Bi-focals and GG focusing

Half frame reading glasses for the fine focus ... and to see the little numbers on the lens !

A large darkcloth to see the glass from print viewing distance.

Laz,
I am terribly far-sighted. I just can't get too close to the GG. I bought a Schneider Kreuznach 8X loupe that has a focus adjustment. It sits 2 inches from the GG. This, the wonderful Satin Snow GG And BlackJacket has made it much easier to see and focus clearly.

You didn't say if you were near sighted, far sighted, or have astigmatism.

I'm nearsighted, and have a very strong astigmatism correction. I have to wear glasses even to use a magnifier. My answer is that I have separate computer glasses adjusted for a distance a little longer than normal reading, and I use these also for focusing view cameras. These and regular magnifiers (3x or 10x pocket magnifiers) work just fine for me.

For normal activities, I just wear bifocals. My astigmatism is such that progressives don't work well for me.

Charlie

voceumana said:

You didn't say if you were near sighted, far sighted, or have astigmatism.

Click to expand...

I have 51 year old eyes. Presbyopia is the nifty name for old eyes. So I have progressives that correct for reading and a slight correction for distance.

Someone mentioned Lasik. I don't think they do it for Presbyopia and even if they did I wouldn't let someone touch my eyes even if it was gonna give me x-ray vision!

The thought of anything cutting my eyes just plain freaks me out!

-Bob

laz said:

I have 51 year old eyes. Presbyopia is the nifty name for old eyes. So I have progressives that correct for reading and a slight correction for distance.

Someone mentioned Lasik. I don't think they do it for Presbyopia and even if they did I wouldn't let someone touch my eyes even if it was gonna give me x-ray vision!

The thought of anything cutting my eyes just plain freaks me out!

-Bob

Click to expand...

I believe you are correct with respect to the Presbyopia. That's my problem too.

As far as laser surgery, I'm sure it's a personal thing. My wife had it, and was amazed that she could read license plates on the way home from the hospital (done as outpatient). But we found a very experienced doctor that did each eye separately (at a different time). The idea of doing both eyes at one REALLY freaks ME out.

I have progressives also. I take my glasses off when composing (dropping them to the cord around my neck), and put them back on to focus. It's a pain, but it works. I'm trying some WalMart glasses, but, of course, I can't see to do anything else (like walk to the next photo!), but they have helped in some situations.

Comparatively our problem is minor: one of my friends has cataracts, and can't focus reliably. It's like the man with no shoes meeting the man with no feet! Count your blessings, as they are.

Dan Fromm said:

Charles, have you washed your ground glass recently? That will make a difference.

Click to expand...

Cleaning the ground glass, hmmmmm. Never thought of that. Is there any right or wrong way?

laz said:

Someone mentioned Lasik. I don't think they do it for Presbyopia and even if they did I wouldn't let someone touch my eyes even if it was gonna give me x-ray vision!

The thought of anything cutting my eyes just plain freaks me out! -Bob

Click to expand...

I've had four cornea transplants and am still blind in my left eye. (It's a good excuse for out-of-focus photos). I had a friend who had lasik and said it was a breeze. $1 dollar store glasses or a loupe still sounds better

Most of the replies seem to be near sighted aging photographers. Thats me as well. I understand the difficulty of viewing the upper corners of the GG if you are using the bottom edge of your bifocals - I can feel the neck strain thinking about it. If you are indeed near sighted, for some people the simple solution is taking their glasses off. If you are far sighted, that is not an option whatsoever, and the flip down magnifiers might be in order. Saint Ansel wore those. Strong astigmatism can only be corrected by eye glasses in general, and if this is a factor, again flip down magnifiers could well work.

Personally, I have been corrected for myopia since my early teens with glasses. For the past 30 years however, I switched to contact lenses, because I hate bruised ears and noses. I am assuming you don't mind wearing glasses. But with my contacts to correct for far vision, to correct for aging (presbyopia) I simply use 1.75 or 2.00 reading glasses for daily tasks and I will wear a pair of 3.00 reading glasses at the ground glass. Reading glasses have the advantage of covering a large area, so I can view the ENTIRE ground glass for composition, not just view a small area for focus.

One last option I would suggest if you want to continue with the bifocal route is to get regular bifocals not progressives. It will give you a much larger truly correct viewing angle. Also, you might discuss with your optometrist - optician the dividing line for the magnifying portion, if he/she understands your need to tilt your head severly when you are under the dark cloth, you might get a much better solution. And remember that you might consider two solutions. One for daily tasks, and a separate one specifically for photography.

I am quite nearsighted and wear progressives. I can remove my glasses for rough focusing, but need to replace them for fine focus with a loop and everything else. Tried the cheap reading glasses solution for a while, but I still needed to remove and replace my glasses.

