S
Stevekir
Guest
After a family visit to Croft Castle I got this pic just as the spitfire landed on the lawn.
OK. Its is my attempt to display a model in a natural scene. The Spitfire was made by MPal (I hope he doesn't mind me using it). I cut it out in Photoshop and superimposed it on a quarter sized version of a photo taken after a family visit to Croft Castle. With all but the Spit. selected I brushed in the shadow and embedded the wheels in the grass. I think it is quite realistic although the Spit. needs to be bigger relative to the background (the blades of grass look to big). Next time! But it certainly shows off the quality and realistic nature of the model.
I have been thinking of how to make such scenes believable. The following rules seem to apply:
First: the foreground of the scene should be level (Note).
Second: the model must be photographed at the equivalent of head height. That means that the angle between the model camera's line of sight to the model and the horizontal must be the same as:
the angle between the scene camera's line of sight to the ground underneath the model's position in the scene and the horizontal. (In other words, the angle to the horizontal of these two lines of sight must match.
This will result in the angle of view (to the horizontal) being the same for the model and the scene, as it would be of course if the model was real and actually in the scene. Any divergence here would look un-natural.
Most models seem to be photographed from a camera position higher than it would be for a photo of a real object with the photographer standing on the ground. I guess that is because it displays more detail of the top of the model. (An example to illustrate this would be of a real Lancaster which when photographed when standing on the ground would show the undercarriage and the underside of the wing and nothing of the top of the wing — the Lanc is a monster.) Therefore, compared to most model photos, it is necessary to lower the model camera to the equivalent of head height as "seen" by the model. This still displays the charms of a tidier like a Spit. but not a Lanc (Note). My picture above needs the model to be photographed from a lower position, or the scene from a higher position (Note). To do that, you could take several photos of the model at different heights and choose the one that fits the scene.
Note: But what if you want to show more of the top of a model, especially a Lanc.? The two angles of the lines of sight mentioned above must still be the same. That means that both the camera positions must be at a correspondingly greater height, perhaps in the case of the scene camera — from a hillside. You could take a suitable range of scene photos next time that you are out and about. But remember that the degree of sunshine needs to match that of the model. In my pic. above, both the model and scene have overcast light coming from above and slightly behind the model. (Although the scene here actually has no noticeable light direction, being overcast.) But if the scene has sunlight it would be best if it came from behind the scene camera so that the model (which would need a single photo light) could be similarly lit so its side facing the camera would be fully illuminated and therefore showing good detail.
By the way, I think that all model photos should betaken with the camera a foot or two away (using the telephoto to get a good size) to avoid distortion making the nearer wing look too long.
Hope this is of interest.
OK. Its is my attempt to display a model in a natural scene. The Spitfire was made by MPal (I hope he doesn't mind me using it). I cut it out in Photoshop and superimposed it on a quarter sized version of a photo taken after a family visit to Croft Castle. With all but the Spit. selected I brushed in the shadow and embedded the wheels in the grass. I think it is quite realistic although the Spit. needs to be bigger relative to the background (the blades of grass look to big). Next time! But it certainly shows off the quality and realistic nature of the model.
I have been thinking of how to make such scenes believable. The following rules seem to apply:
First: the foreground of the scene should be level (Note).
Second: the model must be photographed at the equivalent of head height. That means that the angle between the model camera's line of sight to the model and the horizontal must be the same as:
the angle between the scene camera's line of sight to the ground underneath the model's position in the scene and the horizontal. (In other words, the angle to the horizontal of these two lines of sight must match.
This will result in the angle of view (to the horizontal) being the same for the model and the scene, as it would be of course if the model was real and actually in the scene. Any divergence here would look un-natural.
Most models seem to be photographed from a camera position higher than it would be for a photo of a real object with the photographer standing on the ground. I guess that is because it displays more detail of the top of the model. (An example to illustrate this would be of a real Lancaster which when photographed when standing on the ground would show the undercarriage and the underside of the wing and nothing of the top of the wing — the Lanc is a monster.) Therefore, compared to most model photos, it is necessary to lower the model camera to the equivalent of head height as "seen" by the model. This still displays the charms of a tidier like a Spit. but not a Lanc (Note). My picture above needs the model to be photographed from a lower position, or the scene from a higher position (Note). To do that, you could take several photos of the model at different heights and choose the one that fits the scene.
Note: But what if you want to show more of the top of a model, especially a Lanc.? The two angles of the lines of sight mentioned above must still be the same. That means that both the camera positions must be at a correspondingly greater height, perhaps in the case of the scene camera — from a hillside. You could take a suitable range of scene photos next time that you are out and about. But remember that the degree of sunshine needs to match that of the model. In my pic. above, both the model and scene have overcast light coming from above and slightly behind the model. (Although the scene here actually has no noticeable light direction, being overcast.) But if the scene has sunlight it would be best if it came from behind the scene camera so that the model (which would need a single photo light) could be similarly lit so its side facing the camera would be fully illuminated and therefore showing good detail.
By the way, I think that all model photos should betaken with the camera a foot or two away (using the telephoto to get a good size) to avoid distortion making the nearer wing look too long.
Hope this is of interest.
Last edited:
