Composing with a Waist-level finder

[Pieter12]

My first camera (60 years ago!) was a Yashica TLR. At that time and for the next 3 years, I had no issues composing through the WLF. Recently, I have returned to a TLR and have a hell of a time getting things square in the viewfinder. I found that by attaching a small spirit level to the hood helps, but It keeps getting knocked off so that is not a reasonable solution. Millions of photographers use WLF cameras, so it can't possibly be as difficult as it seems to me. What am I missing here? Just more time with the camera or is my brain so used to seeing things through a prism finder that I can't adapt to this new view?

 

[Mike Lopez]

My first camera (60 years ago!) was a Yashica TLR. At that time and for the next 3 years, I had no issues composing through the WLF. Recently, I have returned to a TLR and have a hell of a time getting things square in the viewfinder. I found that by attaching a small spirit level to the hood helps, but It keeps getting knocked off so that is not a reasonable solution. Millions of photographers use WLF cameras, so it can't possibly be as difficult as it seems to me. What am I missing here? Just more time with the camera or is my brain so used to seeing things through a prism finder that I can't adapt to this new view?

Give it a little time, and it'll likely come back. If it has really been ~57 years since you've used a WLF, give yourself some grace and a little bit of time for your brain to adapt to the WLF perspective. Forget a spirit level--with one of those, you're looking at a little bubble under glass, rather than the image that you've composed on the ground glass of the camera. With some practice (and time), you'll adjust, and eventually you might even prefer the waist-level view. It allows you to compose your image with both eyes open, which is exactly how you'll be viewing the finished product anyway. Prism finders are nice and convenient, but do you then look at the finished picture with one eye closed? Nah.

If you were using the level because you were photographing architecture or something, I would still recommend abandoning that and letting your eyes (both of them) study the image. Are the vertical lines vertical? Are the horizontals horizontal? Do you see convergence problems anywhere? Let your eyes be the final arbiter.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Time. Practice. Spend time playing with the camera. I think that the reversal is the main factor, but that loses its confusion with exposure. The brain is very fluid but also a bit stubborn to accept new things.

Age might be part of it. I have recently accepted that lines on a screen and a split image center dot makes things better for me, and I do think that part of that is related to changes in eye sight.

 

[Pieter12]

What I find the most confusing is which way to move the camera to get things in place, sometimes taking a few steps to one side or the other to line up what I want. I never feel the need to do that with a prism or rangefinder.

 

[mshchem]

Absolutely just give it a little time. It's like getting use to a different car etc.

 

[mshchem]

The spirit level is a good idea

 

[Dan Daniel]

What I find the most confusing is which way to move the camera to get things in place, sometimes taking a few steps to one side or the other to line up what I want. I never feel the need to do that with a prism or rangefinder.

I know this is obvious but sometimes it could be helpful to remember: you are looking AT an image on a flat surface. Not THROUGH a tube (however well-corrected optically) at the world in 3 dimensions out there somewhere. OK, sure, with a prism you are technically looking at a flat image but the effect is to be looking THROUGH the camera, not AT the screen.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have both a 124 and D, I took the hood off the D and with a fine point of a grease maker and laying a steel ruler across the ground glass, (which did not lay on the glass but across the finder) and drew in hatch lines, just 4, 2 horizontal and 2 vertical. Not perfect does a pretty good of keeping the finder square. I have not repeated on my 124 or Kowa 66. If you have a Rollieflex I think there is a ground glass forcing screen with etched parallel lines.

 

[Rayt]

A screen with grid lines can help.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

What I find the most confusing is which way to move the camera to get things in place, sometimes taking a few steps to one side or the other to line up what I want. I never feel the need to do that with a prism or rangefinder.

When I go out on photographic field trips, I only take the 4x5 and the Bronica SQ. So the world is either upside down, or one in which left is right and right is left.

One thing I have learned to do more — not only to help composition but also to keep my sanity — is to go back and forth between the actual scene and the ground glass much more often, something you don't need to do with a prism or rangefinder. Look up, look down, look up, look down, etc., in the case of the Bronica; in and out of the dark cloth a few times in the case of the 4x5. It's amazing how fast the brain adjusts from one view to the other, but the "real" scene is the one that dominates.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Also, it may seem small but we all know- the difference between 6 inches to a foot or more makes a big difference in image framing. If you are used to eye level finders, the image and your 'natural' view are very similar, and you bring the camera to your existing view. With a waist lever finder, the camera lens and your eye lens are offset, and you bring your eye to your camera's view. This is part of the clumsy framing. Again, practice.

 

[MattKing]

There is at least a tiny chance that 57 years ago you could actually see the image in the finder more clearly.
I always find it easier to confirm that an image is level if I can see lots of detail in it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Time and practice. It is as easy as falling off a motor cycle.

