Tilt & Shift Movements For Portraits

[Brian M Harris]

Hello,
I am primarily a people photographer so this post specifically relates to portraits.

I have been shooting large format for about 6 months alongside 35mm/120 and digital. I have Wista 45RF with a Schneider 180mm lens, I am very pleased with the set up and too a degree the results I am getting.

I would like to know how to get consistently that "Paolo Roversi" Tilt & Shift look as per my image below, which was a bit of a fluke. I have been a little slap dash and have not really written the cameras settings down so I have no real data.

I have shoot this Saturday and would love to try and achieve this look, I will also be writing the settings down as well. I was hoping someone could give me a few tips where to start. All movements will be set to default.

The Wista does rise, swing, tilt & shift from the front, it does do rear movements but they are quite limited.

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 ???

Any good tips would be great fully appreciated.

Thanks

Brian

 

[serge silberman]

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

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

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.

 

[Huub]

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.

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

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 ???

I 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.

 

[CropDusterMan]

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

 

[Eric Rose]

I took a look at some of the photographers images you are trying to emulate. What I found was a strong use of creative lighting and a lower than normal camera position. I didn't see the swing/tilt effects you are referring to. Mind you I couldn't see his webpage as he is one of the few who still use Flash and that particular plugin is blocked on my device.

I have used the swing/tilt to good effect on landscapes and "things" such as playground equipment. If it were me I would concentrate on the lighting and posing and do any swing/tilt effects in PS. That way you have a really sharp negative/positive that you can use "straight" if you want.

 

[Brian M Harris]

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

Thanks for the advise and compliment on the image !

 

[Brian M Harris]

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.

I will keep all this this mind !!

 

[Brian M Harris]

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.

Thanks - again very useful info !

 

[Brian M Harris]

I 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.

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

 

[Brian M Harris]

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

Thanks for taking an interest !!

 

[jtk]

Practice makes perfect. Camera movements aren't mysterious...they become easy and almost automatic except in extreme situations, such as some table top shots.

If I was still doing table top commercial work I'd be anxious about lack of Polaroid. I never needed that for exposure because of high confidence in flash metering.

I do think it'd be fun to see what camera movements might accomplish with portrait subjects in unusual positions related to camera position and setting.

Concern about "hokey" looking portraits would seem misplaced for adolescent rappers and models.

http://jennlopezphoto1.weebly.com/f...ion-blog/inspiration-gallery-of-paolo-roversi

 

[darkroommike]

A lot of large format studio cameras offer a bit of swing, mostly, I suspect, to keep both eyes in focus.

 

[Alan Gales]

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

Large format just takes practice. Keep it up! She is a beautiful model who is posed and lit well. You created a captivating image! You definitely need to reshoot her and get the eyes in focus. You will be glad that you did.

 

[MattKing]

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 with working with the model and the idea.

 

[serge silberman]

I agree with that...the dreamy look is quite nice

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.

 

[darinwc]

There is no point in focusing with the camera set in neutral position.
You will have to refocus after applying movements anyway.

Regarding portraits with movements.. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. Be prepared for some hit and miss.
Here are a few from my favorited on Flickr


Valerie Shade by Iggy Bug, on Flickr


Friday. by Victor Samoilovich, on Flickr


Don't forget try different things..

Antistatic hull by Fantastic Acid by Cédric BERNARD, on Flickr

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

A small amount of front swing was used to get more of the background in focus. Very slight downward tilt of the camera bed, camera bed leveled, slight front drop, vertical film plane. I don't recall any front tilt, looking at the image I don't think I used any. Aperture was something like f/16 or f/22, exposure was at box speed, incident metered at the subject's chin with the dome facing the camera.

The effect in the image below is not at all what is shown in the above images, it is used as an example of using movements for a portrait. Selective focus is used in all of these images in the thread, so far. The photographers in each case are selecting different aspects of the subject on which to focus.


Toyo 45AII
Nikkor-SW 120/8
Kodak TXP320

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

To duplicate your example I would put the camera at the same level as her head/eyes, drop the front standard a bit to bring her body into the frame (or raise the rear standard - same effect), and then alter the plane of focus to cut through her eyes and throw her body out of focus. Alter the plane of focus by tilting the lens upward or downward - whichever works best (probably up). You can also alter the plane of focus by tilting the rear standard, but tilting the rear standard could alter perspective in a way you don't want; more severely altering the size of the elements in the frame.

To be consistent you have to know what each movement is doing. There is plenty of literature on the subject.