self assignment to test new lens

hey guys got a question for you!
is it possible to do a scheimflug movement or hinge set up on a converging subject? i'm working on a lil self assignment here and was not thinking when i set this lil assignment up. a building here in tacoma called wells fargo has appealed to me for some time now and wanted to try and shoot it if possible doing one of the movements...is this possible, has anyone tackled something of this nature?? let me know your thoughts...will be waiting!

I'm confused by your question...can you clarify it a bit please? When you ask if it's possible to set up a Scheimpflug movement on a converging subject, the first thing that pops into my head is railroad tracks receding to the horizon. Setting up the movements here is pretty straight forward...front tilt until you get what you want in focus. But with the building, if the film plane and lens plane are parallel to the face of the building, the whole face of the building can be focused by extending the lens the appropriate amount...no other movements needed. You can use front rise to get more of the building into the picture, but no need for any other movements. Can you describe more fully what you're trying to do here please?

Thanks,
Dave

Dead Link Removed

That building?

Pick up a copy of Steve Simmon's book on the View Camera.

question,re-posted

hello again,
what i was talking about was setting up a shot on the WELLS FARGO BUILDING that is on pacific avenue, here in tacoma,washington. so yes nick,
THAT BUILDING! i was planning to do a shot from a 45 deg. angle, set the camera to do a scheimpflug correction. what i didn't count on was the limited area to work in!! i'd have to tilt the camera back so i could get the whole builging in the picture, hence the converging lines effect(building appears to be falling backwards). so based on that .......let me know what you think. is that possible? or should i just try and shoot it from straight on to a converging line correction? i got a new lens...a 90 mm f/8 super angulon, so i may not have to raise it back to correct the converging lines. anyway thats my perdicament, help me out if you can. thanks!

If you want to get the building in focus and don't object to the converging lines, you can apply some front tilt with the camera pointed upward.

If you want to get the lines straight, start by leveling the camera. Apply as much front rise and/or rear fall as needed until the building fits into the frame or until you run out of rise/fall or run out of image circle. If you need more rise and the lens has the capacity, then tilt the camera upward and re-level the front and rear standards so they are parallel to each other. This is how you get indirect front rise/rear fall.

SinarF1user said:

i was planning to do a shot from a 45 deg. angle, set the camera to do a scheimpflug correction. what i didn't count on was the limited area to work in!! i'd have to tilt the camera back so i could get the whole builging in the picture, hence the converging lines effect(building appears to be falling backwards). so based on that .......let me know what you think. is that possible? or should i just try and shoot it from straight on to a converging line correction? i got a new lens...a 90 mm f/8 super angulon, so i may not have to raise it back to correct the converging lines. anyway thats my perdicament, help me out if you can. thanks!

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish. The Scheimpflug has to do with apparent depth of field, most widely used to create a sense of focus on both far and near objects, and I'm wondering if you have your terminology mixed up (which is why I recommended Steve Simmon's book).

Are you just trying to get the whole building in the image (with straight parallel lines), or do you also have issues with near and distant objects being in focus? If you just want straight lines, David's suggestion is the one to follow.

See the following for a discussion of Scheimpflug:

http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/SHSPAT.pdf