 

[Pieter12]

There is at least a tiny chance that 57 years ago you could actually see the image in the finder more clearly.
I always find it easier to confirm that an image is level if I can see lots of detail in it.

My eyesight is corrected, and I have no problem with an eye-level camera. The waist-level screen has a nice grid, is bright and clear. I can see detail just fine--so I see very well when the horizon is crooked or verticals aren't. My challenge is getting used to how to maneuver the camera so those things line up properly. Even trying to include or exclude an element is challenging.

 

[Pieter12]

Time and practice. It is as easy as falling off a motor cycle.

So there is hope. I've done that one before.

 

[Sirius Glass]

So there is hope. I've done that one before.

And it was harder to do than it looks.

 

[Vaughn]

One never forgets how to fall off a bicycle...is how I put it.

I learned with a WL on a Rolleiflex. Etched lines helped. Usually on a tripod with subjects I did not have to chase down, so I had the time to double check the level. I used a ballhead most of the time -- which does not make it any easier at first. With some crazy landscapes true level can look a bit off, despite all the bubble levels on the tripod and on my LF cameras, and one goes by the image on the GG.

Have fun!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

What I find the most confusing is which way to move the camera to get things in place, sometimes taking a few steps to one side or the other to line up what I want. I never feel the need to do that with a prism or rangefinder.

The left-right image reversal is annoying. That's why I gave up on the waist level viewfinder and switched to a eye level on my Mamiya RB67. Waist level however does give interesting perspectives on portraits. But I shoot mainly landscapes. Waist is good for low shots.

 

[Pieter12]

The left-right image reversal is annoying. That's why I gave up on the waist level viewfinder and switched to a eye level on my Mamiya RB67. Waist level however does give interesting perspectives on portraits. But I shoot mainly landscapes. Waist is good for low shots.

I can bend or kneel down to get a lower angle with any camera. I need to master this reverse direction thing. I think I will go out and just practice in the back yard or something.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I can bend or kneel down to get a lower angle with any camera. I need to master this reverse direction thing. I think I will go out and just practice in the back yard or something.

If you watch TV, that's another time to practice. The brain will flip at some point without you even noticing.

 

[reddesert]

Use the grid lines and practice. You have to tip the camera the opposite way from what you normally think, to adjust the horizon to the grid lines. So your normal feedback loop doesn't work and you have to consciously disconnect it.

People can adjust to reversed-sensation devices, but it takes time. An example (I have never seen one of these myself) is the unrideable carnival-game bicycle - it has reversed steering handlebars, so if you can ride a normal bike, you tend to fall over. Here's a description: (sorry the forum is turning the link into a media embed)

There is also a vision experiment where people adjusted to wearing glasses with prisms that showed the world upside down.

 

[grahamp]

Try it with the focusing magnifier up, so you do not get feedback from your surroundings. Walk around looking through the camera. Once it starts to feel normal, try switching back to the full screen. Once your brain is trained to see both ways, just looking down at the screen should be enough to trigger the right sense of motion.

 

[Pieter12]

Use the grid lines and practice. You have to tip the camera the opposite way from what you normally think, to adjust the horizon to the grid lines. So your normal feedback loop doesn't work and you have to consciously disconnect it.

People can adjust to reversed-sensation devices, but it takes time. An example (I have never seen one of these myself) is the unrideable carnival-game bicycle - it has reversed steering handlebars, so if you can ride a normal bike, you tend to fall over. Here's a description: d8c0724c0db4
There is also a vision experiment where people adjusted to wearing glasses with prisms that showed the world upside down.

I am familiar with that upside-down eyeglasses experiment. It is also why monovision prescriptions work. And, as mentioned in an earlier post, on a motorcycle, at speed one turns the handlebars in the opposite direction of where you want the motorcycle to turn in order for it to lean into the curve. So it is all a matter of getting accustomed to the new perspective as it were. I wonder if going back and forth from an eye-level finder and a waist-level finder will be an issue then?

 

[Mike Lopez]

I am familiar with that upside-down eyeglasses experiment. It is also why monovision prescriptions work. And, as mentioned in an earlier post, on a motorcycle, at speed one turns the handlebars in the opposite direction of where you want the motorcycle to turn in order for it to lean into the curve. So it is all a matter of getting accustomed to the new perspective as it were. I wonder if going back and forth from an eye-level finder and a waist-level finder will be an issue then?

I can think of one way to find out.

 

[Dan Daniel]

I wonder if going back and forth from an eye-level finder and a waist-level finder will be an issue then?

My experience is that I sometimes have a small mental hiccup when I move from one to another. Maybe 1/2 second to 3 seconds? Tell myself it's the (waist level/eye level) finder now and it all falls into place quickly. You will not be erasing the eye level brain for the waist level brain. You are creating a new 'program' and the brain might take a second to realize that it has loaded the wrong one and will correct easily.