I used this macro DOF calculator, https://www.kielia.de/photography/calculator/Those are different DOF numbers than the ones I "calculate" for 1/8 life-size I get ~35 mm of depth of field for that magnification.
Are you sure your number isn't for a magnification of 8x? rather than 1/8x?
Disclosure - I just went to this online DOF calculator, rather than doing the hard work: https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof-macro
Those are meters, not millimeters.Calculated DOF zone (assuming 20/60 vision manufacturer standard) from 0.491m to 0.530m
then still remains the issue of the flatness of the baseboard.
I got a 60 years old baseboard made from plywood or carpenter's board. And even modern MDF boards are not ideally flat...
Those are meters, not millimeters.
Works out to 39 millimeters depth of field.
If you adjust the circle of confusion down to 0.009 mm (for 20/20 vision) the depth of field goes from 0.495m through 0.505m or 10 millimeters.
Still pretty deep, compared to the thickness of a sheet of photographic paper.
When using an enlarger it is not depth of field, but depth of focus. Depth of field is a camera function. Well in the UK it is.
Au contraire!Wow! When you put it that way, why bother with a grain focuser? F/8 and be there.
When using an enlarger it is not depth of field, but depth of focus. Depth of field is a camera function. Well in the UK it is.
And if you reference some of the more detailed Kodak reference materials on close focus and macro photography, they add another term - depth of subject.An enlarger is just kind of an inside out camera, with the subject and light in a smaller box that is positioned inside the bigger light tight box that the recording medium is setup in, so what exactly is the difference between 'depth of field' and 'depth of focus'?
Probably not.At any rate, this continues to be something that no one should argue about.
An enlarger is just kind of an inside out camera, with the subject and light in a smaller box that is positioned inside the bigger light tight box that the recording medium is setup in, so what exactly is the difference between 'depth of field' and 'depth of focus'?
Has anyone measured the depth of sharp focus? This is a test I have performed and it convinced me the critical depth nears 1/10 inch. Put a significant slant to your easel. For example raise one side an inch. Put the grain focuser on the easel and focus on a negative. Observe as you slide the focuser up and down slope to find the “just noticeable difference”. Measure this distance you slide and triangulate to find the critical depth.
This would be true if it was actually possible to see the difference when you are viewing the enlarged grain with the focuser.
It is true even if you cannot see the difference. The fact does not change. It makes sense to keep in the middle of the focus range and not risk any focusing problems.
^
We strive for 'perfect focus' when we are shooting a photo of flat art, so why be any more casual minded or sloppy when projecting that same neg onto enlarging paper?
You miss the significance.It is true even if you cannot see the difference. The fact does not change. It makes sense to keep in the middle of the focus range and not risk any focusing problems.
However I do think that thinking about how this stuff works improves my understanding of how to get the best out of the darkroom equipment I use.
Check out HCB's famous images. Many are out of focus.
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?