I know it's a camera angle, but how do I MEASURE it?
January 29, 2012 9:41 PM Subscribe
How do I measure the angle I hold my camera at to take a picture, so I can take other photos to composite together and have it not look terrible?
I've been trying to figure this out and apparently I lack the terminology. When I try to find 'measure camera angle' or 'camera tilt' I get things like "why not just hold a protractor to the camera', or things that appear to assume you're using a tripod to hold things up from the ground level (and then hold a protractor up to it), or assume what you want to do is have it perfectly level.
I want to take a photo of, say, a building, and have some idea of the angle I was holding the camera at so I can then get another picture of someone that looks like it was taken at about the same angle. I don't have a tripod that will go from ground level to my height and even if I did, I can't find any device that I could attach to it to measure that angle.
Any assistance would be helpful, even just the terminology for what I'm looking for.
(I went into a camera store and the fact I was looking for this little device instead of a $1600 DSLR with three lenses and an automatic device to do that for me resulted in me being treated like some kind of half-brained lump.)
I've been trying to figure this out and apparently I lack the terminology. When I try to find 'measure camera angle' or 'camera tilt' I get things like "why not just hold a protractor to the camera', or things that appear to assume you're using a tripod to hold things up from the ground level (and then hold a protractor up to it), or assume what you want to do is have it perfectly level.
I want to take a photo of, say, a building, and have some idea of the angle I was holding the camera at so I can then get another picture of someone that looks like it was taken at about the same angle. I don't have a tripod that will go from ground level to my height and even if I did, I can't find any device that I could attach to it to measure that angle.
Any assistance would be helpful, even just the terminology for what I'm looking for.
(I went into a camera store and the fact I was looking for this little device instead of a $1600 DSLR with three lenses and an automatic device to do that for me resulted in me being treated like some kind of half-brained lump.)
"Perfectly" level? Big ask. Apparently you do not have a camera that does this for you, but if it is important to you, that would be the most effective way of solving the problem. Otherwise you are going to have to carry a level around with you, or at least with your camera.
The other solution is to learn to use the levels provided for you by nature and the construction industry in the features and characteristics of the scenes you are photographing. The ability of digitals to show previous images is a big help here.
On review, I am not sure what you are trying to do here. This is normally an issue for panoramas, where multiple images are joined to create a wide angle image, or for landscapes where the horizon (obviously) should be level. However, you speak of 'another picture of someone ... taken at the same angle' - are you overlaying one image on the other?
Have you looked to see if what you want can be done in post-processing?
posted by GeeEmm at 10:18 PM on January 29, 2012
The other solution is to learn to use the levels provided for you by nature and the construction industry in the features and characteristics of the scenes you are photographing. The ability of digitals to show previous images is a big help here.
On review, I am not sure what you are trying to do here. This is normally an issue for panoramas, where multiple images are joined to create a wide angle image, or for landscapes where the horizon (obviously) should be level. However, you speak of 'another picture of someone ... taken at the same angle' - are you overlaying one image on the other?
Have you looked to see if what you want can be done in post-processing?
posted by GeeEmm at 10:18 PM on January 29, 2012
I wonder if there's an app for that. Seriously, the iPhone certainly has gadgetry for judging orientation wrt gravity. Of course, you either have to use the phone's camera or strap the phone to the camera somehow.
posted by bz at 10:22 PM on January 29, 2012
posted by bz at 10:22 PM on January 29, 2012
Response by poster: GeeEmm: looking for a way to go "ok, so this was pointed at 45 degrees upwards, so when I take the other picture I need to have it at a 45 degree angle so they look similar enough when I composite together. except I don't know the angle so I need a way to figure out the angle.
Squeak: yes, that, indeed!
posted by mephron at 10:28 PM on January 29, 2012
Squeak: yes, that, indeed!
posted by mephron at 10:28 PM on January 29, 2012
Mephron, I simply look at what is in the top left hand corner (or bottom if that is better) of the viewfinder, and then move the camera so that is then in the top right corner (or bottom as appropriate), and repeat as many times as necessary...
Inclinometer would be more precise, tripod (with levelling bubble) and swivel head best though.
Good luck.
posted by GeeEmm at 10:43 PM on January 29, 2012
Inclinometer would be more precise, tripod (with levelling bubble) and swivel head best though.
Good luck.
posted by GeeEmm at 10:43 PM on January 29, 2012
Response by poster: Let me try to make it simpler:
1) take photo of building
2) take photo of person
3) composite together in photoshop so it looks like the person is leaning against the building
If you can't get a reasonably similar angle of shooting, it's going to look ridiculously fake and the illusion is going to fall apart.
That's what I'm trying to do.
posted by mephron at 1:23 AM on January 30, 2012
1) take photo of building
2) take photo of person
3) composite together in photoshop so it looks like the person is leaning against the building
If you can't get a reasonably similar angle of shooting, it's going to look ridiculously fake and the illusion is going to fall apart.
That's what I'm trying to do.
posted by mephron at 1:23 AM on January 30, 2012
Best answer: Aaahhhh - I get it.
I understand the importance of getting some basics right, but isn't this really a question about what Photoshop (or your PP software of choice) can do with the two images? I think this would be quicker, easier, and more reliable than trying to take two compatible photos, the power of this sofware is such that the manipulation possibilities are truly amazing (to me anyway). I would never try what you are attempting, I would go the PP route (assuming that the image of the person is roughly ok). After all, what you are proposing is exactly what the perjorative 'photoshopped' means lol.
My (final) suggestion is to ask this question on a photo forum (DPreview's retouching forum for example), where people with more experience/skill on the software than I have would be happy to give you suggestions on what is possible/how to do it. Even if you proceed with your method, this would give you a fallback for finetuning the merge.
Hope that helps, and good luck with it!
posted by GeeEmm at 3:35 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
I understand the importance of getting some basics right, but isn't this really a question about what Photoshop (or your PP software of choice) can do with the two images? I think this would be quicker, easier, and more reliable than trying to take two compatible photos, the power of this sofware is such that the manipulation possibilities are truly amazing (to me anyway). I would never try what you are attempting, I would go the PP route (assuming that the image of the person is roughly ok). After all, what you are proposing is exactly what the perjorative 'photoshopped' means lol.
My (final) suggestion is to ask this question on a photo forum (DPreview's retouching forum for example), where people with more experience/skill on the software than I have would be happy to give you suggestions on what is possible/how to do it. Even if you proceed with your method, this would give you a fallback for finetuning the merge.
Hope that helps, and good luck with it!
posted by GeeEmm at 3:35 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
use a tripod?
posted by raw sugar at 6:04 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by raw sugar at 6:04 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
Yes, use a tripod. I've also seen camera sticks that just allow you to steady the camera on the ground, and conveniently at the same height. If you can't, make sure you hold the camera at eye level, and then match the horizon to some physical feature on the camera next to the viewfinder.
posted by gjc at 6:21 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by gjc at 6:21 AM on January 30, 2012 [1 favorite]
If your camera has a flash shoe, then you can use a handy bubble level that mounts there.
posted by Mercaptan at 7:25 AM on January 30, 2012
posted by Mercaptan at 7:25 AM on January 30, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by squeak at 9:56 PM on January 29, 2012