| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/24/2011 10:04:31 AM · #1 |
I thought some people here would find this interesting. A video about a Newfoundland photographer who specializes in large format photography. The video really shows the work that goes into the taking of a photo and the developing.
//www.nlphotogs.com/?p=301
|
|
|
|
03/24/2011 11:05:17 AM · #2 |
That's lovely. Takes me straight back to my own past :-) Except the camera I was lugging around weighed 15 lbs for the body alone... I don't think I could even do it now...
Thanks for sharing.
R. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 11:13:15 AM · #3 |
| I remember loading a studio 4x5 in its case with 20 or so loaded filmholders along with the tripod onto a cargo frome backpack and hiking up to the top of Bishop's Peak for a shot. My back still hurts just thinking about it. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 11:19:23 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
I remember loading a studio 4x5 in its case with 20 or so loaded filmholders along with the tripod onto a cargo frome backpack and hiking up to the top of Bishop's Peak for a shot. My back still hurts just thinking about it. |
Are you talking about the Bishop's Peak at San Luis Obispo, California? 'Cuz I hauled my Sinar, my Majestic geared tripod, a case full of lenses and holders, and food for the day up that danged thing once, this would be back in, I think, 1976 or so. The pictures weren't worth squadoosh, either :-(
R. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 11:23:13 AM · #5 |
| I've got no personal experience with large format, but I did watch a guy shoot at Mono Lake back in about 2004. I was really impressed by the deliberateness of the process. If that doesn't make you think about all the aspects of a shot, nothing will. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 01:11:37 PM · #6 |
One of the first big digital photography projects, back in the early '90s before there were digital cameras as we know them today, was a collection of shots from the National Parks by Stephen Johnson, using a 4x5 camera and "scanning back" sensor ... this was also in the very early days of Photoshop, and was a sort of "proof-of-concept" project to demonstrate the viability of digital photography.
I think Johnson also developed the built-in Duotone settings which come packaged with PS.
Originally posted by Photographic Projects Page:
"With a New Eye" is a digital photographic survey of selected American National Parks from 1994 through 2006. The project employs a modified Dicomed digital insert, a Sinar-X 4x5 camera, and the Macintosh PowerBook540c through G4 for completely portable digital photography of very high quality. The camera is capable of color, black and white, and infrared photographs of extremely high resolution and dynamic range (6000x8000 pixels, 140MB files with more than 11 stops of exposure latitude). |
|
|
|
|
03/24/2011 01:16:41 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spork99:
I remember loading a studio 4x5 in its case with 20 or so loaded filmholders along with the tripod onto a cargo frome backpack and hiking up to the top of Bishop's Peak for a shot. My back still hurts just thinking about it. |
Are you talking about the Bishop's Peak at San Luis Obispo, California? 'Cuz I hauled my Sinar, my Majestic geared tripod, a case full of lenses and holders, and food for the day up that danged thing once, this would be back in, I think, 1976 or so. The pictures weren't worth squadoosh, either :-(
R. |
Yep, the very same.
I went to school at Cal Poly. This was a while later than you, maybe 1990-91. From what I recall of my images from that trip, we probably took the same shots.
I carted that same rig all over the area, through Montana D'Oro, Morro Bay etc. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 02:12:19 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
I went to school at Cal Poly. This was a while later than you, maybe 1990-91. From what I recall of my images from that trip, we probably took the same shots.
I carted that same rig all over the area, through Montana D'Oro, Morro Bay etc. |
Awesome! We have walked the same earth :-)
R. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 07:45:45 PM · #9 |
Oh thanks for that Karen! That guy is a master!
I shoot large format 'cuz I think the cameras are so interesting, and darkroom work is fun. Nearly impossible for me to find a mentor or class to improve my skills though, so there is plenty of trial and error.
I guess I am a large format snapshooter for now. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 07:55:33 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by tph1:
I shoot large format 'cuz I think the cameras are so interesting, and darkroom work is fun. Nearly impossible for me to find a mentor or class to improve my skills though, so there is plenty of trial and error. |
Bring your gear to Cape Cod and we'll have a seminar :-) |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 08:02:11 PM · #11 |
| Robert, when they spoke of how adjusting the bellows allowed you to have selective focus, is that the inspiration and/or concept behind the lensbaby? |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 08:33:31 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by tph1:
I shoot large format 'cuz I think the cameras are so interesting, and darkroom work is fun. Nearly impossible for me to find a mentor or class to improve my skills though, so there is plenty of trial and error. |
Bring your gear to Cape Cod and we'll have a seminar :-) |
Hah! I may do that. I am in Boston again tomorrow. Working. And only a couple of compact 35's fit in my briefcase. Never been to Cape Cod, but I you have given the impression that it is beautiful. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 09:14:23 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
Robert, when they spoke of how adjusting the bellows allowed you to have selective focus, is that the inspiration and/or concept behind the lensbaby? |
It's not the bellows per se, but what it allows: the independence of lens and film plane, the ability to position them precisely and separately. The lenses throw an image circle considerably larger than the film, and the camera movements allow you to position the film anywhere within that image circle. Those are the "shifts", they are parallel. Then there's the "tilts", the ability to have the lens and the film plane not parallel to each other, and this allows the shifting of the plane of focus for either more or less depth of field, at will.
