daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Megatalls

Megatalls Discussions of projects under construction at least 600m/2,000 ft tall.



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 15th, 2009, 10:01 PM   #19661
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,772
Likes (Received): 209

I'll chip in and help pay that optometrist bill! I think it will be quite expensive!
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 15th, 2009, 10:22 PM   #19662
_Mort_
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,240

Quote:
Originally Posted by phuonghoang View Post
Wow, Impressive!
Tower on the left looks scaled down, this one on the right looks long-winded.
Especially hihger floors and the spire. So the both pictures are not fully real.
_Mort_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2009, 11:00 PM   #19663
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by gerald.d View Post
What I'm saying is, if you want to find out quite how closely a 50mm lens mimics the field of vision of a human eye, try carrying out a few simple tasks whilst experiencing the field of view that a 50mm lens gives you (40 degrees horizontal on a FF 35mm camera).
And thats what you dont understeand. 50mm dont mimics field of vision. It represent view from human eye. Try a simple task. Take picture with 50mm and 22mm, and then just held picture in your hand. If you will see exactly the same like helding empty frame, thats the one witch give you impression of view from human eye. I thing you should understeand it now.
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 12:21 AM   #19664
AvanGard
HMS
 
AvanGard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sofia
Posts: 250
Likes (Received): 25

All coming together nicely. It's going to be a close one though, getting it all finished this year.


and
p.s. Can we leave the “lens” measuring contest for another forum, guys!
AvanGard no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 12:33 AM   #19665
zurichint
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 14
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
And thats what you dont understeand. 50mm dont mimics field of vision. It represent view from human eye. Try a simple task. Take picture with 50mm and 22mm, and then just held picture in your hand. If you will see exactly the same like helding empty frame, thats the one witch give you impression of view from human eye. I thing you should understeand it now.
Right. And he never answered what camera he uses.
zurichint no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 03:09 AM   #19666
Parisian Girl
MONACO _ Côte d'Azur
 
Parisian Girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: PARIS - Monte Carlo - London
Posts: 16,678
Likes (Received): 2829

[IMG]http://i29.************/20tjzeu.jpg[/IMG]
http://www.xpress4me.com/photos/gall...0.html&index=1
__________________
Je m'appelle Paris
Parisian Girl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 04:27 AM   #19667
Monkey9000
£€$$ is more
 
Monkey9000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 1,647
Likes (Received): 338

Monkey9000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 06:47 AM   #19668
whoami
Registered User
 
whoami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 8

ill chip in as well... post the bill gerald...

im not camera expert as i always use PnS only. but gerald photos are so far the acurate like autocadd drawings. full deatils!!!
whoami no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 07:48 AM   #19669
Abdallah K.
Under the Beirut Sun
 
Abdallah K.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Tripoli طرابلس
Posts: 2,068
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parisian Girl View Post
[IMG]http://i29.************/20tjzeu.jpg[/IMG]
http://www.xpress4me.com/photos/gall...0.html&index=1
Nice Photo
Abdallah K. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 07:53 AM   #19670
DXBQuantum
Registered User
 
DXBQuantum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: From - London, Work - Dubai, Ski - Colorado, Fly - New Zealand
Posts: 904
Likes (Received): 1

small update;

The observation level is no longer called ''experience 124'' - it will now be called ''At the top''

__________________
>>BRING BACK SKY CITY 1000 AND X-SEED 4000<<

For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return.
Leonardo da Vinci
DXBQuantum no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 11:00 AM   #19671
Desert Diver
Just add water
 
Desert Diver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 2,246
Likes (Received): 215

I prefer "experience 124" instead of "At the top". The latter sounds faceless and is not even close to being true

Also, following Emaar's incredible creativity they should have called it "Dubai Observation deck"
__________________
Website
Blog
Facebook
Desert Diver no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 02:27 PM   #19672
King of Construction
skyscraperized
 
King of Construction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kelpen-Oler
Posts: 801
Likes (Received): 254

