A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The last days of analog



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old April 26th 18, 10:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,272
Default The last days of analog

On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:26:20 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


I originally wrote:

"There are some things which as far as I know can't be done with
digital.

then you know wrong.

Consider photographing a very tall wall from close up
while keeping the whole image in focus. A technical camera copes
with this by raising and tilting the lens upwards while tilting the
camera back".

as i said, the camera back is *not* tilted for a tall wall, or more
commonly a tall building because walls are boring, however, the math is
the same.


Let's say it is the front of a 1000 year old building: and you have
limited room: and you want to have all of the wall in the best
possible focus. It's interesting and just making do with hyperfocal
distance is not good enough. You *have* to use a camera setup that
employs the same basic geometry of
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...cheimpflug.jpg
(except that the assembly is pointing up rather than down).


no, you don't *have* to use such a setup for a tall building. in fact,
it would be a bad idea.

here's a situation where it would be, and note the rear standard is
*parallel* to the building:


https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...b9/t/576c2e495
a655be13f013aba/1467902699499/Scheimpflug.gif


I've seen that before but I don't think it qualifies as "photographing
a very tall wall from close up" as I originally specified.


it doesn't. that's the whole point.

scheimpflug is not needed for a tall building.


It is if you are close up.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #62  
Old April 26th 18, 03:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,698
Default The last days of analog

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

here's a situation where it would be, and note the rear standard is
*parallel* to the building:


https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...ef5b4b9/t/576c
2e495
a655be13f013aba/1467902699499/Scheimpflug.gif

I've seen that before but I don't think it qualifies as "photographing
a very tall wall from close up" as I originally specified.


it doesn't. that's the whole point.

scheimpflug is not needed for a tall building.


It is if you are close up.


you're moving the goalposts again.

your original problem image was *not* close up.
  #63  
Old April 27th 18, 12:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,272
Default The last days of analog

On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:22:05 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

here's a situation where it would be, and note the rear standard is
*parallel* to the building:


https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...ef5b4b9/t/576c
2e495
a655be13f013aba/1467902699499/Scheimpflug.gif

I've seen that before but I don't think it qualifies as "photographing
a very tall wall from close up" as I originally specified.

it doesn't. that's the whole point.

scheimpflug is not needed for a tall building.


It is if you are close up.


you're moving the goalposts again.


Go back and read the thread. I wrote "Consider photographing a very
tall wall from close up". I've already told you twice.

your original problem image was *not* close up.


No it wasn't, but that's not we were discussing.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #64  
Old April 27th 18, 11:56 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,698
Default The last days of analog

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

scheimpflug is not needed for a tall building.

It is if you are close up.


you're moving the goalposts again.


Go back and read the thread. I wrote "Consider photographing a very
tall wall from close up". I've already told you twice.

your original problem image was *not* close up.


No it wasn't, but that's not we were discussing.


it was until you decided to change it.
  #65  
Old April 28th 18, 05:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,272
Default The last days of analog

On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 18:56:46 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

scheimpflug is not needed for a tall building.

It is if you are close up.

you're moving the goalposts again.


Go back and read the thread. I wrote "Consider photographing a very
tall wall from close up". I've already told you twice.

your original problem image was *not* close up.


No it wasn't, but that's not we were discussing.


it was until you decided to change it.


Exactly. I raised it as an example and have been discussing it ever
since. I had no idea what you thought were talking about. Mind you
that makes two of us.

You have no excuse for not noticing that I had raised a particular
example as *I* never snipped any text, let alone snipped text without
acknowledging the fact.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My first analog photos! Russell D. Digital Photography 0 May 29th 12 08:50 PM
My first analog photos! George Kerby Digital Photography 0 May 28th 12 07:47 PM
My first analog photos! Andrew Reilly[_2_] Digital Photography 1 May 28th 12 12:01 PM
Analog Black Dial [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 0 May 21st 09 10:42 AM
Old Analog Meter: Any Value ?? Magnusfarce Digital Photography 14 July 3rd 07 06:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.