img802

FWIW - I notice the doorjam/door lines diverging upwards. I bugs me. (you LF guys deserve a chuckle - you've earned it). For my home file, I found how to correct using electrons. Would I be correct that a print could be similarly corrected by tilting the top of the easel towards the the enlarger lens?

You can't do that without also tilting the lens or the film. If you move the easel, you will not be able to focus across the image. The film and the lens need to be parallel, if the focal point is parallel across the planes, which film is in an enlarger. Not sure, though, what actually bugs you about the convergence in this photo. The only composition element that could be made once you found your image is to make sure the edge of the brass strip in the center is absolutely horizontal on the ground glass. Not sure you have grid lines in the hassy to do that, and you are not noticeably off here. I personally think that a bit of convergence is natural in almost any perspective, just as it is seen though not zeroed out by the advanced processing of our brains, and can be very pleasing and even dramatic at times. There is the occasional photo that may need convergence controlled. I will do it often in a photo that is from far way that has a vertical line. I pick the line that i want to be vertical, and then the rest fall where they fall. My flatiron building is an example (i know my cropping seems to defy that intent). I chose the rear of the building, not the center, and all else fell where it fell. i couldn't use a horizontal line, so i had the camera horizon-level. In this photo of yours it seemed to add to the photo, and did a bit jumble up the normal perspective of looking down at a doorknob to that of looking up at one. And i think that the center of the photo is fairly vertical, which makes more sense here. I find a door knob a bit tricky in the sense that it just seems to not work for me when it is dimensionless, which it would be if you took it straight-on. And unless one is spying through the keyhole, or is a little person of about 2yo, looking straight-on at a doorknob is about the most unnatural point of view. Sitting on a floor is natural, standing up is natural, bending over to keyhole height is just painfully unnatural. I realize you put this in the standard gallery, but you are easy-going to correspond with anywhere - what did bother me a little about this photo was the hot spot between the mirrored bass clef designs. Usually unavoidable, though and i have not succeeded in photoshop bringing down broad spots without destructively causing color or saturation shift. Another reason (of several) i just do not shoot color anymore. And, i would also say this. Making convergence corrections in photoshop is so easy, that for all but the most demanding photos you should do it digitally from a drum scan and have printed in fuji chromira (though such an image may then be banned from apug - just shift to dpug for those special photos). I will regurgitate also my comment from the other color photo you posted. This taken in b/w would not have been as good in my opinion as it is color. The texture of leather or canvas or whatever it is on the door would have been utterly lost, as well as the worn down parts of the cover. The color arrangements of that faded burgundy with brass with dark wood just do go well, and i think is the only faithful capture of the subject. Another interesting not necessarily better variation of taking a photograph of this door may have been to go off axis a bit to the right with the camera and then frame it. But it think that would have introduced obtrusive distortion to the brass design, and the doorknob would then have the door frame partially in its background, which would probably not look too good either. Your framing seems just right.

Wow, Michael. Thank You so much. I would have obsessed on how to correct the convergence way beyond its value. 'Must be that reading diet of Adams on the camera. You call it right about fixing one portion - buggers up another. The hot spot - I'm used being from flash, but this was from the 1.5 story stained glass window about 50-60' behind me. I've not found a solution I like yet either, though I tried on one of the color shots. A polarizer would have helped, but I had just finished 3 - 16m exposures & was burned out on holding the release that long. 'Lost a frame when the release lock didn't hold. I'm SLOWLY getting my noggin around the effects of view camera movements. While size/convergence would be fixed by one of the planes being closer, that would probably destroy focus somewhere. Again, I sure appreciate your sharing your knowledge here.

One has to take formulations of AA with a pinch of potassium bromide sometimes so as to restrain the tendency for brain fogging by overthink or overwork. I did learn this the hard way, as it happens with the Shrewsbury church i spoke of just today in the other color photo you posted. I took a photo of the clock tower from the middle of the street. Zeroed out as much convergence as i could literally swing, and simply ruined the image. I never went back and took that photo again. But i studied the problem for literally years to comprehend what i had done wrong. The most important guidance st-A gave us on the view camera is that when you think you have made the composition you want, you then have to check every point of the ground glass for focus, or defocus as you intend. Another lesson i had to learn by personal experience. So swing and tilt the film for the composition and swing and tilt and focus the lens for focus. The last one is much harder, since every move of the lens requires refocusing so you have to iterate to the final solution. It is all in the Scheimpflug, baby. On the other subject, I don't know if a polarizer would actually help in this type of reflection. I don't think there will be enough directivity in the light, it is neither from the side nor is it specular and it is more diffuse. But i have not tried and it should be tried or looked up. I would love a solution to this kind of reflection. Still, here it is only mild, does not destroy the print, and is actually another of those natural realities that makes it so one can live with it. I have had to take a strong arm to the photographs i take so as to not "snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory." But it is true, too, that we do need to be somewhat critical and realistic about our own stuff. Like all of life, it is better to go through it with some balance and temperament.

I'm still chuckling, Michael. Alot of what you describe of the Shrewsbury shot is really close to the bone for me. I have to have lost rolls to trying too hard to get things too perfect. This day was no exception. I expect I'll need to go back for a retake or 4.