Towering Rockface Tilt Problem

Twice yesterday I found myself in front of hundred foot rockfaces
that seemed to prefer that I did not tilt. That is, from the base
where much important detail was, to the top of the rockface, where I
had to maintain focus to unify the structure, I found that I had to be
perfectly vertical with my standards. This however left background
receeding information to go out of focus, and the aperture could not
save it. Esthetically the image is good. In fact I'm interested in
doing more selective focus work, but for right now, I'd like to know
if there is a solution to this that I am overlooking.

Ken Smith wrote:
Twice yesterday I found myself in front of hundred foot rockfaces
that seemed to prefer that I did not tilt. That is, from the base
where much important detail was, to the top of the rockface, where I
had to maintain focus to unify the structure, I found that I had to be
perfectly vertical with my standards. This however left background
receeding information to go out of focus, and the aperture could not
save it. Esthetically the image is good. In fact I'm interested in
doing more selective focus work, but for right now, I'd like to know
if there is a solution to this that I am overlooking.

I don't believe there is any solution except for stopping down further.

When you tilt the lens, you get a tilted plane of exact focus. About
that plane is a wedge shaped region bounded by two planes on either side
of the plane of exact focus. They meet in a line called the hinge line
(not the Scheimpflug line) below the lens. Its distance below the lens
varies with the tilt angle, increasing with smaller angle. That wedge
shaped region includes what will be sufficiently in focus. Its angular
opening depends on the relative aperture. Generally, anything of
significant vertical extent relatively close to the lens will
necessarily extend outside any wedge achievable by tilting more than a
miniscule amount.

If you can get the entire rock face in the frame, and you don't have to
worry about subject movement, just stop down enough so that everything
you want is in focus. If that is not feasible, then I think you are
out of luck and you will have to give up on getting more distant parts
of the scene critically in focus.

Twice yesterday I found myself in front of hundred foot rockfaces
that seemed to prefer that I did not tilt. That is, from the base
where much important detail was, to the top of the rockface, where I
had to maintain focus to unify the structure, I found that I had to be
perfectly vertical with my standards. This however left background
receeding information to go out of focus, and the aperture could not
save it. Esthetically the image is good. In fact I'm interested in
doing more selective focus work, but for right now, I'd like to know
if there is a solution to this that I am overlooking.




If you have a vertical subject in front of you, or a series of vertical
subjetcs such as a series of doors, a stand of trees, a rock wall then
tilttiing is only likey to get you in trouble. I always suggest that large
format photographers level their cameras front to rear and left to right as a
starting [osition. Then use either front rise and fall and shift or back rise
ands fall and shift as compositional tools. Once the composition is worked out
then decide if swings and tilts will be helpful. While some people use front
and rear swings and tilts interchangeably I do not and use them for different
purposes.

It sounds like you did fine. You just encountered a situation where swings and
titls would not help you. In your situation f-stops and the proper placement of
the vertical plane of focus is the answer. By proper placement of the plane of
focus I mean to focus wide open so that the nearest object you care about and
the farthest you care about are equally out of focus. Then watch through thte
gg as you stop down and the dof lines will spread to include these areas. A gg
brightener will help a great deal.

In the Jan/Feb issue of View Camera I started a series on setting up and usng
the view camera. Part 2 will be in the March/April issue.

steve simmons
www.viewcamera.com

(CamArtsMag) wrote in message ...
Twice yesterday I found myself in front of hundred foot rockfaces
that seemed to prefer that I did not tilt. That is, from the base
where much important detail was, to the top of the rockface, where I
had to maintain focus to unify the structure, I found that I had to be
perfectly vertical with my standards. This however left background
receeding information to go out of focus, and the aperture could not
save it. Esthetically the image is good. In fact I'm interested in
doing more selective focus work, but for right now, I'd like to know
if there is a solution to this that I am overlooking.




If you have a vertical subject in front of you, or a series of vertical
subjetcs such as a series of doors, a stand of trees, a rock wall then
tilttiing is only likey to get you in trouble. I always suggest that large
format photographers level their cameras front to rear and left to right as a
starting [osition. Then use either front rise and fall and shift or back rise
ands fall and shift as compositional tools. Once the composition is worked out
then decide if swings and tilts will be helpful. While some people use front
and rear swings and tilts interchangeably I do not and use them for different
purposes.

It sounds like you did fine. You just encountered a situation where swings and
titls would not help you. In your situation f-stops and the proper placement of
the vertical plane of focus is the answer. By proper placement of the plane of
focus I mean to focus wide open so that the nearest object you care about and
the farthest you care about are equally out of focus. Then watch through thte
gg as you stop down and the dof lines will spread to include these areas. A gg
brightener will help a great deal.

In the Jan/Feb issue of View Camera I started a series on setting up and usng
the view camera. Part 2 will be in the March/April issue.

steve simmons
www.viewcamera.com

Thanks Leonard and Steve. Perhaps I should stop obsessing on that
all-over sharpness look anyway. I'm sure you've both noticed how
some soft focus areas can make the sharp ones seem sharper. And I
think its about time I got a subscription to your fine magazine.
Those newstand prices are murder.

And I
think its about time I got a subscription to your fine magazine.
Those newstand prices are
murder.

I've said for years that if someone buys 3.5 issues per year from the stand
they could get all 6 delivered to their home. Each issue is wrapped in a
plastic bag for protection.

To subscribe just call 800-894-8439 m-f 8-5 mountain time or give us an address
via e-mail and we will bill you.

View Camera
Box 2328
Corrales, NM 87048

e-mail