Quote:
Originally Posted by zurichint View Post
Right. And he never answered what camera he uses.
It's somewhere in this thread, I remember he said nobody else in the UAE had it and it costed like 2400 dollars.
__________________
As finishing touch, God created the Dutch

Visited countries: Austria-Belgium-Bosnia & Herzegovina-Bulgaria-Canada-Croatia-Czech Republic-England-France-Germany-Greece-Hong Kong-Italy-Liechtenstein- Luxembourg
Malaysia-Montenegro-Morocco-the Netherlands-Poland-Serbia-Singapore-Spain- Switzerland-Turkey-United Arab Emirates-United States of America-Wales
King of Construction no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 02:58 PM   #19673
gerald.d
Registered User
 
gerald.d's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 2,343
Likes (Received): 44

FAO patrykus and zurichint.

Everyone else, please feel free to ignore.

Guys. For the last time. You do NOT know what you are talking about, and it is becoming increasingly tedious having to respond to your nonsense.

This WILL be my last post on the subject, regardless of however you respond.

I'm going to show you 3 images. If you can't see what this is all about from the following images, then there really is no hope for you.

All 3 images were taken from exactly the same spot (the bridge between the Dubai Mall and Souk al Baha), using the same camera (a Canon 5D Mk II - which I have already mentioned if you could actually have been bothered to read), and using the same lens (a Canon 45mm TS-E F/2.8). The camera is a full-frame DSLR. The lens, by the way, is rectilinear. It does not show any geometric distortion worth speaking of - when used correctly.

I have specifically chosen to use this lens because of your insistence that it represents the same field of view (on a FF 35mm camera) as human vision, but for this exercise, I could have picked any lens in my bag.

Let's split this into two parts. Firstly, let's deal with that field of view.

For anyone who has ever stood on the spot these photos were taken from - and there are many who contribute to this thread who will have - it will be patently obvious that these images do not represent the view that one sees when using one's own eyes.

Image 1:

Shooting dead level to horizontal, from the bridge across to the Burj Dubai:



As mentioned, anyone who has ever stood on that bridge can tell you that that images does NOT represent the field of view that your eyes give you. You can link to as many internet forums as you want to back up your argument, and I could respond with links to academic papers that quite clearly state that a 45mm lens does not give the you the same field of view that normal human vision does.

Personally, I think it is far more constructive to actually get out there and test this out for yourself. Which is why I've gone to the effort to make this post.

Go to your local optometrist. Get your peripheral vision checked. Because if your vision is similar to that in the above photo, then you need assistance, and in many countries would probably qualify for disability benefit.

Moving on.

The problem, from a subjective photographic point of view, with the image above is that the intended subject matter - the Burj Dubai - only comprises half the frame. Why? Because - as mentioned, the camera was aligned so that the lens>image sensor axis was exactly parallel to the horizontal.

This causes a problem - half the image is of the lake - which is rather boring at midday in 50 degree heat when the fountains aren't running.

It doesn't matter what lens you pick. I was using a 45mm lens, but it could equally have been a 50mm, 17mm or 12mm. If you want to take a photograph with the correct perspective, you HAVE to keep the plane of the sensor perpendicular to the horizontal.

But we have a compositional problem, in that half the photo is of the foreground - which we are not interested in.

Every single person you will ever see taking a photograph of the Burj Dubai from that bridge will do EXACTLY the same thing.

To fix the compositional problem, and to get as much of the building in frame as possible, they will pitch the camera up. This has the effect of removing the boring foreground from the shot, and filling the frame with the subject matter.

Which brings us onto image 2:



Remember. Same spot. Same camera. Same lens.

For this image, I've done what everyone does. Because pretty much everyone else doesn't have a choice - if they want to get more of the building in the shot, then they have to pitch the camera up to remove the foreground.

Now, at first glance, you may think there isn't much wrong with this shot. In fact, because it is so similar to many photographs you've seen of the Burj Dubai in the past, you could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that it is a true representation of how it looks to the human eye (ignoring the field of view issue). In fact, it is so typical of pictures of buildings, that you probably don't even question what you're seeing, and assume that if you were physically there, it represents what you'd see with your own eyes.

