Photography Myths
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 чер 2024
- 6 things most photographers are wrong about
The first 500 people to use my link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare skl.sh/tylerstalman02241
Get my presets here stalman.com/shop
The Stalman Clamp for vertical filmmakers kondorblue.com/products/stalm...
Follow me on Instagram / stalman
Follow me on Twitter / stalman
And be sure to checkout @InDepthCine! He has a ton of great videos - Наука та технологія
Great video! Perspective distortion is indeed a property of the relative distance from a subject at which an image is viewed. Colour science is another overused term. The colour of a digital image is determined by the dyes used for the colour filter array and the colourimetric fitting. That's it. However, depth of field is another photography myth attributed to sensor size when it's just a ratio of the horizontal sensor size multiplied by the f stop number.
I started my camera life only using manual. I thought this was the only way. Now 7 years in, I learned that Auto WB, Auto ISO, autofocus and everything else automated by your camera are tools to help you and its by knowing right place to use these tools that make you a professional.
Switching from manual to A/S priority honestly brought back my enjoyment of photography.
That makes two of us! 🙋♂️ However experimenting (and failing) with M definitely taught me a lot. Especially when I got into shooting on film, having that basic fundamental understanding of how cameras work turned out to be super useful.
I agree. I will use Aperture priority but I always like the have the exposure comp at -1 when I do.
@@classic.cameras I accidentally cut a section about exposure compensation, I even shot b-roll for it🤦🏻♂
Make a part two and wear the same clothes? This was a fun video. @@stalman
Agreed - part II would be welcome.
When people talk about wide angle distortion they usually mean 3d objects at the edge of the frame appear stretched. Eg a ball will appear round near the middle of the frame but elliptical nearer the edge, an effect that increases with angle to the central axis. It is not a lens fault rather an inherent effect of the flat 2d film plane imaging 3d objects. A brick wall might render perfectly while a person appears distorted. The human eye with its spherical imaging surface has the opposite effect.
To keep with the main theme of the video, "with 60mpx you have a lot of room to crop in" is also a myth because amount of pixels doesn't directly account for true resolution.
And great video by the way, the talk about different "perspective" or "compression" with different crop factors was getting me crazy
Oh boy I couldn’t agree more on the tripod one 😂 it’s so fun to see a dozen fellas trying to look pro with their tripod in broad daylight
That nostalgic feeling of those flash photos really got me… just like browsing through photo albums of my childhood. I’m definitely gonna pick up a flash now ⚡️Great video Tyler, your deep understanding of photography and how to use it artistically really inspires me!
Yup. (distortion)
Thanks for putting this out, dude! Fstoppers did something similar a few years back but your side by sides are great and PROVE that distance to subject is the key, not the lens, by itself.
I'll check out what they did, but yeah it's something I've known in theory for a while but I had to test for myself to be sure
@@stalman To be clear, your video was much more to the to point! Good content as always, Tyler!
I would say I mostly shoot manual with auto ISO. When shooting moving subjects I want faster shutter speeds, while for steady objectects I usually go way below the speed of "twice the focal length of lens".
That rule is more useful is a world without stabilized sensors and lenses
@@MaDshowonhere exactly. I can shoot way below that. So aperture priority usually won't work for me.
Really well done. This video does a great job conveying technical information relevant to pros in a way that’s easily understandable for less experienced photographers.
Loved this video! Very clear and the production is top notch!
Altho, may I ask, if you can put the camera higher a little so it's eye level with you cos it feels like I'm a little child watching you haha.
Super helpful, loved each one, thanks!
RE: Depth of field changing with longer focal lengths, my hypothesis is that the key variable is aperture diameter. An 85/2 lens has an aperture of 42.5mm wide open, while a 16/2 has an aperture of just 8mm. I think if you stopped down the 85/2 lens so that the aperture closes down to 8mm, the DOF would be the same. (Naturally the exposure would not be.)
I don’t like the on camera flash look, but I do mess around with off camera flash and modifiers. It’s great to have an idea, set the light(s), and have total control over the light and shadow on the subject.
lol thats just called lighting
This is amazing and helpful ! I have a Ricoh grIIIx for my general photo needs.
What hybrid system would you recommend for a long form podcast, travel video and photo, great low light and autofocus ? Body size important too since it’s for podcasting and travel 🧭
To answer that I’d need to make another video 🤗
Ive worked in videoproduction for 15 years and this video learned me a lot! thanx Tyler!