A few years ago there was a post on Tuan's large format forum that discussed special glasses that plumbers sometimes wear. If I recall correctly, they are essentially reverse progressives or trifocals. The close distance is on the top, and the far on the bottom. I think some photographers said that they tried this and like it. There is a special name for these in the optician's world. It might be worth visiting the site and searching for this thread. You probably know, but just in case, it is at www.lfphoto.info.

I found that thread at lfphoto.info: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/496901.html

Sorry for the multiple posts. Here are a couple more threads to read on the topic. When you are done, you will have to give your eyes a rest!

http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/393810.html
http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/259020.html

LASIK was the best thing I’ve ever done for myself. I am a mother of a 3 year old and a 1 year old and that means a lot of waking up in the middle of the night. This translated to sleeping in my contacts so that I could see what I was doing when I had to check on my kids; after 20 years, it was starting to take a toll on the health of my eyes. Dr. Wiles well his a surgeon at LASIK-1, is so informative and has such a calm demeanor; he put me at ease even though I was nervous about the procedure. He went through all of the steps involved in the treatment so that I knew exactly what to expect. I appreciate everything he has done to make my vision what it is today. I can now see 20/20 with no help.

iwitness45 said:

LASIK was the best thing I’ve ever done for myself. I am a mother of a 3 year old and a 1 year old and that means a lot of waking up in the middle of the night. This translated to sleeping in my contacts so that I could see what I was doing when I had to check on my kids; after 20 years, it was starting to take a toll on the health of my eyes. Dr. Wiles well his a surgeon at LASIK-1, is so informative and has such a calm demeanor; he put me at ease even though I was nervous about the procedure. He went through all of the steps involved in the treatment so that I knew exactly what to expect. I appreciate everything he has done to make my vision what it is today. I can now see 20/20 with no help.

Click to expand...

welcome to APUG
20 years of waking up with a 3 and 1 year old would take a toll on anybody especially if the kids never grew up.
Is your name Wendy?

close focusing

I have been nearsighted all my life and have always worn glasses for distance vision. Once past fifty I also needed correction to allow me to read. For these conditions I wear progressive lenses. The problem I found is that the area of the glasses which allows me to read is set for objects about 17" away. Under the dark cloth I can't focus on the ground glass which is about 8" away. I played around with magnifying head bands, flip down lenses, switching glasses, etc. It was all to cumbersome. I wanted to be able to view the scene at whatever distance and then, without changing anything, duck under the dark cloth and view the image on the ground glass. My solution was to have a pair of clip-on lenses made: the bottom portion modifies the focus distance to 8" away; the top portion makes no change, allowing me to focus at distances from about 3' to infinity. If I need to read something while shooting I just hold it 8" away. When shooting with these clip-on lenses I never even think about vision issues. They help with spotting prints, too. njb

Progressive lenses are a total blessing unless you are a photographer. Or maybe a birder. They were never intended for that kind of work.

There are two aspects focusing the ground glass with large format. The first is simply composing the image. The second is fine-tuning the focus, usually using a loupe. As mentioned above, loupes usually are made with the convention of being used with a person focused at infinity or using the top part of their glasses. Composing the image requires looking through the bifocal requiring a person to obtain an awkward head position. All of this is confounded by the relatively dark, inverted image on the ground glass and vignetting about the edges.

Prescribing glasses for people with presbyopia first involves correcting the person for distance and correcting any astigmatism. People who are sufficiently near sighted may be able to focus at near by taking their glasses off. Presbyopic, farsighted people, however, are obligated to wear glasses or other correction for both distance and near. Assuming that the person is fully corrected at infinity, the near correction is made by combining the person’s remaining focusing ability that diminishes with age with the power of the bifocal. The sum of these is the reciprocal of the working distance in meters. For example, if a person has .5 diopters remaining focusing ability and has a +2.00 diopter bifocal, the closest working distance is the reciprocal of 2.50 or 0.40 meter. Progressive bifocals have the advantage of increasing power as the person looks downward through the lens allowing a smooth transition from infinity to near. The disadvantage is distortion about the sides of the glasses. Standard or fixed powered bifocals do not give the same range of working distances in older people, but may give a satisfactory range in younger presybopes who still have some focusing ability left. These bifocals do not have the same problems with distortion. All bifocals, with the exception of the above mentioned plumber’s glasses require tipping the head back to see through the bifocal, which is particularly awkward when focusing the ground glass.