But you'd be wrong. There is a LOT wrong with that photo, and it's all caused by the decision to pitch the camera up.

Ignoring the composition, compare it with the first image.

Look at the crane on the right hand side of the first image. It is perfectly vertical. Because of course, this is how it is in real life. If it wasn't, it would topple over. And if you were standing on that spot, and looked at the crane - whether directly, or peripherally, it would appear perfectly vertical to you too.

Now look at it in the second image. Something isn't right - it no longer appears to be vertical.

And the reason it appears this way has NOTHING to do with the focal length of the lens used. It would appear the same way whatever lens we use - and I could, if I could be arsed, provide you with many different examples at different focal lengths - if we pitch the camera up in order to remove the foreground.

Look at the buildings behind the Burj on the left of the second photo (these are two of the Loft towers). Has Dubai gone completely bonkers and decided to out-do the Leaning Tower of Pisa? No (well, at least, not with these buildings).

Like the crane, they too are angled inwards because of the camera being pitched up. Go back to the first image. Perfectly vertical. Like they are in real life. Like they are if you were to go there and look with your own eyes.

Now look at the sides of the Burj itself.

As you will now notice (and quite probably didn't before), they too are angled inwards. And the effect given is that it looks like the Burj is toppling backwards. It's a relatively subtle effect, but once it's been pointed out to you, you can't miss it.

And it's wrong.

Remember - same lens used for both photos. A lens with a focal length that you both insist gives the same image that you'd see with the human eye.

And yet, because of the way the lens has been used, the result is totally different.

Do you think you'd see things in both ways if you were physically there? No. Of course you wouldn't. You wouldn't see cranes toppling over, you wouldn't see the twin leaning towers of Dubai, and you wouldn't see the Burj falling over backwards.

What you'd see is what is shown in the first image. Vertical lines will be vertical. Wherever you look. End of discussion.

So - how can we combat this effect if we want to take a picture of the Burj Dubai that accurately represents how it would look if we were to be physically standing there?

We can use a wider angle lens, pitch it perfectly to the horizontal, and then crop out the lower half of the image. Problem is, for this particular building, you'd need a VERY wide angle lens in order to do that. And you'd be throwing away half your pixels.

But there is a better way.

The "TS" in the name of the lens that I've used for all these photos stands for "Tilt-Shift". A tilt-shift (or, in Nikon terms, Perspective Control) lens produces a much larger image circle than a standard lens, and the "shift" capability of the lens allows you to effectively move the part of the image that falls on the sensor.

This means that rather than pitching the camera up, you can keep it perfectly horizontal, and instead shift the lens so that the upper portion of what is within the image circle can be projected onto the sensor, rather than the middle portion.

In this third image, this is exactly what has been done. The lens has been shifted up 11mm in order to give (approximately - this was all done hand-held) a composition the same as that you would get if you were to pitch the camera up, but without the problem of converging verticals.

Image 3:



This precisely replicates what the human eye would see - for that particular part of the field of vision - were you to physically be there.

You both claimed that this all came down to focal length. Look at the above images. They were all taken with exactly the same lens - not only that, but with a lens that you claim accurately represents the field of human vision.

The distortion between image 2 and 3, just like the distortion between the two images I posted earlier in the thread, has NOTHING to do with the focal length of the lens. It has NOTHING to do with any comparison between camera lenses and the human eye.

The only reason for the difference is down to the way the lens - in each case - has been used. If you move the lens>image sensor axis off the horizontal, then you will distort the image.

