vertical camera orientaiton

[OPEN_RANGE]

I have searched on the internet but found surprisingly little about this. This is in regard to Arch Viz exterior rendering. Does anyone have experience with creating still renderings and matching into vertically oriented camera photos?

I am well acquainted with the issues of matching perspective like focal length and accounting for sensor sizes when using digital slr. It's getting the vertical oriented shot setup to display correctly in the view port (and render to match) that I am seeking advice on.

I have, in the past, actually rotated the camera in Max to a vertical orientation. That works, but it makes for a very awkward workflow. There's gotta be a better way but I am unaware of it.

[OPEN_RANGE]

self bumped. Stupid question? Anyone have a method or advice for dealing with vertical oriented photos/ renderings.

Rotating camera 90 so it's vertcaly orient d in max works but then you have to rotate,your head to look at the scene in the viewport. Awkward to the point of being a deal breaker.

[kosso_olli]

Erm, I am confused. Can you show an example image of what you are trying to match? There should be no difference whatsoever between vertical or horizontal images.

[theedge]

Haven't tried this myself, but : what happens if you set the width of the sensor to 24mm instead of 36mm ?

[jamesf73]

do you mean for portrait views rather than landscape? try multiplying the film gate by the image aspect, keeping the focal length the same. keep the image aspect as a portrait image, but multiply it by the image aspect…
so if your portrait image resolution was 5616x3744 you would render off at 8424x5616. Then crop the image to make it 3744x5616 to make it a portrait aspect. And if you're matching it to a background image set the horizontal tiling of the image to the square of the image aspect ratio: so if it's 1.5 set it to 2.25

[OPEN_RANGE]

Thank you all for your replies.

Oliver - I am asking about adjusting for portrait orientaion versus landscape (thanks to james for using those terms). If I shoot a photo in landscape orientation with my digital slr the photo has an image aspect of 3W x 2H. If I rotate the camera 90 degree it is now in portrait orientaiton and the photo is 2W x 3H. I am trying to find a good way to match an architectural model into a photo that is taken in portrait mode.

mekene - I think you have the solution! It makes sense and I'm going to try that. camera film senesor (formaly knownas film gate) is 36w x 24h = 3w x 2h. So changing to 24w and setting output to 2w x 3h aspect may do it. It may take some time for me to do this. I am tied up with other things but I have a project that will require a portrait photo. Going to wait for leaves to come out on the trees also. Thanks!

[kosso_olli]

Oliver - I am asking about adjusting for portrait orientaion versus landscape (thanks to james for using those terms). If I shoot a photo in landscape orientation with my digital slr the photo has an image aspect of 3W x 2H. If I rotate the camera 90 degree it is now in portrait orientaiton and the photo is 2W x 3H. I am trying to find a good way to match an architectural model into a photo that is taken in portrait mode.

There is no difference in camera matching between portrait or landscape mode. The procedure is exactly the same.

[OPEN_RANGE]

Sorry I'm not being clear enough. I am well versed in camera matching. But... try matching a portrait oriented shot in a max viewport and you will see what I mean. Thanks!

[kosso_olli]

But... try matching a portrait oriented shot in a max viewport and you will see what I mean

I still don't see the problem, sorry.

[OPEN_RANGE]

to match a portrait orientation in max viewport one must rotate the max camera into portrait orientation. That makes the top and bottom of the camera view at the left and right side of the viewport and it makes the left and right of the camera view at the top and bottom of the viewport. mekene has the solution..i believe but will verify.

Attached shows what it looks like when a camera is rotated to portrait in max. You gotta turn your head sideways to look at it. awkward

[Neilg]

But why would you do that? I've never known anyone to rotate a 3d camera to do a portrait rendering... you can change the output resolution to be portrait.

[OPEN_RANGE]

yes you are correct. But... if your trying to match into a site photo that was shot in portrait orientation that doesn't work. (My attached example doesn't show a site photo issue so still causing confusion)

Here is another discussion by others:
http://forums.cgarchitect.com/72521-...ion-photo.html

[jamesf73]

if you use the method that i tried to describe you'd end up matching to something like the above. you can see that that the backgroun repeats, and the central section is what would be the portrait section of the image. sorry if this is not celar

[OPEN_RANGE]

hmmm that is interesting and maybe another approach. Thanks for that.

I think, per meneke, that If you change the max camera film sensor from 36 to 24, then you could change the output resolution to portrait for example 2000w x 3000h and it would match a portrait oriented site photo of same resolution. To me that is the "cleanest" solution and thanks to all who weighed in!!

[kosso_olli]

OP, you must be trolling us, right?
Please give me a photo and a cube representing a building, so I can try to show you the correct way.