn the rules first and then let your gut force you to angle it... or don't.

[@TracyFenner]

many thanks🙌

[@laurenwalker1379]

very informative and helpful video, thank you steven

[@mohsina.a.2105]

Thank you sit, learnt a lot form your video. . . . . After composition as a whole.. . This was the next big thing i came to know about photography. . Your computer is slow,.. i think.

[@hobelgoblin4724]

thank you for sharing this information

[@stevenbrookephotography]

You're very welcome.

[@toresubas7778]

He is the best!

[@joassouza291]

Totally agree with you Steven.

[@studioavophotoandvideo333]

Great Video

[@fernanddurler4709]

Is it not cheaper to correct verticals in post - these gorgeous lenses are not affordable to most of us. I am seeking a good start up pro system and wandered if the Olympus cameras or Pentax are suitable. I am presuming that full frame is very important as its best for lower light? Any input would be most appreciated- here in the UK

[@stevenbrookephotography]

The Canon 5DS is no longer in production. You may find one, but they are definitely getting scarce. (Avoid a used one!) In a short time, it seems, only mirrorless cameras will be available. You might start checking these out. However, there are numerous caveats suggesting waiting until the 2nd generation versions of these cameras are available and some of the bugs are fixed. Focusing issues are reported. Read the reviews on B&H’s website. I am partial to Canon because of their excellent perspective control lenses. Admittedly, those lenses are not inexpensive. For those who contemplate photographing architecture as a profession or as part of their expanding business, I have always recommended starting with a 24mm Perspective Control lens. An alternative might be the 24-105 ZOOM: a single lens capable of shooting architecture, interiors, landscape and architectural details. The barrel distortion at the 24mm end is fixable in post-production. You are correct that it is less expensive to correct verticals in post-production. Of course, this means composing to accommodate for the loss of material when you do correct. A full-frame camera is preferred, not for low-light capability, but primarily because it provides the full coverage of any lens. For example, a 24mm lens with a 1.6 crop-factor sensor is equivalent to about a 38mm lens, not really convenient for architecture and especially too narrow for most interiors. I highly recommend a full-frame camera. If you are on a budget, I suggest finding a decent camera that you can afford and spending your money on a very good lens, as that is what is actually taking the photograph. A camera with anywhere around a 32MP sensor will do just fine.

[@youjohnsmith]

Your videos and e-book are being a tremendous help - many thanks! I have a question about lens choice: As an aspiring architectural photographer, I'm considering a 24mm tilt-shift lens or a wide angle (eg 14-24) zoom lens. Considering the drop of sharpness when the 24mm lens is shifted and that there are wide angle zoom lenses with excellent sharpness, photos produced by the tilt-shit lens will probably be softer than ones taken by the latter and then corrected in PS; is this correct? If yes, are there other features of the TS lenses that make them indispensable for architectural photographers?

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for your note. This is easily the most asked question that I receive. It probably deserves its own video. The necessity for a 24mm perspective-control lens is at least three-fold. First, most importantly, I believe it is always better to compose your final image in-camera, rather than having to imagine what an out-of-alignment view will look like after you download and correct the verticals and horizontals post-production. Second, a PC lens allows you to shift left or right (or up and down) to adjust and fine-tune your composition. If your view is axial, that orientation is maintained. The alternative is having to reposition your tripod, which changes the relationship of items in your view; or, pivoting the camera on the tripod, which, if the view is axial, throws it out of alignment, necessitating more corrections in photoshop. Third, a PC lens allows you to stitch together several images without introducing the misalignment that occurs when you pivot the camera on your tripod (unless you do so at the lens’s nodal point, which usually requires another piece of equipment. Re: sharpness. The sensors of today’s newest digital cameras have remarkable resolution. So, shifting a PC lens, even to its extremes, is unlikely to produce unusably soft images. And, any minor degradation that does occur can easily be corrected with either Photoshop’s sharpening tools or any of the newer AI-based sharpening plug-ins. Don’t forget, you can use “Live View” with an accessory viewer like the Hoodman, to be certain your images are, in fact, wire-sharp after shifting. I have the second version of the Canon 24mm TS lens. I have had not issues with either sharpness, contrast, or chromatic aberration.

[@Termidryna]

Thanks a lot.

[@MoonShow]

Hi Steven, great video 👍 but why don’t you just raise the tripod instead of shift the lens?

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for your question. There are several reasons that raising the tripod is not as effective or efficient as shifting the lens. (1) The further you are away from the building, the less effect there is in raising the tripod. (2) Raising the tripod, especially elongating the center post, makes the tripod that much more unstable. (3) Most importantly, all things considered, the wider the lens you use, the lower should be your eye height to reduce the foreground distortion that occurs when the eye height is too high.

[@lottaleijon6654]

Imagine a line from the sensor, through the lens and to the building. On a standard camera, that is horizontally placed, the line will be horizontal to. When you raise the tripod the line is still horizontal, you may gain up to a meter - buildings tend to be much higher. Then use the tilt shift, or the bellow, and move the lens. The line from the sensor, through the lens and to the building is now diagonal, reaching towards the roof. That means that shifting the lens a few centimeters will raise your perspective several meters. This is too what happens when you tilt your whole camera, but then the plane of the sensor and lens compared to the building will be tilted and there for the vertical lines too.

[@josepmartin753]

Hi Steven, congratulations for the quality of your content, just beginning to go from Real Estate to Interiors and Architecture skills... I just received my Canon 17mm tilt-shift. I was using leica lenses and with this canon i feel like a loss of quality even if that lense is a good one... i'm just trying to be sure my second hand has not a problem (since is a second hand). Cleaning the back glass of the lens (the small round one) i just discovered that the glass or the glass and its container has a small flexibility (move) when pressing to clean. Could you let me know if your has the same move and is normal or if yours is stricly static and probably i have something broken ? Thank you !

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Hi, Joseph. Thank you for your note. Yes, there is a slight movement (depression toward the center of the lens) when you clean the rear lens on the 17mm; but not very much at all. If you are concerned about the image quality, I suggest having a qualified camera tech properly test it on an optical bench.

[@josepmartin753]

@@stevenbrookephotography Thank you, i'll make new tests this week-end to be sure it was not kind of flare or similar... at least it is not broken in the back lense area :-) thank you. By other way i'm buying your book just now. Thank you again !!!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Josep, please be aware that flare with a lens this wide is always an issue.

[@ym6708]

Great video 👍🏼

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thank you. Hope you’ll check out the others and subscribe.

[@laurentk8105]

super interesting

[@jessrynmarielim6530]

Hi Steve, thank you for this! I’m wondering is there any other editing tools aside from Adobe Lightroom? I’m not keen on their subscription style? Way to much payables/month.😅 Thank you so much and hope to enroll in one of your classes, face to face!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for your note. First, if I am going to pay for a subscription, I would suggest using Adobe Photoshop rather than Lightroom for processing architectural photographs. That said, I regret that I do not have experience with any other processing programs. There are several stand-alone programs that handle RAW files that offer a one-time purchase agreement. You might research these on-line and carefully check the reviews. Currently, the only class I am teaching is the fall Architectural Photography and Composition class at the University of Miami. Hopefully, I will start conducting workshops again next year.

[@cnkaufmann]

I’ve long wondered how photographers got perfect vertical photos of skyscrapers in the 1920s. Thank you.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

The view cameras they used back then were big, unwieldy instruments. But it was necessary to properly align verticals in camera for film. I've seen photographs of Eugene Atget, the French photographer, hauling his clumsy view camera around the back streets of Paris. They worked hard to get it right!

[@timeslikethese6379]

Currently reviewing these older lessons: When you correct proportions of the building after correcting verticals, do you have some method for checking width to height ratios, or are you doing it 'by eye'? Many thanks, Michael

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for this important question, Michael. When correcting verticals, especially where the correction is significant, the height of the building definitely can get squashed. Generally, I re-correct by eye, using the original uncorrected version as a guide as well as my knowledge of the building's proportions. In my book, I show an example of this with the Standard Oil building in New York. (Logistics prohibited an in-camera shot with aligned verticals, even with my 17mm TS lens.) Remember, too, that if you know a significant correction will have to be made post-production, be sure to include enough material on both sides of your project, as you will lose some of this when you correct, and you don’t want the sides of your building to be too close to the edge of the frame.