(full resolution images available here -
http://picasaweb.google.com/gerald.d...eat=directlink
)

Last edited by gerald.d; August 16th, 2009 at 03:12 PM.
gerald.d no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 06:12 PM   #19674
Desert Diver
Just add water
 
Desert Diver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 2,246
Likes (Received): 215

The pictures show a view of Burj Dubai that you would have standing on the Souk al Bahar bridge and looking at the tower through a toilet paper roll. So I totally agree with you, gerald. However, I also think this topic should not be discussed here any further
__________________
Website
Blog
Facebook
Desert Diver no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 06:26 PM   #19675
GOL2007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 406
Likes (Received): 110



NO! Keep on fighting gerald.d(on quixote) for some wisdom in the SSC community!
__________________
sorri four mei bat inglisch!
GOL2007 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 06:39 PM   #19676
CrazyDave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Waterbury - CT
Posts: 1,058
Likes (Received): 192

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucianmx_2007 View Post
20 december 2009
The Grand Opening is December 2, 2009
CrazyDave no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 07:28 PM   #19677
Jarott
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Gdynia
Posts: 162
Likes (Received): 0

and you know whats the best thing abour gerald.d? not only do people outside of dubai get great photos of what they cannot see themselves, but also we get some extra photography lessons, from someone who has proven to know what he speaks about.

great job gerald, all the way =]
Jarott no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 09:26 PM   #19678
The-Real-Link
The-Real-Link!!
 
The-Real-Link's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 752
Likes (Received): 300

Thanks Gerald. I was about to jump back in here and say only that you have the Mark II (same as I do so I'd love to go over these TS examples with you first-hand someday maybe) The resulting lesson however, was incredibly insightful.

So basically if we want a shot of the burj without converging verticals and distortion, we'd need to be practically at The Address' side of the lake in order to capture the entire building in the shot?

Ok sorry about also being off topic about the photography - but at the same time it is great know learn how those of us who eventually visit this building may end up taking better photographs because of this thread. For those of us who do photography regularly, we don't want to visit the World's Tallest and end up with the World's Crummiest photos.
The-Real-Link no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2009, 11:29 PM   #19679
Fury
Proudly Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,059
Likes (Received): 350

Hi all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDave View Post
The Grand Opening is December 2, 2009
Hi Dave.

That is the latest press release date we have but whether it will be the grand opening is suspect. To put it in better terms - whether the entire works will be completed by then is questionable. They may even call it the "grand opening" but I think it will actually be the "soft" opening for the hotel and its entrance. We may or may not get another press release stating this.

By the looks of Geralds shots for the photography debate (interesting stuff) the office entrance area (zone A) has a long way to go as far as landscaping is concerned. A month ago we had some shots of the podium areas and the hotel entrance side (zone C) landscaping was much further along than the other 2.

Cladding is coming along. The office annex looks to be 90 or 95 % completed. There is still some to go up top where the crane was and on the top sections of a few tiers.

I imagine the cranes on the office annex are nearly done. They will probably come down soon as well as the main structure cranes. We should see the small crane appear near the one on tier 17 terrace (level 159) soon. I'm thinking it will be the same one that was up on tier 7 terrace (level 76) in Dec '08.

Here is a shot (from Imre - of course) showing the crane to which I am referring to.



That crane (R2) will lower R1 pieces from level 159 to level 99 where it will be lowered to the ground by M3 that has been there since Nov. '07. R2 will then be disassembled by hand and taken down to level 99 in an elevator where it will be set up. Then R2 will lower M3 in pieces to the ground. Lastly R2 will be once again disassembled by hand and taken down to the ground in an elevator. That is (was) the plan but M3 on level 99 was to be a different crane than what is there now. The crane on level 99 (M3) was one of the 3 that was on the top of the structure earlier. Because of that change they may have to set up and use R1 to lower M3, then use R2 to lower R1 to the ground. We shall see.

__________________
Burj Khalifa - The Greatest Structure of our Time !!

Last edited by Fury; August 16th, 2009 at 11:59 PM.
Fury no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 17th, 2009, 02:27 AM   #19680
Doomlord_uk
___________________
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 180
Likes (Received): 5

Gerald, thanks for the explanation of the TS lens I learned something new. Now stop explaining it any more and go and take more pics with it please!!
Doomlord_uk no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
adrian smith, burj dubai, burj khalifa, downtown, dubai, dubai tower, emaar, megatall, middle east, rascacielos, sarajevo construction, skyscraper, spire, tallest, uae

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu