how has this been done???!

game · Feb 25, 2006

This is a picture I saw on http://www.littman45single.com/.
The begin with, I LOVE this photograph. I think it's pretty gorgious. But how has this been done? I don't see one depth of field:

the car is sharp, the building behind it is not. the building on behind that is. then there is blur again, and at the horizon all is sharp!

Is this photoshop gaussian blur or something like that?
Or is some photographic technique goin on I don't know about.

Like to hear something bout this.
Thanks GAME

rbarker · Feb 25, 2006

The image appears to use view-camera tilts to move the plane of sharp focus from the usual vertical position down to almost the ground. Thus, objects like the buildings extend up past the plane of sharp focus and become blurred.

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 25, 2006

Yup, just some front tilt here. Most any view camera can do it.

game · Feb 25, 2006

DAMN! that's such a great feauture!

Maybe I should start considering....

avandesande · Feb 25, 2006

you do realize that is a model car/building?

blansky · Feb 25, 2006

I was under the impressions these were shot on Cuban streets.

Michael

game · Feb 25, 2006

me too
sam

argus · Feb 25, 2006

avandesande said:
you do realize that is a model car/building?

That was my first impression too!
The very small DOF is a result of working close-up.

G

blansky · Feb 25, 2006

If you go to the site I think your questions will be answered.

Ralph and David, I believe are right.

Michael

avandesande · Feb 25, 2006

That is certainly a weird looking image. had me fooled.

game · Feb 25, 2006

It's a street, no modelled street.

Game

Helen B · Feb 25, 2006

It's very fashionable at the moment. 'Tilt-shift' photography, that is. Often with the intention of making a real scene look like a model because of the shallow depth of field.

There's a lot of it on the web, on flickr and elsewhere. I think that it is one of those things that gets very tired very quickly, but that's just my opinion.

Of course the other explanation is that William Littman uses quasi-transitional Boussinesq pentangulation with hybrid Lagrangian indeterminacy to re-compute and rebuild the lenses on his cameras. Or something like that.

Best,
Helen

rbarker · Feb 25, 2006

I'm with you, Helen. It's a gimmick that should be used very sparingly.

game · Feb 25, 2006

that goes for the whole open aparture + small depth of field in a straight camara as well I think. Still amazes me, tilting the depth of field...
Creates tremendous depth in the image i strated the thread with.

gr82bart · Feb 25, 2006

It's a very fancy lens-baby.

Art.

Helen B · Feb 25, 2006

"It's a very fancy lens-baby."

Are lens-babies quadrangulated with extra variables to enhance the synergy? I think not.

Best,
Helen

David A. Goldfarb · Feb 25, 2006

Ce n'est pas par hasard! Whenever I read "panthere gris," I think of these folks--

http://www.graypanthers.org/index.htm

gr82bart · Feb 25, 2006

Helen B said:
"It's a very fancy lens-baby."

Are lens-babies quadrangulated with extra variables to enhance the synergy? I think not.

Like I said. It's a very fancy lens baby.

Art.

bauhausler · Mar 17, 2006

Try this one: http://www.claudioedinger.com/fmsetgallery.html?gallery=rio 4x5

Amazing!

Joe VanCleave · Mar 23, 2006

So the logical question therefore would be: "is the Littman 4x5 capable of the shifts necessary to take this image?"

rbarker · Mar 23, 2006

Although it's called "tilt/shift", that's really a misnomer, as shift does nothing to the angular placement of the focus plane. "Tilt/swing" would be more accurate.

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Mar 23, 2006

There's a photographer who's all the rage now because he do such things with an aerial camera and a kite, I think. He's doing a series taking such pictures of cities, I know he did it for Montreal for an exhibit at the Centre Canadien d'Architecture.

Found his name: Olivo Barbieri is the man. http://www.hamiltonsgallery.com/photographers/barbieri/ob-virtual.html

Extra shallow DOF and whatnot somebody will explain better than I creates the effect that big cities look like a small-scale model.

Bill R · Mar 24, 2006

Earlier this month I saw this technique used on the cover of a magazine touting the golf course offerings of the San Diego area. It's definitely getting a good amount of use.
I think something similar to this could be achieved with a wide open antique portrait lens. Alan Greene shows an example ("Ramnoeurs en Marche" by Charles Negre, 1851) in his book "Primitive Photography" of such a scene. Good sharpness in the center of the frame, lots of out of focus in the areas immediately adjacent. Not as pronounced, but similar. It has the effect of making the people in the photo look somewhat like miniatures.
Overall I think it can work if used for a good reason. Plenty of potential to become a cheap gimmick when applied indiscriminately.

how has this been done???!

game

rbarker

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

game

avandesande

blansky

game

argus

blansky

avandesande

game

Helen B

rbarker

game

gr82bart

Helen B

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

gr82bart

bauhausler

Joe VanCleave

rbarker

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

Bill R

how has this been done???!

Moderator

Moderator

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency