Does any camera auto-level?

ThreeHounds wrote in post #17792684
It seems to me that you're asking the camera to apply some intelligence to the shot you're taking. In this case cropping the image for you, since that is the only way to adjust level without you changing the angle the camera is at.
For me, I would rather do that crop in PP. I don't normally like the decisions the equipment or software makes for me, including exposure.

If its just kept in the RAW data, then I have full control to take it or not.

For sports, I'd take it.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #17792687
I think that is more lens distortion than anything. Neither the original or the corrected one are bad enough to bug me whatsoever.

Some are worse than others, but on this one the gravity bugged me. I picked one that's mild to stop the whole "its your poor technique".

For soccer, even a slight downhill is an advantage so getting it level is a "truer" depiction. So, even that slight tilt bugged me.

NBEast wrote in post #17792608
30% of my PP seems to be wasted with crop-n-level. Well, it feels that way anyway. It just seems like "isn't this the kind of thing computers are for"? Even 5% off bugs me unless I'm intending the tilt so at a high percentage of my shots need some kind of leveling. Ugg.

How hard would it be for them to install an electronic internal level and feed that into the RAW file?

Anyone know if a brand/model has this? Maybe this is one of those features a smartphone or P&S will get first. Hopefully its just my ignorance and its already there for the taking.

But how would the camera know what was supposed to be level in the image?

DGStinner wrote in post #17792674
You have to remember that camera sensors are rectangular and not round so even if the technology was available, which I'm sure it isn't, it would still result in part of the image being cropped off after leveling. Use the grid lines in the camera if you want to ensure the camera is level while handholding. Making sure the horizon is level is more important than verticals since they can get skewed by the angle of the camera.

If I payed attention to gridlines on every shot, I'd miss the action.

Auto-level technology is common-place in other devices. i-Phone's level is quite precise, but even within 1% would be good enough.

Home Depot sells electronic levels.

Yeah, its rectangular. I fail to understand what that has to do with it.

Bottom line here is that some of the DSLR designers need to step-up - apparently Fuji has. I'm curious who else?

john crossley wrote in post #17792717
But how would the camera know what was supposed to be level in the image?

I'm just asking for a gravity reading. If the camera is tilted upward, this could pose a technical problem. Engineers are good a solving those, but frankly I'd take it if just the straight-ahead shots had accurate level readings.

NBEast wrote in post #17792720
Bottom line here is that some of the DSLR designers need to step-up - apparently Fuji has. I'm curious who else?

What model Fuji? My 7DII has a level on the top of the viewfinder screen.

NBEast wrote in post #17792705
Some are worse than others, but on this one the gravity bugged me. I picked one that's mild to stop the whole "its your poor technique".

For soccer, even a slight downhill is an advantage so getting it level is a "truer" depiction. So, even that slight tilt bugged me.

Heya,

I get what you're after. I appreciate it too. I totally get you don't want to use grid lines, mounts, etc. You want an in-camera feature that allows the camera to choose the crop for you. It will be a crop by the way, no matter what, even if done in-camera, because of the shape of the sensor relative to your orientation holding it. It would have to be super good at knowing the difference between ground, and lines. In your situation, shooting soccer, with no sky really to compare (where there would be an obvious 4~6 stop difference in exposure that would be an easy tip for a computer looking for it), you are stuck with whatever your camera figures out, which may be a power line, road, etc. And if it's cropping in-camera, and makes a mistake, you have.... that as a result. Either way you lose data to get your result. If you trust a computer to pick a horizon for you, you risk a total bust and lots of data loss. If you just do it yourself, which takes seconds, you lose less data. I appreciate you don't want to do it to 250 images. But of those 250 images, which of those are the kind you're going to share, print, post, etc? You don't need to straighten all 250 I'd bet.

Like all things, if you let the camera do it, there's room for it doing something that maybe you didn't intend or want. Exposure for example. I'd worry more about exposure problems than a straight horizon in such a wide field of view shot of a kid playing soccer. If you let the camera choose that exposure, well, you get my point.

What you're asking for, a horizon cropping in-camera tool with settings to ensure it doesn't ruin images, doesn't exist in the form you want it.

I'd focus on composition, exposure and capturing an interesting moment so that later, if it's good enough for you, you actually want to correct any horizon issues. Again, I doubt you need to do this to 250 images at a time. But I may be wrong!

Very best,

when i edit a picture on my iPhone it will attempt to do an auto rotate. It does this after I click Edit and then the Crop tool. It does a pretty poor job of it, don't get me wrong, sometimes it does it perfectly, but sometimes it screws it up royally.

the problem is that both vertical and horizontal lines are often not vertical or horizontal. The only time they are is when the camera sensor is perfectly parallel to those lines. This is of course due to perspective and the keystone effect So how is this imagined automatic rotation feature supposed to adjust for perspective? That's a lot to ask IMO. Maybe the verticals are more important, maybe the horizontals are more important? Ultimately it is up to the person editing the pic and no program is going to get it right every time.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
Heya,

I get what you're after. I appreciate it too. I totally get you don't want to use grid lines, mounts, etc. You want an in-camera feature that allows the camera to choose the crop for you. It will be a crop by the way, no matter what, even if done in-camera, because of the shape of the sensor relative to your orientation holding it.

Hoping it's just a 2% crop. That's negligible - I'd have to crop it manually anyway or accept the tilt (unlikely).

