- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:11 pm to quail man
The lines are complete bullshite!
You can't draw straight lines on a pic taken at that extreme of an angle and get a correct solution. With that angle of photograph the true foul line would be moved way to the right looking at the picture.
You can't draw straight lines on a pic taken at that extreme of an angle and get a correct solution. With that angle of photograph the true foul line would be moved way to the right looking at the picture.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:19 pm to Oyster
Im thinking he made a straight line consistent with the foul pole and just placed them on the foul line. The foul line doesn't bend. So the angle being viewed changes nothing.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:24 pm to tigerfan in bamaland
quote:
looked fair
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:24 pm to PaperTiger
The foul line doesn't change, the position of the base ball in reference to the foul line does.
This post was edited on 5/26/16 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:31 pm to Oyster
quote:To be fair, I think that unless you fiddle with photography or something similar, most people don't grasp the concept of barrel and pincushion distortion. Keystone, yes.
You are preaching to a choir of slow learners. They don't have the capacity to understand
Put simply for those who don't mess with it- you know those crazy fisheye lens photos? That's extreme distortion; and you clearly see that straight lines appear curved in the image.
ALL lenses have this, just not to the extreme that you see on a fisheye.
Again, the only area where something is not shifted is directly on the X- or Y- axis.
It's theoretically possible to draw lines, but they would not appear straight (because they then would not be, in reality). But you'd have to know the length of the aperture and lens, the exact distance from the camera the object-line should be, and exactly how many degrees offcenter you are. I guarantee that was not done last night!
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:40 pm to Scoob
quote:
fair
I agree, fair ball!
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:47 pm to Scoob
quote:
most people don't grasp the concept of barrel and pincushion distortion
Serious question. Can you highlight what is actually distorted in the images? I ask because all the lines (horizontal, vertical, diagonal) that should be straight, do in fact look straight.
I was under the impression that with pincushion (and possibly barrel?) distortion, this would not be the case. And if this distortion is that minor in the pictures, how is it a big deal? I'm asking because I don't know.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 5:47 pm to slackster
Whether it was foul or fair, the call shouldn't have been overturned using either of those two, off-line camera angles as a evidence. 3rd base official was in the perfect position to make that call. You have to give his call priority.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 6:17 pm to AFtigerFan
Apparently someone would rather downvote me than address the question. A quick search shows that many professional lenses compensate for pincushion and barrel distortion, making it almost negligible. The great thing is, if the distortion is actually there, you can see it. It seems as though some are just affected by confirmation bias when looking at these pictures and video... present company excluded.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 6:40 pm to slackster
Fair ball that should have been caught.
Thankfully, it really doesn't matter.
Thankfully, it really doesn't matter.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 6:48 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
it was clearly fair in both clips
Posted on 5/26/16 at 7:51 pm to AFtigerFan
quote:
I agree, fair ball!
I agree also, and I don't think it's as close as LSU fans want to believe... but whatever.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 7:55 pm to Geaux Tahel
quote:
I agree also, and I don't think it's as close as LSU fans want to believe... but whatever.
I think they want the play to be on Sports Science before they will finally agree on the obvious!
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:07 pm to sardog12
Doesnt matter where it lands if the player touches it in fair territory.
They were saying if it hadnt been touched in fair territory. Clearly it was and the call was correct.
They were saying if it hadnt been touched in fair territory. Clearly it was and the call was correct.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:14 pm to Oyster
quote:
The lines are complete bullshite!
The lines are legit. The horizontal line is parallel with the one along the wall, touches his foot, and it intersects the vertical directly below the ball.
Oh, and one other thing: any idiot can see that it is fair.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:44 pm to Penrod
quote:
The lines are legit. The horizontal line is parallel with the one along the wall, touches his foot, and it intersects the vertical directly below the ball. Oh, and one other thing: any idiot can see that it is fair.
I guess you need to believe what you believe. I'm saying you can't honestly tell if it is fair or not. The ball moves in reference to the camera angle. With the info available to us and the umps there is no fair way to know whether it is fair or not.
I locate lesions on radiographs etc for a living. I am incredibly familiar with this subject.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:44 pm to Penrod
I'd like to see a freeze of the rear angle shot, from the left field camera. They only showed that angle one time last night and it looked foul. Not really important now.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:50 pm to TBoy
quote:
to see a freeze of the rear angle shot, from the left field camera. They only showed that angle one time last night and it looked foul. Not really important now.
That's exactly what I'm saying. One angle looks very foul and the other appears fair. The ball location appears to move in reference to the camera angle. If we had the height of the ball, angle of each camera and distance from the ball in addition to lens distortion we could possibly tell if it was fair. Without that info ther is no way to tell.
The 3rd base ump was about 20 feet away. I'd tend to trust his perspective.
Posted on 5/26/16 at 8:52 pm to Penrod
Ok, other game is over, I'm back
1) I didn't downvote anything
2) I'm not going on some self-rightous rant that the ball was foul; I'm saying the procedure to review it is flawed. And easily correctable, simply by placing cameras directly down the lines.
No, lenses do not correct for distortion. Cameras (DSLRs) might have software that will internally correct, when they go do a conversion from RAW to JPG. Use the straight RAW image, you will see the distortion present.
The camera (or software) has to know what lens is in use, so it can make the calculated correction.
Yes, there is distortion in the images present. The camera is level, and the foul line on the outfield wall is not 100% vertical (although it is in real life). And that is at a different range than where the ball is, so the shift would be different again between the two.
Distortion really isn't a debatable topic, it's completely normal optics. Your mind does the corrections so things look normal, but it's present. Every single lens in existence has some distortion and it's greater at the edges.
As an aside, I'm a fairly avid hobbyist with photography, I like to use legacy manual lenses mounted by adapters on a modern camera frame. I currently use Olympus, would love to get a Sony a7R, that would be my ideal platform. Since I shoot RAW, I have to deal with distortion on every shot (if I choose to, most of the time I don't worry about it). It's usually just a minimal effect based on the length of the lenses I use, but if I had to take an ultra-precise image (let's say, some architecture and I want the angles all perfect for the front of a building), you would notice it.
Was the ball fair, or foul- doesn't matter, we won regardless.
1) I didn't downvote anything
2) I'm not going on some self-rightous rant that the ball was foul; I'm saying the procedure to review it is flawed. And easily correctable, simply by placing cameras directly down the lines.
No, lenses do not correct for distortion. Cameras (DSLRs) might have software that will internally correct, when they go do a conversion from RAW to JPG. Use the straight RAW image, you will see the distortion present.
The camera (or software) has to know what lens is in use, so it can make the calculated correction.
Yes, there is distortion in the images present. The camera is level, and the foul line on the outfield wall is not 100% vertical (although it is in real life). And that is at a different range than where the ball is, so the shift would be different again between the two.
Distortion really isn't a debatable topic, it's completely normal optics. Your mind does the corrections so things look normal, but it's present. Every single lens in existence has some distortion and it's greater at the edges.
As an aside, I'm a fairly avid hobbyist with photography, I like to use legacy manual lenses mounted by adapters on a modern camera frame. I currently use Olympus, would love to get a Sony a7R, that would be my ideal platform. Since I shoot RAW, I have to deal with distortion on every shot (if I choose to, most of the time I don't worry about it). It's usually just a minimal effect based on the length of the lenses I use, but if I had to take an ultra-precise image (let's say, some architecture and I want the angles all perfect for the front of a building), you would notice it.
Was the ball fair, or foul- doesn't matter, we won regardless.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News