The color science one is true for video too. If you use a color checker like the Xrite one in the video you can make any two cameras look the same, including skin tone. It just requires some knowledge of the tools (hint: curves) you use in your NLE.
I hugely appreciate your clear explanation on focal lengths and distortion. I always cringe a tiny bit when I am (again and again) told that 85mm is the perfect portrait focal length (bokeh quality aside). This didn't make intuitive sense to me at the beginning of my career, so to clear this up for myself, I shot several portrait sessions with a 200mm f/2 lens (I had to use a walkie talkie to direct my subjects sometimes!) and with several different wide angles, and moved back and forth and cropped as necessary. All good. But I've never been able to explain the issue to my colleagues and students as clearly as you have here, kudos.
Conversely, I shoot in manual almost all the time, just a habit I picked up when I was first starting ("you gotta know your camera, grasshopper"), and it's entirely second nature, I (roughly) adjust my various settings even with my camera down by my side. This includes shooting in studio, of course, but also in hugely varied conditions, like music festivals. Personally, in challenging conditions, I find that most automatic modes get it "wrong" as often as they get it right, they rarely match the exposure that _I_ would have chosen (so I just maintain complete control, mirrorless sure has made that a lot easier).
As for mythbusting "my camera has better colour science", yes yes yes, you got it 100%, thank you!
Re: tripods, I have a bunch, and they are absolutely mandatory...for timelapse photography (which is what I mostly do). Sometimes I haul around up to 5 of them on my back and shoulders, but if I'm not shooting something that needs a tripod? LOL, they stay in the car/hotel/studio.
And flash during the daytime? It's either someone new to photography, or a pro :-)
Again, great vid, I'm sharing it around a lot.
Great video as always! The way I always thought of it is that "compression" is the space between the camera and the subject. A long lens "compresses" that space to make it feel closer. It's not compressing the space between the subject and it's background. That will remain unchanged no matter the focal length. So this video makes a lot of sense to me!
hey, that's a clever way to think of it! I like that
Interesting. Maybe "constrains the space" is a better way to say it. A long lens narrows the field of view so that you notice the "compression" caused by the distance between camera and subject more.
The compression thing is something I’ve talked about / known for awhile. I think what we can do to fix the “myth” or what I’d call a bit of miscommunication: use terms like compression, distortion, etc to include the work *effect* after them. So it’s not physically a compression or distortion factor between lenses, but rather a compression EFFECT or distortion EFFECT. In a way, both sides are correct. We do visually see an effect of compression or distortion by changing lenses AND changing our distance to subject. But it is just that, an effect achieved based on the look you’re going for.
So we can say “I’d like to give a distorted effect by using a wide angle lens and getting within a foot or two of the subject.” Or “I’d like to get some compression effect of the scene by using a 200mm and backing way away.” It would still communicate the look that most people are talking about, while helping educate on the difference.
Just a thought / idea of course, maybe that’s wrong and we do need to just attempt to undo years of incomplete terms? Haha
Definitely more of a communication issue than a myth exactly, I just know a lot of casual photographers have a hand wavy misunderstanding of what’s going on
I think the use of the word “myth” is incorrect in this video, and misleading
I was wondering about this because I watched the In Depth Cine video, then revisited the Fstoppers about this right after watching that video! How ironic that you posted a video about the crop/compression myth!
The tripod thing has always baffled me. I suppose it's just different methods, but id rather just stay handheld and discover some difference angles by moving about and experimenting, than spending those ten minutes setting up a tripod and pontificating about my original idea
you're more charitable than me to say it's different methods 😅 my assumption is that most of those photographers just don't realize they could get by fine without a tripod
Very interesting video, my only grip is that I don't think your test with distortion was truly scientific enough to prove your point... I would have been interested to see if the 85mm distorted your face when you move closer as that seems to be your hypothesis? So in theory both lenses should distort more or less as you move closer or further from the lens? Otherwise awesome video!
It absolutely would distort his face the same way because the distortion he's talking about is all about perspective. You just wouldn't be able to see the distortion very well because it's so zoomed in.
Glad you came to visit Romania, hope you had a great time!
Great video, so many times beginners - and also long-term beginners, if they can be so called - say that: "wide lenses distort, don't use anything wider than 35/50mm!", or "Canon colors are class-leading, Sony colors are cr*p!", "I have an entry-level camera and 3x kit lens, so I use full manual, incl. manual ISO, to become a pro!"
A caveat to the compression thing: when you put a subject at the side of a wide lens, it will be distorted, even though the distance might be the same. So only for the centre of the lens, zooming in yields the same results. Or is that also the cause of pincushion/barrel distortion?
Came here to say this. It really only works if the subject is in the center of the frame. The wide angle lens typically distort things on the sides of the frame.
I think calling it 'perspective distortion' is alright for the sake of conveying the point that a close object will look different than a far object.
I’ve shot in Manual mode my entire life. It’s so second nature to me that it’s just as fast for me to shoot manual than using exposure compensation in semi automatic modes such as aperture priority. However I will use fully auto when I’m just out with friends or family casually snapping photos without really looking at the screen.
Nice shout out to Steve Yedlin. He has an amazing blog. The only thing about distortion and the whole 'large format look' that I keep thinking about is that car scene trough the corn field in Interstaller. There's a IMAX camera mounted to a car, so there is a fixed distance from the camera to the subjects. This scene would look different if you want the same angle of view on super35. Wouldn't the image have more distortion if you wanted the exact same framing but had to shoot on super35?
I guessed 2/4 correct for camera brands. Color science doesn’t matter much if you plan to manipulate after but I picked out the Fuji instantly. Fuji most of the time has darker shadows. That’s how I identified it.
I'm surprised to see you crop your trip photos so extensively. Personally, I wouldn't do that. I don't see the necessity of using a wide lens only to crop a tiny portion of the frame. Moreover, many of my friends who are professional photographers in weddings, events, or concerts, all shoot in manual mode. None of them rely on aperture priority.
Do the lens test in reverse, shoot the 85 as if it were a 16mm.
Would get the same results, he will have to move one of the lenses to match the other.
No it won't, go try it your self. You'll land on a fastly different image. Just try it with your phone in a local park. @@waynealejo
This was a fantastic video! You brought up some great (and maybe controversial?) points. And yes, 99% of the time I shoot in Aperture priority mode... which has been a lot of time since my first DSLR in 2006 lol
Great video! And I will just add one more hot take here: there is no such thing as a medium format look. Optically an APS-C camera or full frame camera can achieve the exactly same picture of a medium format camera if they match the equivalent focal length and aperture
I agree for medium format but when you get up to large format it can cross over to a depth of field/field of view ratio that's just not possible on full frame. But that's not usually what people are talking about.
I shoot manual because I used to shoot jpeg on dslr, and aperture priority will often expose what is essentially the same scene differently based on slight differences, like a person wearing white stepping into frame. Manual is just more constant, and there are very few environments where the light will go from one extreme to another in a matter of seconds. Adapting and adjusting your settings is normally a matter of dialing in a maximum of one stop up or down, if there's a cloud coming in or something.
What you're talking about is metering! So the method your camera uses to describe the current exposure is called "Metering" and back in the day it used to just be "Spot" metering, which would just meter off the very center of the frame. If you're having issues with your camera switching from one extreme to another, you might want to look at what your metering mode is, and use one that fits your desired look! You absolutely are not meant to use just one metering mode 😅 My personal favorite has been "Highlight" metering, which generally underexposes images to protect the highlights, which lets me preserve as much detail as possible across the entire frame!
Love the aerial shot you got of my home town ( Brasov ) ❤🔥
And I loved Brasov! Such a beautiful place, I’d love to see it in the summer
@@stalmanIn the summer everything is green and fun, good for cooling when hiking or just a walk, but in Autumn every forest is like a rainbow.
From mid September until early November is a good time frame to catch the colorful forests.
Absolutely love these videos! But I hardcore disagree about shooting in manual. Probably because I shoot concert style photography and the lighting changes are absolutely insane. I never trust a camera to pick the correct exposure or white balance so I stay manual the entire time particularly when switching between stage shots and audience shots.
That's fair, each mode has it's place
Would also just add I think these ideas around compression are in the context of images that had a very clear subject/face/focal point that's small in the center of the frame -- and actually where the distortion matters the most for a lot of photographers is the distortion of objects/information around the edges of the frame that can't be cropped out/are required to be in the final images. A lot of the times, you can't step back any farther, or you don't wish to.
