Camera distortion?
 

The particular camera distortion that happens when a body part is coming towards you.... is there a name for this? In drawing it is 'foreshortening.

Is there a particular setting that helps with this? I have read many times to do portraits on 55 mm - 80 mm. My camera has only a 18-55 mm lens so far- so I feel fairly confident I have to zoom it all the way out to have the proper reading, but for this type of distortion is there something that will help - or is it just a matter of posing?

I have posted some examples of what I am talking about. Perhaps just backing farther away? The hands/feet are just unnaturally huge with the way I took the photos.

Chris Saper! You mentioned to me once that I was getting a distortion and you'd try to get back to me to explain - if you are out there perhaps you can help with this!

Now this one isn't as bad - but it coud be only because the hand is partially covered with the apple.

The answer is to paint from life, but when I cannot.....?

Get yourself a much longer zoom lens (80-200) and stand at least 12 feet back from the model. 15 to 20 feet would be even better.

The problem is that you are to close to the object. If you could back off a little you would get less distortions.

You should use the 55 setting.

Allan

Kim,

Taking a short break from packing.

The discussions regarding the optimum focal length of a lens setting for portrait work was geared to the focal length of the lenses of the SLR film cameras. My old Mamiya medium format film camera had a fixed portrait lens which was 80 mm.

When we talk about this in relation to our digital camera we have to make an adjustment. If you will go to this link for your Canon digital rebel you will see listed a little ways down under lenses: 1.6 x field of view crop (my Nikon multiplier is 1.5). That means that for the sake of this discussion, the 18mm on the low end of your lens becomes a 28.8. And the 55mm at the top end becomes 88mm.

This would be true of all your old lenses as well. My old 200mm lens is now a 300mm lens on my new digital camera! This digital stuff pushes us into a different bit of nomenclature, and it will take a while to catch hold. If the 80mm lens on a film camera was optimum for portraiture, then 53+- is that same number in digital format for your camera.

HI Kimberly,

Yes, yes, they are all correct! Until you get your new lens :) there are a couple of things you might try.

When you photograph your subject, get at least one image with , for example the hands, that shows the hands on roughly the same picture plane as the body. With that information you can make relative measurements about the size of the hands ( in this example) compared to the size of the head. Then you would just make an adjustment in that measurement when you paint the hands. This adjustment can be a good approximator but I think it's always best to be WAY back and zoom in.

The other thing you might play with if you have Photoshop skill, is to try using the spherize function. It's located under Filter - Distort- Spherize. I haven't personally used it , just know that it's there. I have Photoshop CS so I am not sure whether other versions offer Spherize.

Good luck, I just LOVE that first image!

Allan, Marvin, Mike & Chris -

Thank you all - I truly appreciate the help!

So, it sounds as if my lens if good for portraits, but not whole body shots or ones with parts coming towards me. Going to order another lens asap!

This is really a lot of new things to learn with a new camera (and my small amount of patience) - but you all are making this much easier and faster than it would be otherwise. Seriously, I feel like I owe you all dinner.

Chris - when I have my imaginary discussions with you forum people I like to talk to your little photos - now you changed yours and it is too small !

Think like an Egyptian
 

Kimberly,

In another life I did buckets of fashion illustrations. I had to learn to do easily readable figures that would withstand the ravages of newspaper reproduction. Chris suggested keeping a hand on the same plane as the figure for measurement, and until you get another lens, that would be a good rule for the rest of the body parts. Think almost in silhouette, or like an Egyptian. Often poses that look good in a photo do not translate well into painting. If you are doing seated figures for example it is always better to turn the knees away from the camera, unless you are at a very high angle, like Sargent's Mrs. Hammersly.

Arrgh! Thanks a lot, Sharon.

Now I'm going to have a stupid Bangles song playing incessantly in my poor overloaded brain all day while I paint!

Oh whey oh whey, oh whey oh oh..
Walk like an Egyptian.

Aargh, thanks a lot Cindy, now I am going to have it in my brain all day too!

New lens?
 

Hi Kim,

I am searching the forum because I'm having the same problem you had back in 2004 when this thread was started. Problem with distortion. I have the Nikon D70S.

From looking at your recent beautiful work, you have obviously solved the problem of distortion, though maybe you are adjusting things by 'eye' with all your experience. I'm wondering, did you ever find a lens that solved your problem? Basically, I'm looking for the lens with the least amount of distortion. (Aren't we all?) I recently took some photos of a model, her shoulder was turned towards me, and just that small difference in her shoulder being closer to me than her head . . . well, it made her shoulder and that arm look much bigger than they really are.

Any info you can share will be much appreciated! Thank you,

Joan

Joan,

I still here and there find I have to draw/paint something smaller than how it appears in the reference for exactly this reason - but less often than I used to.

I dont know about a particular lens, but the answer is basically to get farther away from the subject. I do have a Rebel now with a second lens that goes up to 200, but I seldom use it. When I do a shoot I take photos from where I think I want to, then I get closer and snap the same ones, and I also get much farther back and snap the same ones. The ones from farther back will not show the distortion and I can crop them on the computer.

I hope this helps!

Thank you
 

Hi Kim,

Thanks for your help. I do understand that it's best to get farther back to avoid that 'fisheye' type distortion that I get some of. Problem is that my little 'studio', where the walls are painted the perfect color!, is just not big enough to get far enough back to do this properly. Darn. I was hoping there was a magical lens out there. Well, not magical, but close. I guess I'll be moving my models into the living room. I do have a huge foamcore board that I painted the same color as my studio and a bunch of background clothes that I can drape for a background.

I did actually do a little experimenting in my living room with a model and found some of the same problem though. When I take photos the heads look small and the bodies look large. I've been staring at people in grocery stores, at the movie theater, and indeed, some people do have little pin heads. I paint from life once a week and those models look just fine, but they're usually sitting. Now I'm trying to do some standing models. Maybe this is one reason they look like pinheads. This is another reason to paint from life, but as you know, that can't always be done.

Thanks again for your help. I enjoy seeing your beautiful artwork on the forum!

Joan