Agreed… Granted, the effect done in post can be very close to the real thing but, only if you actually know what you’re doing in post! Clearly, this guy doesn’t!
@@harveymanfrantinsingin7373 Yeah, chances are the "real" tilt shift effect shots are done in post too. Tilt Shift lenses get used for different shots usually, not overhead shots. Canon has a page on what those lenses are used for. I think his biggest mistake in the edit is the blur being too strong/ not fading correctly
@@ferdinand3und4zig true story. If I recall, their biggest use is food photography. And yes.. the lack of smooth gradient blur makes it look super unnatural.
There's a confusion of tilt lens and shift lens. Tilt lens can tilt the focusing plane, for example to keep tilted objects in focus. Shift lens is doing what is said in the video, shifts perspective so that buildings can be vertical while horizon line is below the middle in shot. Only the tilted lens offers the "miniature" effect. But because such solutions are often combined in one lens they're called "tilt-shift".
@@melody3741I don't know why anyone would show and explain shift functionality of the lens when the effect you're trying to achieve exploits the tilt function only. It just adds to the confusion of some new users.
Whatever he's done it makes the focus area look like it's really small. I don't think you're supposed to have gradient here since the first real samples also didn't have it.
Or you can use your ordinary lens, detach it from body and hold it right in front of the matrix and _tilt_ for some angle. It's not a simple task but it can actually provide *accurate* miniature effect. Better done with tripod
Light leak is a pain and you'll lose a ton of contrast unless you drape something over the gap so no light gets in. Also, it'll screw up your focus and you won't be able to focus to infinity anymore. Great idea on paper, but not irl.
@@Swagger51 It looks horrendous in photoshop, as you can see here. You could spend like an hour per photo and make it looks right, but you could also just buy a lens, lol. You can get a tilt adapter and an old medium format lens (so that the image circle covers your sensor while tilting) for a couple hundred bucks, not $3,000, that's for crazy professional stuff
@@gavinjenkins899 Saying it looks horrendous is just a straight up lie dude. I literally do tilt shift as one of my main photography styles and they look completely fine. The only reason a photo would look bad is if they didn't apply the effect correctly.
@@sebastiangudino9377 My brother in Christ, he literally doesn't show you an easier way to do this at all. He literally says this is to save money and sure- But only if you have whatever drone he has. And then he describes adding the "blur" in a video program he doesn't name with steps he doesn't show. So cool @NicolasGrant shows us useless ass methods to get what we want. And cool that you want to B&M about a RU-vid comment, cuck.
This isn't really true, you can apply the same image distortion that any lens can produce in post. His usage of a blur has only replicated a tilt distortion though (modified depth of field,) he would need to warp the image to replicate the effect of a lens shift (modified perspective.)
@@forrestcarroll9350 except for the fact that he didn't properly give it a depth of field whatsoever. it's not actually blurred by distance, all he did was add a blur to the top and bottom of the photo. it doesn't look authentic at all
No need for a 3k lens which is obviously way too expensive for the vast majority. So the solution is to just use your 2000 or so dollar drone and primere pro which is a subscription based program and there you have your shot.
Totally not like you can do exactly the same by going on top of a building and adding blur in free software. I mean when you have expensive lenses elevation is still a problem
The Mavic Air 2s is like $800USD and their create software actually has this preset filter, so no editing at all of you couple that with their master shots mode. Still a reasonable option if you're going to use a drone anyways.
Not bad, unfortunately the tops of the bridge towers in the 1st example, are still blurred when they are not further away, So its missing the 3d blurring effect that a real shot would have, and to me is too noticeable. If you also have depth information or manually mask it, you can also add more realness in post that way too
And the gray roof building in the lower left should be sharper, the marina boats behind the bridge should be tack sharp (but can't be because the real lens cared about them being far away and that data can't be recovered)
Tilt shift lens is great for architecture shots. It more about correcting stuff from looking like they are tilting back and not so much for blur effects.
We've done it on the second year of photography and it was cool but our public high chool wasnt funded and ss shit so We didnt really get to play with it and get in engrained into our brains
Doesn't work for anything but the gentlest of tilts, since your lens' image circle is not designed to be big enough to cover the sensor while doing movements. You need a medium format lens to do anything significant and not have half your sensor black.
The tilt-shift effect can be imitated quite well in an editor like Photoshop. Until you put side by side photographs taken through a tilt-shift lens and edited in Photoshop
Yeah, just like a $10k TV is a stupid price to pay, but is cheap for a used car. Also, maybe because he can’t fund a 3k lease because he purchased the drone and MacB Pro. Expand your mind just a little bit and you’ll see so much more. Don’t stay so sheltered.
I accidentally learned how to do this whilst messing around in Photoshop during my photography course and honestly it came out great and cost me nothing
Good comparison and explanation. It was good and concise, and presented a simple solution accordingly. I fully understand and I am also preparing with a drone.👍
Old vintage 4x5 accordion cameras have this as a built in feature. But this can also be used to keep two different objects at different distances IN focus, while having a large amount of separation from the background.
You can also do that sort-of-in-post nowadays as a lot of modern cameras have built in focus stacking/bracketing with normal lenses. It wouldn't get the diagonal line of grass in focus on the ground like with a tilt lens, but if the things in your shot are suspended in air (like most portraits where this is used, e.g. couples shoots, you can't see the ground between them), it works to bracket/stack two shots.