Yes that’s very true. Just trying to clarify that if you can’t step back any further, it’s still not your lens causing the distortion.
You could attempt to get a wider distortion free image by shooting a panorama with a 50mm but will run into the same perspective distortion
@@stalman It's a really useful lesson with the new era we're in where cameras like the 100VI now have 40mp. I've always stuck my nose up at the Fuji X100 series because 23mm lens is so wide and there weren't really enough mp to compensate -- but at 40mp, the VI makes it so you can really compose a variety of type shots in the center of your frame and not worry too much about cropping limitations.
Also for colour Science, I found the white balance is completely different between Sony, canon, fuji ect. so you cant sync the WB but you have to manually match it!
If only Lightroom had a vector scope, waveform and the spider chart
We try to avoid our shooters using different camera brands for this, but imagine AI has helped alot!
Loved this video, I always know you get things correct and I trust your knowledge.
I'm so with you on the lack a color data in Lightroom, it's crazy to me that these visualizers aren't standard for photography
Isn’t the distortion issue at the side of the frame on wide angle lenses?
There are lenses that have their own distortion in the corners, but great lenses have very minimal corner distortion
They do have the distance distortion I talked about though
I think you should go back through indepthcine's video it is correct. Compression and distortion are two different things. When you take an image and crop it in photoshop you miss the point. If you take a 24mm lens and then shoot a 40mm lens the perspective of the scene becomes shallower. If I go to a 200mm lens I can flatten the perspective. Kinda like foreshortening
I wish I knew you were going to visit Bucharest & Brasov! I would've showed you some spots around the city, you know, beside the touristic spots. Did you like your time in Bucharest?
lmao i used to shoot fully manual when i first started because we all need to learn the exposure triangle and i thought it looked "professional", nowadays i'm using mostly shutter priority because i'm just tired of juggling the exposure triangle constantly and missing the shot, and since i usually shoot street+documentary style IMO the shutter speed affects the feel of the images more than aperture. plus i'm using the ZV1 so that 1" sensor aint a bokeh monster anyway lol so i usually adjust my shutter and EV values on the fly and just ignore the ISO and f/ value.
another one is about gear; gear actually does matter if it improves your picture taking skills or enjoyment. i remember how i had more fun on my Samsung NX300 than on my Canon 750D even though the NX300 is older, just because it's smaller. i bought the 750D thinking a proper DSLR would improve my skills but i was dead wrong lol.
The tripod thing is definitely strange even at night when travelling. My usual working limit on my X-T4 is 1/5th of a second with a wide angle lens. I consistently get sharp images without too much trouble. I would assume any brand camera with IBIS would perform similar.
I did carry a mini tripod in my bag on my most recent backpacking trip but ended up only using it a few times. I probably wouldn’t bother in the future unless I planned on doing something like astro
Yeah same, I often shoot 1/15th in the evening and it's not even close to a problem
P or S is my go to modes. I use M as a custom mode set for when I want ISO 100, aperture wide open, slow shutter and rely on IBIS. 😂
Cameras are pretty smart, I may take over in some chomped lighting situations, but I'm fine with the camera going for f5.6 most of the time. Bokeh is overrated. 😎
The only reason I can think of for tripods in the day is frame matching. So maybe focus stacking or something like taking multiple images at a tourist spot then using the stack in Ps to clear out the crowd.
You should try to shoot a round plate with tight framing with a wide angle lens like 16 or 20mm haha
You were right about everything here except for the times when it kinda just depends.
I always shoot manual stealth for photography, not filmet much yet. But on Sony A7IV the camera mostly get it wrong, too dark, too high, too low iso, overexposed.
Not tried with the 2.01 Firmware yet, but in 1.11 only Manual was valid.
Great video
I believe I saw a video maybe by F stoppers about this a long time ago about compression.
A great intro to lens science. I prefer to go by what I see rather than how I think the lens will perform. I look, I like, I shoot. I don’t get bogged down by the small stuff.
That’s exactly the right way to approach it, shoot what looks good
Fuji by far has the best JPEG options out there. You can use your camera to process RAWs inside the camera in the preview menu! Awesome. They have XRAW studio to do the same thing with your computer. But be careful. The profiles inside many of the software out there are not exactly the same as the processing happening inside the camera. And this goes well beyond the hue and sat of each individual color.
In lumix cameras you can make your own luts and bake them into your photos
@@LumixGang Which is awesome!
