View finder with one eye vs ground glass viewing with both eyes ?

If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.
I think that this difference in perception is behind the use of
Polaroid photo proofs, viewing the composition with both eyes.
Has this perception difference been studied and are there any
references that you could point me to?
This may not be the best group for this question, and I may not be
clear in my question, but I thought that I would give it a try. If
there is a better place to post this question, please recommend it.
Thanks
Ken Kaiser

In article . com,
" wrote:

If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.
I think that this difference in perception is behind the use of
Polaroid photo proofs, viewing the composition with both eyes.
Has this perception difference been studied and are there any
references that you could point me to?
This may not be the best group for this question, and I may not be
clear in my question, but I thought that I would give it a try. If
there is a better place to post this question, please recommend it.
Thanks
Ken Kaiser

A range finder causes something known as parallax- it's the offset
caused by not having the lens connected to the viewing system.

So yes there will be things lacking or added to the final images for
cameras that don't directly see through the lens.
--
George W. Bush is the President Quayle we never had.

Gregory Blank spake thus:

In article . com,
" wrote:

If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.
I think that this difference in perception is behind the use of
Polaroid photo proofs, viewing the composition with both eyes.
Has this perception difference been studied and are there any
references that you could point me to?
This may not be the best group for this question, and I may not be
clear in my question, but I thought that I would give it a try. If
there is a better place to post this question, please recommend it.

A range finder causes something known as parallax- it's the offset
caused by not having the lens connected to the viewing system.

So yes there will be things lacking or added to the final images for
cameras that don't directly see through the lens.

That's not at all what he was getting at.


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

spake thus:

If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.
I think that this difference in perception is behind the use of
Polaroid photo proofs, viewing the composition with both eyes.
Has this perception difference been studied and are there any
references that you could point me to?

First of all, you've asked a good question. The lowly viewfinder is one
of the most underexamined aspects of cameras.

You might find Rick Oleson's page on viewfinders of interest:
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/looking_forward.htm. The inestimable
Oleson is a fount of camerositous information.

As for myself, I can't say I've experienced the same differences between
viewfinders and ground-glass images that you describe. Perhaps that's
because I only look out of one eye anyhow, so my "depth perception" (a
highly-overrated concept) doesn't depend on binocular vision.


--
Just as McDonald's is where you go when you're hungry but don't really
care about the quality of your food, Wikipedia is where you go when
you're curious but don't really care about the quality of your knowledge.

- Matthew White's WikiWatch (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/wikiwoo.htm)

wrote

If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.

I know exactly what you mean. I think it's more than using both eyes. The
difference is with a 35mm camera you are looking *through* the viewfinder
with your eye focused relatively at infinity. (No, I know it's more like
39", yes?) When you're using a view camera you are looking AT the image, and
it's very close, just as you would examine a print. Described another way,
through a viewfinder there is less tendency to examine the image as if it
were... an image. (The reality is simpler than I can describe it!) Yes, we
do use both eyes when viewing a ground glass, but it's not necessary.

Looking at an image on a ground glass, you are seeing it for what it is, as
close to what the final result will be on the film. The camera is on a
tripod and you are spending time examining it as you would examine a print
in your hands, so you are less likely to make common compositional mistakes.
When you look through a viewfinder, it's as if you're looking at a scene
even without a camera: you see what you WANT to see, not necessarily all
that is really there. This is why it is so common to have photos with trees
sticking out of people's heads.

Another aspect to consider is that the image is upside down. This
disconnects you from what you are expecting to otherwise see, so objects
seen on the ground glass become shapes and lines, and light and shadow,
rather than recognizeable objects that you expect to be a certain way and
subconsciously dismiss what is really there when looking through a
viewfinder.

The problems viewing through standard viewfinder cameras can be eliminated
just by being careful.

wrote in message
ups.com...
If I look at a scene with a view finder with only one eye, like a 35 mm
rangefinder camera, and compose a photograph, there is something
missing in the composition. For example, things at the edges go
unnoticed, mergers, and so on.
If I look at the scene on a ground glass with both eyes at a
comfortable viewing distance, these things that were not noticed in the
viewfinder are instantly obvious.
I think that this difference in perception is behind the use of
Polaroid photo proofs, viewing the composition with both eyes.
Has this perception difference been studied and are there any
references that you could point me to?
This may not be the best group for this question, and I may not be
clear in my question, but I thought that I would give it a try. If
there is a better place to post this question, please recommend it.
Thanks
Ken Kaiser


Do you wear glasses?
My mother used to have problems with compostion looking thru the viewfinder:
her shots were off-center. Her glasses prevented her from getting the camera
close enough to her eye to see the entire viewfinder image. We got her a
camera with a "bullseye" in the center of the viewfinder. This helped her
considerably.