You can do actual optical tilt shift for like $100-200. The Canon $3000 one is like saying "Cars are expensive, look at this Bugatti Veyron's price tag! That's why I ride a bike" Get a lensbaby if you want to just do toy shots like this. Or an old soviet medium format Pentacon 6 lens (like $50) and a tilt converter mount (maybe $100), plus some shipping. I recommend the very common very available but amazingly sharp Carl Zeiss Jena Biometar 80mm f/2.8
A shift lens does not remove perspective, it alters the perspective point. And a tilt lens does not reduce the focal plane, it tilts the focal plain With a tilt lens, the shot of the suspension bridge, you can have a wider aperture, which does produce a narrow focal plain, but align that plain with the angle of the bridge, so that the entire bridge is in focus. Oh, and the lens is $3k because of the quality of the glass, not because it is tilt/shift. You can get a tilt/shift adapter for about $200 if you have compatible lenses. Or a cheap tilt/shift lens for $200. Photoshop only works if you have enough width to crop a trapezoid shape (for shift) and if the entire frame (or at least the subject) is in focus. so you can leave that and progressive blur at an angle.
I didn't realize they made an actual lens for this. I remember the DIY with your camera and lens from around 2008-2010. Doing in software is fine now, but there's something missing.
It doesn't work because the difference in blur even in an f/1.0 lens or something, will be almost nothing between an object at 1km versus an object at 1.5km. Those are both basically infinity focus. Whereas the difference in blur would be huge between 1 foot vs 1.5 feet away. So you cannot make it look miniature by just aperture. The tilt lens is a way to "Cheat" to get more of a blur difference than possible normally without it actually being very small.
i have a canon m50 mark ii camera and it has the miniature effect included in the special effects menu. it creates pretty good photos with the miniature effect
I used to have an old Canon PowerShot(the ones without interchangeable lenses) which had a Tilt shift mode and got exact same results. I wonder why more modern cameras doesn't have similar modes.
A russian lens company exists that sells high quality tilt shift lenses for full frame cameras for dirt cheap. Don't know if you can get them now with the war, but a lot of people would important them and sell to other photographers person to person. If you are a member of any decent photography forums pretty sure someone is on them looking to sell these lenses. You can get them in Pentax, Nikon and Canon mounts.
Adding blur does not fully match the real optical tiltshift. Larger objects that would stay in focus from top to bottom in an optical tiltshift have their parts blurred in digital tiltshift. This usually spoils the magic. Whether you use optical or digital tiltshift, adding some saturation or vibrance will boost the tiltshift effect by making it look more toy-like.
No, a tilt shift would also screw up the bridge supports and make the top of them blurrier than the bottom. A normal camera taking a literal photo of a miniature city would NOT do that, but both photoshop and a real tilt lens each will do that. You can actually get better results than a tilt lens in photoshop if you take an f/16 then blur each item by distance from you, which a tilt lens can't even do and is only roughly mimicking. But you have to not be lazy like him.
It's actually about the shallow depth of field, so adding blur is not the same.. You can't add shallow depth of field afterwards. But it almost looks the same, most people will not notice the difference.
In a real miniature picture, the blur isn't top and bottom; it's nearby and distant. So for example, if the photo has a tall building close to the camera that occupies the bottom, middle and top of the photo, it should be all blurred because it's close. So to make a real photo look like a miniature photo, blur in top and bottom just doesn't quite cut it.
It depends if you're trying to make it look like a tilt lens, or trying to make it look like a miniature. In tilt, it's not near or far to YOU. That's just a normal lens. It's near or far from a DIAGONAL slanted 2-dimensional plane that has been tipped by the tilt. So the building would actually be tack sharp probably on top but blurry on the bottom as the diagonal plane cuts it apart unlike a normal lens. But that's actually a "flaw" of the tilt trying to look like miniatures, as a real normal lens of miniatures would be more like what you said. So depends on whether you're going for the kitschy look or for actual real miniature look. Tilt lens is already a compromise in many ways, so those aren't the same goal.
Nothing to do with sensor size, what matters is that your flange to focal distance (mounting ring to your sensor in mm) is significantly shorter (like in a mirrorless camera) than that of the camera the lens was originally designed for. Giving a half inch or an inch of space to built a tilt mechanism. Crop sensor will help you tilt a bit more without vignetting, though.
i first noticed this effect in a movie called game night. Then I tried it in premiere pro using random stock footage, a few times actually. it's a really cool effect.
"Just adding blur" isn't enough to get a genuine effect. Vertical items in the shot will be partially blurred and partially sharp. In the real effect these items would be evenly blurred as the whole item is the same distance from the camera.
No, in real life WITH A TILT lens, they would be differently blurred much like this. The tilt makes the plane of focus diagonal from you instead of flat, so objects of fixed distance have different blur top and bottom. Real life WITH MINIATURES AND A NORMAL LENS would be like what you said, though. So it depends if you want it to look like a tilt lens effect, or if you want it to look like an actual miniature city, which are not the same thing.
The biggest point on getting a miniature effect are the FPS. Just set ist to 25 or even less and with the blur, a bit of oversaturation and the right angle and you get your shot.
Just use a $20 CS Mount lens and an adapter. Works like a champ, and has the option of giving some really whacked out bokay. Plus they have real low F stops.
It's a meditation technique in yoga, it can be done while sitting or lying. It can help in getting focused, it is especially helpful in getting rid of anxiety and anxiousness.