I love that about Lumix but I do think Fuji has an edge by building it in. Every camera brand should have it's own flavour of film sim
I shoot only in manual mode, white balance is also manual, depth of field with aperture, aperture shutter speed, cameras are always deceived on the machine
I always stick a cheap flash on my Leica to take snapshots. It's not easy getting that "disposable camera" look. Off to throw my tripod in the bin. Good video.
I wish there were more low profile flash options, why would anyone want it to be tall?
Personal I'm not the biggest fan of aperture priority, I find the camera offten chooses settings I wouldn't. That being said there's 100% a use case for it and the right time for it. Same with auto iso
im a wedding photographer with 15 years doing this ... I shoot AV (aperture priority) the whole wedding but when using flash aka the reception party.
Yep same here, that's how I've always shot weddings
One word is enough - THANKS!
This is true about wide lenses. Its like using a 85mm wide open but the person is like 10 meters away and in the distance. There is no bokeh practically at that point. Certainly not the punch you get doing a head shot.
On the color science front-I think another point that needs to be hammered home is that it's ADOBE that creates all the profiles that go into Lightroom & camera raw. AFAIK Canon (or any other brand) has no part in creating the camera-matching profiles for Adobe software (which is why they tend to suck so bad and why I argue that camera manufacturers SHOULD create their own profiles FOR Adobe-NO ONE WANTS TO USE DPP CANON!!). I'll apologize now for the long parenthetical... 😅
So, this is why Capture One and other raw processors have different colors and looks. I'd love to test different camera brands and profile each setup with an x-rite color profile and see what (if any) differences there are... Or, a test between different raw processors! I love Adobe but their color profiles just arent as good as C1...
Yeah I'm actually really dissatisfied with these default color pipelines we use. Adobe Color is painfully dull and isn't as constant as I would expect. CaptureOne definitely has a better starting point but manufactures need to provide mode color options at higher standards.
@stalman This is a big point which is never talked about.
Even though there are tens of camera manufactures, in this moment in time I'd say 50% of RAW photos out there are based on Adobe profiles, 40% on camera matching profiles (still by adobe), 10% on Capture One and a fraction of a fraction of people use custom camera profiles.
There is only so much you can do with LR curves and HSL, very little education on this topic, and very few alternatives.
Back in the days I loved VSCO Film with custom profiles. Sadly when it was abruptly discontinued I had to abandon ship, but I'm still missing that project. The most complete do date.
Mathematically a 15mm and an 85mm lens may have similar distortion but functionally the result is completely different
I think words like distortion and compression may be used wrong. Both are really an optical illusion. I don't know what the correct terms are so, I will continue to use them incorrectly until I know what the correct terms are.
HAH! Guessed all the cameras, so happy now!
Switching to Sony after shooting Canon for 20 years. Honestly never really noticed Canon colors. Like I guess they have a wee bit of a different look but its nothing crazy and really, I just edit my RAW files all the time.
The lens selection and camera handling are way more important than the sensor color
I agree. Another myth you could put in a part 2. Sharpness doesn't always matter. I hate too sharp of lenses for portraits, it shows every imperfection. @@stalman
oh no you increased my Leica GAS 😭😭
The distance to camera seems to show similar distortion, as long as you are looking at the center of the lens. What if your subject is on the edge of the frame on an uncorrected 16mm lens? Very apparent when shooting large group portraits. Or maybe I’m wrong…
It's still about distance to the camera. Consider this: you have a large group of people and you frame them up with a long lens so they fill the frame. The people directly in front of you are slightly closer to you than the people at the far left and the far right of the group, however the difference between these distances is minor compared to the distance between you and the group as a whole.
Then you frame the same group with a wide angle lens, coming much closer. Now the relative difference in distance between you and the center people versus you and the people at the far edges is much greater, so there's more perspective distortion.
That's why there's more distortion at the edges of a wide angle lens. It's not the lens, it's distance to subject.
i farted into myths
Photographers who tell me lens compression isn't a thing blows my mind.
Yeah surprising, right?
compression is not depth of field!!!
He really generalized and assumed a lot here
The ability to match one sensor to another doesn't mean that there's no color science lol. Every camera sensor is different and responds to color manipulation differently, even when shot in RAW.
Yes absolutely, but if you spend any time in camera forums you’d think that each manufacturer will produce a distinct flavour of “color science”. Raw engines normalize most of those differences and even jpgs don’t usually have opinionated color behaviour in different manufacturers.
