Using hyperfocal distance effectively in the field

[Doc W]

I understand what the hyperfocal distance is, but just barely. There are lots of discussions about how to find the hyperfocal distance on 35mm or MF lenses, but what about large format? How does one effectively calculate and use this in the field. I don't carry any electronic devices with me. I am looking for crude but useful.

How about posting some concrete examples, or providing links, for the thick of skull among us?

 

[shutterfinger]

http://fcalc.net/
Hyperfocal distance depends on focused distance and aperture. Use the linked calculator, downloaded and installed on your computer, and make up a chart or print on a small card to carry with you.
I have an older version for Windows I can email you if desired.

 

[Trail Images]

http://fcalc.net/
Hyperfocal distance depends on focused distance and aperture. Use the linked calculator, downloaded and installed on your computer, and make up a chart or print on a small card to carry with you.
I have an older version for Windows I can email you if desired.

I agree. I made a chart for MF & LF 20 years ago and placed the small cards back to back and then laminated them. Works great.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Why bother? Given the advantages of movements on view cameras, hyperfocal is almost an academic subject. Some people use this kind of
theory for controlled tabletop photography in studios, in conjunction with cameras calibrated for this, like the Sinar. But even when using a
Sinar, I ignore all that. In the field, there are much more intuitive ways to handle depth of field in composition. The groundglass and a focus loupe tells it all. I might have used hyperfocal theory exactly twice in the last ten years - in both cases for a medium format SLR. View camera work is very different.

 

[Doc W]

Why bother? Given the advantages of movements on view cameras, hyperfocal is almost an academic subject. Some people use this kind of
theory for controlled tabletop photography in studios, in conjunction with cameras calibrated for this, like the Sinar. But even when using a
Sinar, I ignore all that. In the field, there are much more intuitive ways to handle depth of field in composition. The groundglass and a focus loupe tells it all. I might have used hyperfocal theory exactly twice in the last ten years - in both cases for a medium format SLR. View camera work is very different.

Drew, let's say you have a situation with conflicting planes, e.g., you want a lot of dof in a landscape, but there are verticals in the foreground which will not work well with forward tilt. Let's say that there is a bit of wind so stopping down and using a slower shutter speed is not a good option. In a case like this, would it help to use the hyperfocal distance to maximize dof?

I run into situations like this fairly frequently. BTW, I am not arguing with you; I am really just interested in exploring this.

 

[ic-racer]

I understand what the hyperfocal distance is, but just barely. There are lots of discussions about how to find the hyperfocal distance on 35mm or MF lenses, but what about large format? How does one effectively calculate and use this in the field. I don't carry any electronic devices with me. I am looking for crude but useful.

How about posting some concrete examples, or providing links, for the thick of skull among us?

Look up the focusing method of Hansma. Tutorials are linked on another website you can easily find with a search.

Also, for landscape you may be better off with infinity focus. See Chapter 4 in "The ins-and-outs of focus" by Harold M. Merklinger (free internet book) comparing hyperfocal focus to infinity focus.

 

[Steve Smith]

Hyperfocal distance depends on focused distance.

It doesn't depend on focused distance, it tells you what distance to focus at. Perhaps you are thinking of depth of field.


Steve.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Doc- My method of operation really sets the aesthetics of the final print at the forefront of how to solve depth of field problems. Having a large groundglass certainly facilitates assessing what kind of detail will or will not hold in the final print. For instance, looking at 8x10 with a 6x magnifier
is equivalent to being nose to nose with a print six feet wide! But since these are long lenses with relatively shallow depth of field, even using tilts and
small apertures, there will always be parts of the image more in focus than others, especially if the planes in the composition are complex. This is the
challenge and part of the fun. If the final print is relatively small, or a contact, a lot of things are going to appear tack sharp even if they aren't. But
big enlargements require a different strategy. Yeah, you can use shorter focal length lenses for more depth of field, but this alters the composition.
So how do you prioritize? I like the idea of having some important aspect of the composition in true focus. I rarely just blur out the background using
"selective focus". But I do employ tilts and swings to get the best overall effect without sacrificing my primary focal point, whatever that might be.
Then I stop down halfway to my final shooting aperture and scan key areas of the groundglass again with my magnifier, and maybe play a tad with the
focus knob to see what actually changes for the better, and what is essentially undisturbed. It's a practical rather than mathematical version of hyperfocal
technique, and very quick. Then I stop all the way down to my final f-stop. It's an aesthetic approach. But with experience, it can be done almost spontaneously. At a certain point, the image on the groundglass just feels right; and the magnifier simply confirms the suitability of the focus for its
intended print size.

 

[Jim Jones]

As a quick approximation, hyperfocal distance for a lens with normal coverage is about 2000 times the apparent diameter of the aperture as seen from the front of the lens. Scale that 2000 up or down in proportion to the focal length of other lenses relative to one with normal coverage.

 

[Hexavalent]

A Quick 'n Dirty Method that I recall:

1. Focus at the most distant object.
2. Find the nearest object that is reasonably sharp.
3. Refocus on that object. You are now focused at the approx hyperfocal distance.

