Being new to cameras with movements (though understanding the concepts), I was wondering about the series of steps that take place in your head when you're first standing there behind your tripod, to determine which and how much movement to apply. With the goal to have a repeatable pattern that could be done in a more quickly and more organized way. I'm not asking "what does this do" so much as the applied practical application side. Thanks for your thoughts.
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
Can you describe your brain's "algorithm" for determining what movements to use for an image?
-
A
- Thread starter loccdor
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Omega D parts
- Started by mgb74
-
For Sale Zone VI 5x7 Enlarger & Accessories $1500 obo
- Started by oficinouno
-
For Sale Antique Darkroom Red Safe Lights _ Electric Lamps
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Antique contact printing frames, Kodak and others, several sizes
- Started by Manual Camera
Forum statistics
Ian C
Allowing Ads
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2009
- Messages
- 1,327
- Format
- Large Format
In order to use movements efficiently, it’s important to use a lens that projects a generously sized image circle so that the movements don’t cut off part of the image.
Read about Scheimpflug Geometry for which we use horizontal swing or vertical tilt.
See the paragraph: Changing the plane of focus.
The basic setup is shown in Figure 2 in the following Wikipedia article. While the math is theoretically interesting, it can be ignored for practical purposes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle
It’s simple to set up. Once you’ve done it a few times, it becomes intuitive and can be done quickly.
As for what indicates which movement to use, it’s the result of looking at the scene and noticing something amiss. For example, if you must angle the lens axis upward to include the top of a tall building or tall trees, you might notice an annoying perspective. It might be remedied by leaving the lens axis as close to horizontal as practical and raising the front standard upward (vertical shift) to capture the higher part of the scene to minimize perspective distortion. Alternatively, you could select a longer lens and photograph from a greater distance if practical.
A subject, such as the photo of the model train in the Wikipedia article, in which the main area of interest lies in a plane that is not parallel to the image plane, indicates the use of Scheimpflug geometry (horizontal lens board tilt in this case) to give the line of train cars good definition at a moderate aperture.
Read about Scheimpflug Geometry for which we use horizontal swing or vertical tilt.
See the paragraph: Changing the plane of focus.
The basic setup is shown in Figure 2 in the following Wikipedia article. While the math is theoretically interesting, it can be ignored for practical purposes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheimpflug_principle
It’s simple to set up. Once you’ve done it a few times, it becomes intuitive and can be done quickly.
As for what indicates which movement to use, it’s the result of looking at the scene and noticing something amiss. For example, if you must angle the lens axis upward to include the top of a tall building or tall trees, you might notice an annoying perspective. It might be remedied by leaving the lens axis as close to horizontal as practical and raising the front standard upward (vertical shift) to capture the higher part of the scene to minimize perspective distortion. Alternatively, you could select a longer lens and photograph from a greater distance if practical.
A subject, such as the photo of the model train in the Wikipedia article, in which the main area of interest lies in a plane that is not parallel to the image plane, indicates the use of Scheimpflug geometry (horizontal lens board tilt in this case) to give the line of train cars good definition at a moderate aperture.
Last edited:
Tel
Allowing Ads
I'm not nearly as scientific about this as some and I don't do architectural photography or landscapes, but rather prefer closeup work. Mostly I ask myself what I want to see in sharp focus in the frame and make the adjustments to do that. More than half the time I don't use the tilt or swing adjustments at all, especially if I'm shooting a slow exposure with a small aperture and deep DoF. I usually spend much more time adjusting the tripod than playing with planes of focus.
Alan Edward Klein
Allowing Ads
When would you shift rather than turn the camera towards the subject?
IMO, the most important thing to remember about camera movements is that very small adjustments typically have a large impact. Architectural photography can demand extreme movements, while landscape/general scenic photography not so much.
I shoot landscapes and general outdoor scenes and my camera movements are generally limited to tilt and rise. When trying to maximize DOF in a landscape, for example, if I have tall verticals in the scene (trees, cactus, etc) I rely on proper setting of focus and smaller apertures to pull as much DOF as I can muster. Personally, I find it difficult to get tall verticals correctly focused if I employ any amount of tilt. If I don't have tall verticals in the scene, then tilt is truly your friend.