[@timeslikethese6379]

@@stevenbrookephotography Never thanked you for your last response. I have a related question. I'm working on an image of a 12 story bldg. Shot off-axis at a roughly 45 degree angle to picture plane. This was my only possible shot. I computed width/height ratio from original and applied to image with corrected verticals. Of course, this makes the bldg. appear larger at top than at base, as the horizontal lines of bldg. converge. Is it ever acceptable to change the aspect ratio to minimize this visual anomaly? Other solutions? Are there shots that just don't work? Thanks, Michael

[@stevenbrookephotography]

You’re very welcome for the last note. I’d like to think that there are no impossible shots. Ok, there may be a few, but with digital technology, those are few/far between. In my video “Stretch it Out” I show how you can alter the width (or height, if need be) to reduce the wide-angle curse. You can do this by eye with as much success as actually calculating it out. The latter technique may be mathematically correct, but not look right. As for its ‘legitimacy’: you do whatever it takes to make your image the way you want it. What you describe is typical of a wide-angle shot of a tall building from which you could not back up sufficiently: the top starts to prow out. This is fixable. First, make certain your verticals at the sides are as perfectly aligned as possible. Bring a few guide lines in from the ruler for the sides of your building. Then, with the EDIT>TRANSFORM>WARP controls, gradually reduce that prowing effect. This is trial/error to be sure, but it can be done. Since this is a common distortion, I will make a video specifically showing how to handle this.

[@lisarutledge2404]

Hi Steven. Thanks so much for this really fantastic tuition. I have been trying many different ways to do this and this one really hits the nail on the head. I have a question if that's OK? After I have made the adjustments on the verticals and then go to adjust the horizontals, I find that latter adjustment pulls off the vertical corrections I just made.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Hi, Lisa, Thanks for your note. Here is the way to avoid having the verticals go out of alignment when you adjust the horizontals. (1) SELECT ALL > TRANSFORM > DISTORT Do this for the right vertical. (2) DESELECT (this is important to finalize the first correction) (3) SELECT ALL > TRANSFORM > DISTORT Do the left vertical. ***Remember: do each vertical separately as they may be out of alignment to different degrees. And you may have to go back and forth if the verticals are way out of alignment. This is not unusual to have to do. (4) DESELECT (5) SELECT ALL > TRANSFORM > DISTORT Now, when you correct the first horizontal, be certain that you pull the corner handle directly down or up, and that you don’t misalign the vertical when you do so. (6) DESELECT (7) SELECT ALL > TRANSFORM > DISTORT Correct the other horizontal if needed. ***The key to this admittedly tedious workflow is to DESELECT after aligning each individual side. Hope this helps.

[@lisarutledge2404]

@@stevenbrookephotography Steven. Thanks so much for your detailed reply. I really appreciate it. I will work on this today.

[@cooloox]

@@lisarutledge2404 I disagree with the advice given in this video. It offers no way of getting the height of the building correct (true to the original building proportions) after straightening the verticals. You can't just drag the height and hope for the best. If you have Lightroom you can use the auto (one-click fix) or manual tools to straighten a scene (and fix verticals) while proportionately increasing the height of the building (software uses mathematical formulae to correctly adjust the height proportionately' as you straighten it'). Photoshop has the same manual tools under Filter> Lens Correction and click on the Custom tab.

[@lisarutledge2404]

@@cooloox Thanks for this. I will try this too. Appreciated.

[@brett7406]

Is there a reason to use distort in PS main vs the geometry panel in Camera Raw? Just curious if this is just another way to do it or if there’s a benefit here?

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Hi,Brett. I use PS distort because I can adjust each side individually. (That’s also why I don’t use the adjust>perspective control; it adjusts both sides at once. ) This manipulation, along with the warp adjustment, is better made in PS.