I might have it all wrong, but I do recall it working way back when.

 

[grahamp]

Presumably that has to be done at taking aperture?

I always thought that hyperfocal distance required the furthest point of the depth of field (skipping the nuances of *that*) to be effectively infinity?

 

[Steve Smith]

The hyperfocal distance is a distance you focus the lens to which will give acceptable sharpness from half of that distance up to infinity.


Steve.

 

[gzinsel]

so far, all things being equal in the world, I have to agree with Drew Wiley. Its ALL: THE ART of compromise. . . .and choices etc. :take this approach, you deny other variables, or accrue other variables. Its a process, mostly THRUE experience, that tells what to do, to get what you want. in LF or ULF its experience that counts. looking at ground glass, stopping down ONLY gets you SO far. While I tip my hat from time to time to those who insist thats its all geometry and math, I still think and believe that images made by a sensitive and intuitive person are/is "where it is at". IMO, these images are the ones that have "something" worth talking about at the gallery. NOT being able to have everything, all the time> IS the challenge, and to how you solve those challenges is the art.

 

[Jim Jones]

Gzinsel is right that there is much more than mathematical formulae to hyperfocal distances and Depth of Field. Subject matter influences both. The final image presentation makes even more of a difference. The tiny low resolution images we post here may show perfect DoF, but might be dismally unsharp when printed for many exhibitions. Understanding the logic and math is but one step to performing the art.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I cut my teeth making large very highly detailed Cibachrome prints from large format chromes. So I certainly know how to focus by now,
and what will or won't give me consistent depth of field. But it's only AFTER you understand all that, that the real game begins. The eye of the viewer can be subconsciously directed to where you want it by subtle nuances in focus control. It part of composition, really. And I'm not referring to soft-focus technique. There are just all kinds of aesthetic tools at your disposal. And my advice is that once you learn how to play the basic chords of exposure and development, throw all your calculator mentality out the window awhile, and just learn to look, look, look through that groundglass until the magic appears. Sheet film has a lot of real estate to it, so might as well make the most of it.

 

[Doc W]

The hyperfocal distance is a distance you focus the lens to which will give acceptable sharpness from half of that distance up to infinity.


Steve.

Now this may be a really dumb question, but how can you tell the distance? I may have a table that says the hyperfocal distance is X, but how can I tell how far away is X?

 

[Steve Smith]

On a roll film camera lens, you set it to the distance marking on the lens. With a view camera... guesswork I suppose!

Or yet another table or calculator which gives extension from infinity position for each of the focal lengths you use... Or just make it look good on the ground glass!


Steve.

 

[JPJackson]

Now this may be a really dumb question, but how can you tell the distance? I may have a table that says the hyperfocal distance is X, but how can I tell how far away is X?

I usually "pace" the distance; about 1 meter to each stride; note an object at the proper distance to focus on. This has been close enough for landscape foregrounds to infinity.

There is an article by Gerry Russell; "Mastering Large Format Depth-of-Field" from Darkroom and Creative Techniques Nov/Dec 1991 that i found very helpful. I would be glad to share it with you.

 

[RobC]

If you are doing landscape work its not something you need to worry about too much providng you don't have close foreground in the image.

Look at following site and you will see what I mean by playing focal lengths and apertures. You will find that anything over 20 feet or so will easily be in focus at F22 or F32 when you are focussed at say 30 feet with a 150 lens and with a 90 lens you can use f16 and everything from 10ft away will be infocus.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

get the camera up as high as possible which takes as much as the close foreground out of the image as possible.

On the other hand, if you are photographing theings nearer to you then it matters a lot more.

Personally I would always focus on the main subject of interest rather than spread focussing using hyperfocal distance and relying on the main subject falling within that.

For out in the field you can use following android app

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.opticalsoftware.calclensthin

 

[Jim Jones]

Harold Merklinger http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/HMArtls.html makes available some useful information on using hyperfocal distance and depth of field. As for determining the distance to the subject, digital rangefinders are fairly inexpensive. Some of us used a variety of optical rangefinder accessories years ago. They still show up on online auctions.

 

[Doc W]

All of this is very helpful. Thanks a lot, fellas. I am going to read the suggested material and I will report back.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I sell all kinds of digital rangefinders. Nowadays a litle over a hundred bucks will get you something compact and suitable. There has been some discussion about them recently in relation to rangefinder cameras per se, as well as night photography. They all use bright laser dots
for aim. But neither own or use one myself. No need. I do all my view camera focus visually, with merely a loupe for critical focus.

 

[RobC]

if you carry a little digi camera or slr with prime lens on it, you can measure focus distance with that.

 

[Alan Klein]

I carry around lens charts for each of my RB67 lenses. Attached sample is for the 90mm lens. I marked off hyperfocal points for quick reference of where to set my aperture and distance. I'll often stop down one more stop for good measure.

 

[Alan Klein]

The hyperfocal distance is a distance you focus the lens to which will give acceptable sharpness from half of that distance up to infinity.


Steve.

It varies depending on the aperture. See the sample chart in my last post. You'll notice that at smaller apertures it could be 1/5 or a lot closer than 1/2.