Whappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1560 posts, RR: 2 Posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1992 times:
Such as photos with too many lines or verticals? I've had this one photo, that I've done everything I possibly know how to do in photoshop to get it "level" and no matter what I do, from leveling by eye, to using the Measurement tool, to just leaving it normal, gets it a "level" rejection. I'm starting to think there is no possible way to get it level.
After its 8th level rejection, this is what I have come up with now: rotated 2.99 CCW. It appears level, but I got a rejection at 3.0 CCW on this photo before. Also, I'd use the "PreScreen" thread, but after posting this image twice in the old one and having people say LOOKS GREAT! and getting the rejections, I tossed it in as part of the question posed above...
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, RR: 8 Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1989 times:
A touch of CCW I'd say - the hangar on the right is leaning slightly in that direction (to be expected due to lens distortion) but the hangar just to the right of the tail also seems to lean in the same direction. I think if you got both vertical it'd be level, or if anything have the right-hand one lean slightly to the right and the left-hand one slightly to the left by an equal degree.
Whappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1560 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1983 times:
I'm 99% sure the hanger in the background isn't level to the same ground I am on. Its near a lake and is a good distance away, between where I am standing is a grass runway, and a marshy swamp land that the other hanger is built over. Like I said, I've for sure had a 3.0CCW photo rejected for level...
Quick edit: I gave it up to 3.3 and it looks good, I think I'll requeue it, but the original point of this thread was a more general question: Is it impossible to get some photos to look level? We always use arbitrary verticals that may or may not be vertical in person to the plane of ground we are standing on.
Photopilot From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, RR: 20 Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1978 times:
Ok, have a look at this. When an image gets rejected so many times for "level" it's time to go into the bag of tricks and think differently.
I rotated this slightly CCW to bring the verticals into line. But it still looked somewhat off. So then I went and used the SKEW command to lower the left side of the image a bit further. The skew command allows you to adjust the horizontals without affecting the vertical axis. I'm not sure if the "rules" allow this, but visually it works. Then crop slightly to take out the white corners from the rotate.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, RR: 8 Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1949 times:
Quoting Whappeh (Reply 2): We always use arbitrary verticals that may or may not be vertical in person to the plane of ground we are standing on
Believe me, been through this argument many times in this forum and haven't manage to convince anyone. If the verticals are level, you can consider the image level (in A.net terms anyway).
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1560 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, 
From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