I shoot landscapes and general outdoor scenes and my camera movements are generally limited to tilt and rise. When trying to maximize DOF in a landscape, for example, if I have tall verticals in the scene (trees, cactus, etc) I rely on proper setting of focus and smaller apertures to pull as much DOF as I can muster. Personally, I find it difficult to get tall verticals correctly focused if I employ any amount of tilt. If I don't have tall verticals in the scene, then tilt is truly your friend.
Before thinking about camera movements, you first have to think about getting the camera in the best place for the perspective you want -- and then picking a lens for the coverage you want. Putting thought into that will make camera movement easier. Failing to do that will lead you into making unnecessary camera adjustment, especially in rise/fall & shift.
Alex Benjamin
Allowing Ads
No fixed process, depends on the context.
Easiest is general countryside landscape photography. I'll start with rise (or sometimes fall) if needed to get the framing I want. Then it's front tilt to figure out my plane of sharp focus, unless there are many tall, straight objects (trees, poles,etc.) at different distances, in which case I just stop down the lens aperture. I might do a tiny bit of back tilt to emphasize the foreground a little, but really very little, as I don't like this technique becomes obvious in the photograph (this, of course, is a matter of taste and style, not of process per se).
Urban landscape is also simple. Generally, it'll be just rise to get the right framing, and also to eliminate converging line in tall buildings. No other movements are usually necessary, but I might use a little back swing if, for example, I want to sligtly modify the perspective of the side of a building.
Things get more complicated if I need to have the camera at an angle — for example, when point it downwards. First thing in that case is to figure out where I want the film plane (i.e., its relation to the subject), generally through tilt. After comes the front tilt (or swing, in some cases) movement to figure out focus. This situation, to me, is hardest, and longest, to figure out. Happens, for example, if you want to photograph stuff lying on a table from a specific angle and simply using fall doesn't cut it.
Portrait movements are more complicated to systematize, as the totally depend on style, i.e., on how far you're willing to go and experiment in terms of the focusing possibilities that front and back tilt allow. Same can be said for still life.
Easiest is general countryside landscape photography. I'll start with rise (or sometimes fall) if needed to get the framing I want. Then it's front tilt to figure out my plane of sharp focus, unless there are many tall, straight objects (trees, poles,etc.) at different distances, in which case I just stop down the lens aperture. I might do a tiny bit of back tilt to emphasize the foreground a little, but really very little, as I don't like this technique becomes obvious in the photograph (this, of course, is a matter of taste and style, not of process per se).
Urban landscape is also simple. Generally, it'll be just rise to get the right framing, and also to eliminate converging line in tall buildings. No other movements are usually necessary, but I might use a little back swing if, for example, I want to sligtly modify the perspective of the side of a building.
Things get more complicated if I need to have the camera at an angle — for example, when point it downwards. First thing in that case is to figure out where I want the film plane (i.e., its relation to the subject), generally through tilt. After comes the front tilt (or swing, in some cases) movement to figure out focus. This situation, to me, is hardest, and longest, to figure out. Happens, for example, if you want to photograph stuff lying on a table from a specific angle and simply using fall doesn't cut it.
Portrait movements are more complicated to systematize, as the totally depend on style, i.e., on how far you're willing to go and experiment in terms of the focusing possibilities that front and back tilt allow. Same can be said for still life.
cowanw
Allowing Ads
Supposing your Avatar had a mirror staight on instead of a painting, and supposing the person taking the picture did not want to be in the mirror- set up directly in front of you and shift to include the mirror
We have to define "The Camera" because the front and rear are independent and do different things. Turning "The Camera" would move both the front and rear standard and would have dramatic consequences to the focal plane. If the lens moves in space, the viewpoint (perspective) changes also. Again, just to emphasize the dramatic effects of turning the whole camera.
Moving the front standard alone changes perspective, and is the only way to change perspective. That is, moving the lens in 3d space changes the viewpoint and the ONLY way to change the viewpoint is to move the lens in 3d space.
Moving the back does not change perspective. The relationship of objects is held constant. No change in viewpoint.
Of course back swings change the relative size of objects but their relation to each other is held constant. Viewpoint, perspective, etc don't change. One can't 'see around' another object by any movement of the back.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |