One question I do have is that A. do I focus with all movements at default, then make movement alteration and shoot or B. Should I focus with all movements at default, make movement alteration refocus and then shoot ???
Thanks for the advise and compliment on the image !Hi Brian,
Personally I prefer to start with neutral settings and add tilt as needed to your preference.
Just look at the groundglass to see how you like it.
(From what I hear, Roversi works (or used to) with long exposures to get that dreamy look also)
I like your enclosed sample.
Serge
I will keep all this this mind !!Possible suggestions, given the reference image.
- start with camera in neutral positions
- camera height approximately nose (of the subject) high, maybe a bit higher
- camera bed angled slightly downward toward subject
- slight front fall (opposite of rise)
- slight front tilt, toward the subject, of the front standard
I don't see a need for shift movement.
This will take some experimentation. If you have an assistant, he/she can pose while you dial in the movements. Then you can bring the subject into the set and work with him/her for the aesthetic you want to achieve.
Thanks - again very useful info !And to reply your question: always refocus after making movements, even when it is just to be sure the focus is where you want it.
And that is quite a nice picture.
I do agree, the eyes would have been better to focus, but I was struggling with focus in general I think it was 1st or 2nd time using the cameraI suppose that at a point you will understand which kind/amount of movement gives the look you like in your pictures, and you will stick to it. So in my opinion you don't even need to focus with movements at default, there's no real need for it. Nor there is need to reset movements and then re-apply movements at every other picture. Just keep them as they are and go ahead.
The picture is nice and the model is absolutely lovely (I wish I also had one), however if I were you I would have focused the eyes and not the hairline. Just my opinion/taste of course.
Thanks for taking an interest !!I have never been a fan of camera movements in 4x5 or 8x10 portraits...I always feel it looks hokey.
I use the formats purely for the neg size. I worked as an assistant for Albert Watson for a year and then
Martin Schoeller for 31/2 years and both used 4x5 and 8x10 basically straight. What I learned from them
was to focus on the image content. Obviously this is just my opinion FWIW.
Jason
I do agree, the eyes would have been better to focus, but I was struggling with focus in general I think it was 1st or 2nd time using the camera
I'm going to be contrarian about this.I do agree, the eyes would have been better to focus, but I was struggling with focus in general I think it was 1st or 2nd time using the camera
I'm going to be contrarian about this.
I think that the plane of focus actually works well - it is an exception to my normal rule favouring the eyes.
In this case, it adds a dreamlike character to the image - not dissimilar to a soft focus result.
But I certainly wouldn't hesitate to experiment more the model and the idea.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?