I am a painter. I took a photo of a painting and noticed that the aspect ratio looked a little off.

[jwt99]

The aspect ratio looked slightly wider in the horizontal and shorter in the vertical aspect.  I turned the painting horizontal and took a photo and it looked correct but when I rotated it to upright in digital photo pro it returned to the slightly wider and shorter than reality aspect ratio.  Any help would be appreciated. I am using a EOS 40D camera.

[jwt99]

Waddizzle  My largest difficulty is in not having enough space in my studio to devote an area to a well squared system of photographing paintings but I am working on obtaining a larger area to paint.

I have the LR4.4, Illustrator and PSCS6 and Perfect Photo One  They are very helpful to archive and use image components to compose more narrative paintings.  But I have only been using them a few years and my knowledge of what is possible with them is sadly limited.  I am over 60 and just don't grasp new concepts as well as most people do.

I was amazed that the measuring and leveling that I do isn't adequate to keep angular distortion from being apparent.  

I will be more careful and use more points of reference to ensure the painting and camera are perpendicular and centered.

Your information has been hugely helpful.  

I will be watching for your posts and try to learn more about improving my photography skills.  

[jwt99]

TTMartin Thanks for your mention of my work and wife. My children and family are often subjects for my paintings.  I had a career in the health care industry until I had a brain aneurysm and stroke and status/post craniotomy/aneurysm repair I was not able to resume that career.  Painting and photography were hobbies that I have attempted to expand in retirement. I have much better painting skills than photography skills and that is a serious handicap.  Your willingness to assist in this problem was a real lifesaver.  I don't have much budget for camera equipment and when the Canon technician suggested this was a camera sensor issue I was very concerned that I would be using a much lower quality camera for awhile.

You were able to explain what was going on very clearly with a lot of valuable information as to how to minimize the problem in future painting submissions.

Thanks again,

James

[jwt99]

ebigs1  Thanks you for your very clear understanding of what was going wrong with my photographing  paintings.  I very much appreciate your help.  I will certainly work to make my camera and painting square and perpendicular.  I will do more measuring.  And I am learning more PS strategies to manage the whole process.

Thanks,

James

[ebiggs1]

James,

One last thought.  All the advice and suggestions, good or bad, are really not as important as knowing this, you have all you need to accomplish what you desire.  Your gear and PS will do the job.

Keep everything as square and perpendicular as you can and crop in PS.  Make sure you shoot with plenty of room around the outside of the painting to leave room for later cropping. Actually this is a good idea and standard practice in the professional photographic world.

Don't try to, or let people talk you into, make this more difficult that it is.

[Waddizzle]

"It is very difficult to put a painting on the floor or outside and not substantially change the lighting thereby dramatically altering the color and white balance of the image.  If I place the painting on the floor it is difficult not to have shadows on the painting especially if it is a large painting. "

White balance.  I had forgotten to mention white balance.  Do a little research on the web. No doubt, this is crucial for you.

For precise white balance and color control of the images, you will at least need a standard, neutral grey card for starters, so that you can document the light conditions when the shots are taken, so that you can use a custom white balance setting in post processing.  Place a grey card where the painting will be located, so that the card receives the same light as the painting would, and take a picture of it.  Custom white balance can be implemented in your camera, but I never bother with that, anymore.  Applying custom white balance in post is much easier, and far more flexible.

When you are editing photos, there are color calibration systems for computer monitors out there, which seem way too expensive IMHO.  Basically, if you're not using a sizeable color monitor that costs as much as a downpayment on an automobile, then you will get limited benefit from buying one of those color calibration systems.  I have no use for it. 

Monitor color calibration systems are most useful to people who may shoot similar stuff, but with different cameras and lenses, and wish to have highly repeatable results.  In films, this is one small part of the production designer's job.  Making sure that what will be shot today, will look exactly like what was shot yesterday, or will be shot tomorrow.

[ebiggs1]

James,

One last thought. redux!

I forgot to advise you to learn PS.  You have what you need.  You need to learn how to use what you have!

Paintings are made on the canvas and likewise photos are made in Photoshop.

[TTMartin]

---

ebiggs1 wrote: 

Paintings are made on the canvas and likewise photos are made in Photoshop.

---

Photos require post processing. Usually that can be as simple as DPP, or more commonly Lightroom.

If you need to manipulate your photos beyond what can be done in Lightroom, I would say you've left the realm of photography, and entered the realm of computer graphic arts. 

[Waddizzle]

---

TTMartin wrote:

If you need to manipulate your photos beyond what can be done in Lightroom, I would say you've left the realm of photography, and entered the realm of computer graphic arts. 

---

I agree, wholeheartedly.  Lightroom is the equivalent of a digital darkroom.

As I noted earlier, I do most of my work in Llightroom, over 99% of it.  I only use Photoshop to introduce some sort of special effect, or for simply removing smudges created by dust spots on the image sensor. 

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

James,

One last thought. redux!

I forgot to advise you to learn PS.  You have what you need.  You need to learn how to use what you have!

Paintings are made on the canvas and likewise photos are made in Photoshop.

---

James,

Ernie Biggs is to Photoshop as Ansel Adams was to the darkroom. (Adams was a perfectionist who spent countless hours dodging, burning, reprinting, trying different papers and chemicals, etc., etc., etc., never satisfied until he had it just right.) If I had a piece of software I wanted to promote, I could ask for nothing more than to have Ernie as an enthusiastic user.

That said ...

A large percentage, perhaps most, of the people who pay for Photoshop don't really need it. In his career as a photographer and graphic designer, Ernie probably did. But you probably don't. Photoshop is a marvelous (and expensive) program for serious graphic design and high-end photo manipulation, but that's not what you do. If you want to learn and use Photoshop, you may find it a highly rewarding exercise; but for the requirements you've shared with us, DPP, or a variety of other photo editors (including Lightroom), will do the job every bit as well.

[kvbarkley]

"The negative is the score, the print the symphony" Ansel Adams.

Photoshop Elements is dumbed down, but it has most of the stuff Photoshop has. I just wish it had a better levels interface.