One solution to the problem is to have a specialized pair of glasses that solves the problem of composing and focusing with a single lens without a bifocal and without the need for a loupe. The working distance would have to be far enough to compose the image and close enough to fine focus. This might not be practical for very large formats, but for 4X5, adding the reciprocal of 0.150 meters (the focal length of a normal lens) to a person’s distance correction should create a lens with a working distance about the same as the diagonal of the format. This would be a reasonable viewing distance for composing that is also close enough for fine focusing.

Hi !
I, too, have tried a lot of solution to keep wearing my waaaayy toooo expensive vari-focal glasses.
I've given up.
The best route I've found is to put a lace on them in order to be able to let them rest on my chest with no risk of breaking, then use them for composition, and then without them for focusing.
As I was unable to find a loupe able to be adjusted to my sight, I made one.
I used a 135 tranny projector lens (brand Rollei, made in Indonesia, 85 mm focal lenght) a local shop gave me and I made a plastic plumbing tube at the correct length to allow the loupe to be focussed on the ground glass at my sight. Start with cardboard. Easier;-)
This way, I've an inexpensive but very clear magnifier, adjusted for my eyesight and sufficiently long to be used with the focussing hood of my field MPP.
Give it a try, you won't regret it !
Hope this helps ;-)

davekarp said:

A few years ago there was a post on Tuan's large format forum that discussed special glasses that plumbers sometimes wear. If I recall correctly, they are essentially reverse progressives or trifocals. The close distance is on the top, and the far on the bottom. I think some photographers said that they tried this and like it.

Click to expand...

Count me with those that like the reversed bifocal. I went to my optician and requested my prescription upside down (much to their amazement) and it has solved my stiff neck, fogged ground glass, sweaty brow and fuzzy negative problems completely. Plus, it allows me, without removing the glasses, to peek out of the focusing cloth to check my composition, look for stray beer cans, and to avoid tripod legs and rocks as I adjust the shutter. Most of the lens is for far vision, but the normal half-moon at the bottom has been replaced by an inverted half-moon at the top. I have the same pair I bought 10 years ago even though my prescription has changed for my daily glasses several times over the years. Money well spent.

Perhaps one of you might have a thought on this experience, given the topic of this thread... On my MF cameras (Mamiya c220, c33 and Bronica S2A) I get the sharpest view of the image on the ground glass by using the pop-up magnifier and my bifocal; the top, distance viewing, is completely useless. And without my glasses at all, I cannot focus either.

But with my 4x5 ground glass and a focusing loupe, I cannot use the bifocal at all and have to remove my glasses completely. Same glasses in both cases. In fact, I have been thinking of having a bifocal made that has my distance prescription on the top and no prescription on the bottom for use when I am shooting 4x5 only.

But why the difference between MF focusing and LF focusing?

Westly, I am not sure why there is a difference, but is sounds like part of the problem may be with the glasses prescription. As mentioned above, most loupes and pop up magnifiers are designed for viewing with the top part of the glasses. If you see through the pop up magnifier better with the bifocal, there may not be enough plus power in the top part of the glasses. You might check with your eye doctor and verify your glasses prescription, then consider whether it is helpful to get a pair of glasses without the bifocal.

Deckled Edge said:

Count me with those that like the reversed bifocal. I went to my optician and requested my prescription upside down (much to their amazement) and it has solved my stiff neck, fogged ground glass, sweaty brow and fuzzy negative problems completely. times over the years. Money well spent.

Click to expand...

I've heard of that, people (over 40!) who work in stockrooms sometimes use the updside down bifocals, they're reaching up to head level or above. I've been wearing progressives about 5 years, and am considering getting trifocals or whatever it takes at next OD visit, I can't stand them. I have problems with them in darkroom, and gg focusing. The only thing I've found worse than photography is shooting sports, the first time I pulled up a rifle to my eye with progressives was laughable....have to turn my head at an extreme angle to see through the scope or sight clearly. I've heard the progressives technology has improved, though, as mine are 4-5 years old. Regards, Tom

My biggest problem with my reading glasses (for old far sighted eyes with a stigmatism) is fogging up under the cloth. Maddening. For focusing a camera or a contact sheet or film on a light box I have learned to use a lens that doesn't sit on the image being focused, you have to hold it a ways away. Takes a bit of getting used to as you get a feel for the distance but I like it. I can use it with my reading glasses on or off.

A few months ago, I bought a cheap pair of the "reading" glasses (of strength +3.5). I don't normally wear glasses, but the main reason I purchased these was to stop using my loupe for GG focusing. I did not spend much money on them, and that strength seemed to be the greatest I could find.

They are small (1/2 height of normal glasses), so they can be at the end of my nose without interfering with the overall initial composition using my eyes. The MAIN BENEFIT has been the improvement in workflow and the FREEING of BOTH hands for adjusting camera movements. This has made field work so much easier and quicker. My 2-bits about my experience with this...