I shot jpegs for events hahahaha i dont have time to edit 4000 photos and deliver it in a week
Color science is a thing when you shoot video. Few months back bought the Blackmagic and its comparison to Sony …. Uuughhh
Most of what we’re seeing is differences in color pipelines. Sony, Canon and Lumix have very mediocre manufacturer transform LUTs, where as BMC, Red and Arri have it dialed. But with effort you can match them all
@@stalman What about 10
And 12-bit difference? Maybe if you are super color grader with masks but with the mixed Lightning sony can destroy the balance in such a way that both temp or balance or hue to hue will not help maybe some advanced matrix manipulation. Also the sony has post processing which is irreversible
So I feel like the title is inaccurate. The devil is in the semantics. Wider lenses do distort by nature. If you're using a wide lens vs a tele lens and you're filling the frame with the same amount of face at the time of the shot there is absolutely still distortion. The caveat is the proximity aspect. If you're shooting both focal lengths from a fixed distance and then you're doing massive crops to make the frsming equal you can avoid the distortion in the final product. You made that point in a roundabout way a few times but I'm not sure that you drove it home. Maybe it's just me.
There’s a lot of details and semantics in the point I’m making, but I know the default assumption from most photographers is that a wide lens “has” distortion or a tele lens “has” compression, but they are not lens properties. They are properties of viewing distance.
I also hear photographers say that one lens has especially nice compression, which is confused on even more levels
I agree. The manner in which this information was presented was frustrating and made for a hard watch
For anyone who thinks that the whole "lens compression" myth isn't really a thing. I know of many professional architectural photographers who think (incorrectly) that if they use a 24mm tilt/shift lens and create a two or three shot stitched panorama they can get the same field of view as a single shot with a 16mm lens but without all of the "wide angle distortion."
That’s a perfect example of how these myth affect real world photos.
There is no myth to be busted. It is more of a wording or convention issue. With your framing/composition being kept equal, and considering the full frame sensor, wide angle and anamorphic lenses will distort, be less flattering (or more dramatic), and will have less dof compared to longer focal lengths.
When you crop in to just a tiny piece of sensor in the center of the frame you are effectively changing the equivalent focal length of your lens and not experiencing the whole set of optical properties of your lens & sensor set. It is similar to saying that a 50mm lens on cropped sensor becomes the equivalent to an 85mm lens on full frame, because they will have the same field of view (all things being kept equal). You are just extrapolating/cropping in much more in your example.
I’m old school in that I always shoot in manual mode. While AP/AV is helpful, knowing your camera settings and the environment you’re shooting in and your post-prod process I think is key, as a pro photographer.
Lots of use cases for M! I just think people starting out sometimes get frustrated how often they miss the shot and want them to know it's ok to lean on the camera for help
@@stalman absolutely agree. Although because so many photographers reply on post, many don’t know how to shoot in M and rely completely on the cameras’ auto-assist features. But you have to start somewhere and better to create than not create at all because you’re scared of M mode.
1st
Compression is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE SAME THING as depth of field. In the In Depth Cine video he is not referring to the bokeh when he is talking about compression. He is referring to how a telephoto lens makes the background appear closer to the subject (given that all other factors remain the same when changing between a wide angle & telephoto lens).
I think you’re trying to myth bust without you having a proper understanding of some of the things you are trying to myth bust. Yes rules can be challenged & broken to produce interesting effects, but there’s a reason why photographers & cinematographers say ‘no close up portraits with wide angle lenses’. It because those lenses DO distort facial features. It’s because those lenses DO render the depth of field in a less pleasing way. It’s because those lenses DO change the compression of the scene in a less pleasing way. These are foundational things.
No no no. Lenses have NOTHING to do with "compression." It is distance from camera to subject.
I got this response from other experienced photographers, it’s a really common reaction. But I promise I’m not making it up, distortion and compression in the way you’re describing them are not lens properties. It’s just subject distance and field of field.
Lens distortion is not a myth.
Have a person sit at a normal/close distance from your lens, and a wide angle will distort.
And you proved it in your video.
Clickbait BULLSHT
Yup, if they sit close to the lens they will distort because of perspective distortion, which is not a property of lenses at all. Use a 50mm and stitch together a wide panorama, you'll discover the same perspective distortion