But; what I'm really asking for is a RAW data, then I can choose to accept the crop or not in PP.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
It would have to be super good at knowing the difference between ground, and lines. In your situation, shooting soccer, with no sky really to compare (where there would be an obvious 4~6 stop difference in exposure that would be an easy tip for a computer looking for it), you are stuck with whatever your camera figures out, which may be a power line, road, etc.

Surely they could use the same technology as electronic levels.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
And if it's cropping in-camera, and makes a mistake, you have.... that as a result.

For sports, I'd do it in-camera. It's in the RAW data, so I could reverse it later if it chopped something I really wanted (or did an intentional tilt).

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
Either way you lose data to get your result. If you trust a computer to pick a horizon for you, you risk a total bust and lots of data loss. If you just do it yourself, which takes seconds, you lose less data.

I've been looking for the Lightroom feature - a prior poster pointed it out. Yeah, in most cases I'd trust vertical lines. Horizontal lines are too prone to perspective distortion unless they're straight-on.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
I appreciate you don't want to do it to 250 images. But of those 250 images, which of those are the kind you're going to share, print, post, etc? You don't need to straighten all 250 I'd bet.

Well, I took 500 shots (rapid fire - sports). 250 are the ones that are technically acceptable. I filter from there down to 120+

There are 14 players. I have 2 objectives.

1. Good shot for each player. Some Pros shooting a soccer game are required to have 10 usable shots of each player. For me, I'm happy with 3 or 4 although I usually get 10 or more of the forwards. So we're up to about 100 keepers.

2. Tell the story of the game and teamwork. That's a lot of sequences.

The kids love seeing photos of themselves, 2nd only to their parents.

Even just 120, it would save me 1 hour if there were a "just match gravity" button.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
Like all things, if you let the camera do it, there's room for it doing something that maybe you didn't intend or want.

Exposure for example. I'd worry more about exposure problems than a straight horizon in such a wide field of view shot of a kid playing soccer. If you let the camera choose that exposure, well, you get my point.

Exposure is easy. I always use manual exposure so whatever the correction is, it's easily synced across a large batch of shots (unless there's shadows - then I'm on AV and there are many problems due to contrast differences).

I'm not a pro so the team doesn't care about minor exposure issues, but a tilt is just sloppy.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
What you're asking for, a horizon cropping in-camera tool with settings to ensure it doesn't ruin images, doesn't exist in the form you want it.

Actually I'm asking for an electronic level in the RAW data. The image contents doesn't play a role.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17792740
I'd focus on composition, exposure and capturing an interesting moment so that later, if it's good enough for you, you actually want to correct any horizon issues. Again, I doubt you need to do this to 250 images at a time. But I may be wrong!

Very best,

For amateur team photography, its OK to be sloppy in some areas (like posting some so-so ones) but posting a tilt just screams "too lazy to fix". Maybe I have too much pride.

NBEast wrote in post #17792770
For amateur team photography, its OK to be sloppy in some areas (like posting some so-so ones) but posting a tilt just screams "too lazy to fix". Maybe I have too much pride.

I understand. I agree it would be nice to have it as RAW data that can be used or not used. Unfortunately doesn't exist.

I agree about it being sloppy to post horizons like that. Then again, some would argue the same applying to an underexposed image with a dark face, etc, in sports photography. It's all relative really!

Very best,

I agree with the OP and wish the level of the camera was recorded in the EXIF. Most cameras seem to have level sensors. They display pitch and roll before shooting if you set it to do so. If time allows, you can check the level and fix it before clicking the shutter.

The problem is often you have no opportunity to consult the level information, because you are shooting birds in flight rapid-fire or kids running around or some other intense stuff and there is no time. Pictures end up crooked.

Now if the camera would just record the angle in the EXIF, then you could correct it afterwards in post. Maybe it could even be done automatically.

There could be an issue with the accuracy of the level sensors in the camera, or how quickly they react to a change in level. But I think having the level recorded would still be helpful in most cases.

Archibald wrote in post #17792821
I agree with the OP ...

Thanks!

Archibald wrote in post #17792821
There could be an issue with the accuracy of the level sensors in the camera, or how quickly they react to a change in level. But I think having the level recorded would still be helpful in most cases.

Hey, we'd have something new to grip about being imperfect haha. Even if 5% weren't accurate enough, it would be a great start.

Griping it's not quite good enough is a big leap from "who would want that".

X,Y,Z

The 70D has that also.

Archibald wrote in post #17792821
I agree with the OP and wish the level of the camera was recorded in the EXIF. Most cameras seem to have level sensors. They display pitch and roll before shooting if you set it to do so. If time allows, you can check the level and fix it before clicking the shutter.

There could be an issue with the accuracy of the level sensors in the camera, or how quickly they react to a change in level. But I think having the level recorded would still be helpful in most cases.

the latter is the problem. i had 3 cameras with levels so far: 5d3, 7d2, 5dsr. all of those levels are off. they're only good enough for a rough estimate. i even went through the trouble of sending the 5d3 in to calibrate the level twice. the first time canon returned it saying nothing was wrong. the 2nd time they told me they cannot adjust it.

so anyway, if you really want accurate level info, you need to use something like a hotshoe leveler, and even then you gotta go through a few to find one that's perfect.

but in the end you just want your pic to look good--so use your eyeballz and your favorite crop/rotating tool in post.