[@hichamfilalizehri8500]

Thank you so much, ( in Arabic-chukran jazilan)

[@Dplaysitcool]

Tell me I'm being stupid. But having not used a shift lens, it appears the view can only be shifted up slightly. Why wouldn't you just use a tripod that can sit even higher than any shift lens could do........

[@zosozoso2]

Im using the 5D mkIV for interior and landscape work, do you think the 5Ds would be an upgrade? How good is the dynamic range on this camera?

[@stevenbrookephotography]

I upgraded to that very camera (5Ds) and am totally satisfied with its functionality and resolution. I think you'll see the difference right away. A note: it produces very large TIFF files, so plan for computer speed and sufficient storage.

[@MicheleUrukHai]

My 2 cents: Mkiv got an awesome sensor, recovery of shadows and highlight it's on another level.. 5ds and 5dsr they suffer from canon old sensors poor shadow recovery. If you need megapixel (big prints, big crops) go with 5ds or 5dsr. If you want canon best sensors stay with mkIV. By the way I have a 5dsr and I'm very happy

[@jeanjacquesfabien3976]

Really great, great video about this topic of Architecture Photography. It sets the basics and the advance knowledge. A minor comment. i have noticed on several videos of Mr Brooke that in some words, some letters miss. For instance, in the information box above, the "O" in Photgraphy is missing (architectural photography basics). In a couple of words published in several videos, there are missing letters. Would be great to check on this.

[@vishnudsign]

Thank u so much ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@yellowdogpaddler]

Could you not have achieved a architecturally correct image in-camera with a DSLR/SLR using a tilt shift lens rather than relying on post-processing with Photoshop? It seems to me the term "good architectural photography" should be reserved for creating the photograph in camera and not used to describe the end result by means of photo manipulation. The second point I'd like to raise is the correction of the height of the church. If you were level with the structure or used a tilt shift/perspective control lens would the structure not appear to be shorter? Since your view is looking up, hence the converging verticals- when you corrected the verticals to be parallel with the film plane then when your building would appear shorter.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

"Good architectural photography" is by no means reserved for only those with perspective-control lenses. Yes, of course, perspective-control lenses are the ideal tools for photographing architecture, and creating the best possible composition in-camera. However, these relatively expensive lenses are beyond the budget of most photographers like students, amateur photographers, and even professionals for whom architecture has not been their main income stream. For them, taking the best possible shot with their existing equipment, and correcting verticals etc post-production is the only way they can achieve architectural images with properly aligned verticals and correct proportions. In the end, all that matters is the actual veracity of the image, irrespective of how it was taken or what post-production manipulations were used.

[@schifferfoto8659]

Get off that high horse ;) Of course a tilt shift lens is the optimal choice, but technology progresses and the digitally corrected image (when done right and with good source material resoution) is almost impossible to distinguish from a genuine tilt shift shot. If the client wants to pay for it, I rent a tilt shift lens, but most clients won't for the above reason. Especially when a picture is used mainly online, there is no good reason to spend a lot of money on a fancy lens if you don't have some weird kind of fetish - no offense, just pointing out the obvious.

[@LeonKotze70]

London just isn't the same if you don't travel there with a chauffeur-driven Rolls Royce... People who travel to London by train or drive in a cheap car just don't have the same scenery as those going with a Rolls...

[@mitchellvaneijk1855]

@@schifferfoto8659 There is always a good reason. And that is it makes your life easier getting the photo with the correct perspective in camera. Instead of having to correct the perspective of multiple photos in post. Also you lose pixels while cropping after correcting in PS or LR. Trust me I shoot architecture and I have been correcting perspectives a lot.

[@schifferfoto8659]

@@mitchellvaneijk1855- getting a tilt shift lens is not everyone's answer to making one's life easier ;)

[@bachnghiem6920]

drones can make this process easier?

[@andrieslucian]

Thank you sir!!!!

[@stevenbrookephotography]

You’re very welcome, Lucian. Thanks for watching.

[@schifferfoto8659]

Good explanation, but very cumbersome procedure. Why don't you use an automated software like DxO ViewPoint, that allows you to set the vertical (and if desired horizontal) lines in one go?

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Thanks for your comment. And it’s a valid point. I’m aware of the automated approaches for alignment, layering, etc. I’m not at all a Luddite, but I don’t incorporate them into my videos and classes for several reasons. First, when I’ve used some of the automated plug-ins, I find I usually have to go back and tweak what the program didn’t accomplish to my satisfaction; so, in the end, it would have been easier for me to just do the entire procedure myself. Second, for vertical/horizontal alignment in particular, I haven’t found my suggested approach to be all that cumbersome. But more importantly, I eschew them for the following reason. Compared to film, digital photography is facile enough. And if you’ve worked with a view camera you know the level of concentration and involvement you need to succeed. With digital imagery, easy as it is to create the initial image, I still want my students to have a more ‘intimate’ relationship to their image, which reliance on push-a-button, automated procedures can easily obviate. I definitely want them to do the manipulations “by hand.” I actually want them to take more concentrated time to process their image. For professionals under deadlines, the shortcuts may certainly be helpful. However, I, too, am a working professional; yet, I look forward to being able to spend time developing my images slowly, manually. The time I spend restores, in some sense, the intimacy I admittedly lost when I retired my view cameras.

[@schifferfoto8659]

@@stevenbrookephotography, I see where you're coming from. For me the speedy workflow is a main argument to use specialized software for the correction (I did not mean a push-button solution. In DxO ViewPoint you set the (guide-) lines on the image and get the vertical and horizontal lines perfectly aligned.) I cannot imagine the Photoshop approach with the manual tinkering of the edges to be more precise. I do not believe that it disconnects me from the editing process too much as it is just one of many steps to transform one or several blunt RAW pictures into a pleasing end result. Streamlining my workflow is key to satisfying my clients within acceptable time limits.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

@@schifferfoto8659 I'll have another look at DxO VP. Thanks.

[@schifferfoto8659]

@@stevenbrookephotography, you definitely should. They're not paying me, but I would even suggest, you check out DxO Labs as well (best Noise Reduction module I have seen so far). It integrates seamlessly into the standard Lightroom/Photoshop Workflow. Just another tool in the box. :)

[@djcruse]

Came here to say the same thing DxO ViewPoint is an integral part of my architecture photography post processing. The most recent updates make it even more valuable!

[@rafibenatar2519]

Steven how about combine digital back with view camera together you get both world 😜👍🏻

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Some photographers do use that setup. You have to decide if the cost of the digital back is worthwhile and if the speed of operation of this type of system compared to a 35mm system works for you.

[@rafibenatar2519]

Well Hasselblad 907x works perfect with iPad Pro plus you have huge display vs 35 mm camera display and all the digital back control done via iPad Pro in live view 👍🏻

[@fatfro1]

I actually learned something

[@stevenbrookephotography]

Glad to hear that.

[@程子康]

就水平校正来说其实Lightroom有引导式功能 通过画图片上X和Y轴的直线能瞬间校正 然后我是倾向于通过移轴镜头直接拍摄的 因为通过修饰的图片会有画质损失的问题 更严重的是视距相场通常都不对 毕竟用人脑想象仰拍校正后的样子是不现实的 这就会造成中间的位置会有差别甚至图片的三维关系错乱 这是后期修饰无法弥补的

[@fiamekupa6423]

Remember the Prime Directive.

[@euphus57]

I will stick to view cameras.

[@stevenbrookephotography]

There is definitely something undeniably romantic about using a view camera.

[@euphus57]

@@stevenbrookephotography Yes, I enjoy using them with film and the obscure collodion dry plate tannin process (which was for architecture and landscape only because of the extended exposure times). Thank-you for your KZbin series. It is informative and helpful!

[@danthepainter8924]

1000+ Likes

[@stevenbrookephotography]

1000 thanks. Glad you enjoyed it.

[@johnscratchley3288]

Excellent info, thanks.