In the dSLR world we have very expensive tilt/shift lenses that allow us to use these techniques, but only within the confines of the mirror box inside the camera. That's an inherent design limitation that's not present in a monorail large-format camera with front and back standards. The box-type, folding large format camera that this Newfoundland gentleman uses is a little less flexible than the monorail camera, but typically we don't need the really extreme shifts and tilts for landscape work, and its relative compactness when collapsed, and lighter weight, are real bonuses.
As far as Lensbabies go, these are pure "tilt" lenses with o shift at all, so their only designed function is to shift the plane (and point) of focus around. They wouldn't be particularly useful for architecture, for example, even if they WERE sharp; you need shifts for that. And Lensbabies are designed NOT to be sharp (though I understand there's a sharp version now), so they're all about having fun with "degraded" optical quality, whilst view cameras are designed for extremely high optical quality.
R. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 09:31:52 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by smardaz:
Robert, when they spoke of how adjusting the bellows allowed you to have selective focus, is that the inspiration and/or concept behind the lensbaby? |
It's not the bellows per se, but what it allows: the independence of lens and film plane, the ability to position them precisely and separately. The lenses throw an image circle considerably larger than the film, and the camera movements allow you to position the film anywhere within that image circle. Those are the "shifts", they are parallel. Then there's the "tilts", the ability to have the lens and the film plane not parallel to each other, and this allows the shifting of the plane of focus for either more or less depth of field, at will.
In the dSLR world we have very expensive tilt/shift lenses that allow us to use these techniques, but only within the confines of the mirror box inside the camera. That's an inherent design limitation that's not present in a monorail large-format camera with front and back standards. The box-type, folding large format camera that this Newfoundland gentleman uses is a little less flexible than the monorail camera, but typically we don't need the really extreme shifts and tilts for landscape work, and its relative compactness when collapsed, and lighter weight, are real bonuses.
As far as Lensbabies go, these are pure "tilt" lenses with o shift at all, so their only designed function is to shift the plane (and point) of focus around. They wouldn't be particularly useful for architecture, for example, even if they WERE sharp; you need shifts for that. And Lensbabies are designed NOT to be sharp (though I understand there's a sharp version now), so they're all about having fun with "degraded" optical quality, whilst view cameras are designed for extremely high optical quality.
R. |
love it, i often feel like i'm in a class discussion when you post things.
I have often wondered why people say you need tilt shift for architecture? |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 09:43:43 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
I have often wondered why people say you need tilt shift for architecture? |
You need the shift, more than the tilt. In order to keep verticals squared up, the film/sensor plane has to be truly vertical. This is why we have levels. Set up that way with a normal camera, we have too much foreground; tilt up to see the top of the building, and the verticals converge.
Solution: make the lens and the film independent, square up the film plane, mount a lens with a large image circle, and shift the lens vertically so the sensor is inhabiting the same real estate inside the image circle as the building :-)
The tilt can be useful to increase DOF without stopping down so far as to degrade image quality by refraction. If the projected planes of the subject, the sensor, and the lens intersect at the same point, everything on the subject plane will be sharp. So if you're standing at 45 degrees to a memorial wall, say, or if you're shooting down at a richly detailed, very large carpet, you can tilt the lens to bring the plane of the wall or carpet into sharp focus as far as it runs.
Of course, other things start to go OUT of focus and you have to bring them into the DOF by stopping down... In the carpet example, the carpet/floor will be sharp, but you will lose sharpness going up the walls of the room unless you stop down to compensate for that. So it's a juggling act.
R.
Message edited by author 2011-03-24 21:44:09. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 09:45:11 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
love it, i often feel like i'm in a class discussion when you post things.
I have often wondered why people say you need tilt shift for architecture? |
Easy- preservation of perspective and lack of distortion. You can photograph a gorgeous building but if all the straight lines are curved it certainly isn't an accurate representation, now is it? They eliminate convergence. It also allows control of depth of field placement so you can control more carefully how a building is rendered. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 09:55:40 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
...if all the straight lines are curved it certainly isn't an accurate representation, now is it? |
Tilt & shift are useless in the battle against barrel distortion and pincushioning, the usual two sources of lens-induced curvature in nominally straight lines; those you correct (easily and automatically) in post. Convergence and keystoning are what we can correct; when you look UP you get convergence, whilst looking DOWN gives you keystoning (although there seems to be a trend to call both of these "keystoning" lately).
R. |
|
|
|
03/24/2011 10:22:48 PM · #18 |
| Indeed, my usage of curved was pretty misleading and in error, nor really what I meant. But rest assured, I was well aware of convergence and keystoning, as I learned of them from a reference you made to them somewhere back on the forums or in comments or something, which lead me to investigate :) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 02:11:56 PM EDT.
