did anyone try this: cheap point-n-shoot on the back of a large format beast?

"chibitul" wrote in message
...

yes, that is what I mean. Most cameras have a macro mode, but you can
also put the camera about 0.5 meters away from the ground glass.

Ok, the image is dim, but [...]

It's just plain crazy to think of photograhing the ground glass. Has the OP
ever looked at a ground glass? And that's only one reason.

"chibitul" wrote in message
...

How will the "image act as an object" without the glass?

optics 101.

You are, of course, imagining shooting the aerial image. Sweet dreams,
chibitul.

"chibitul" wrote in message
...

How will the "image act as an object" without the glass?

optics 101.

You are, of course, imagining shooting the aerial image. Sweet dreams,
chibitul.

"chibitul" wrote in message
...

How will the "image act as an object" without the glass?

optics 101.

You are, of course, imagining shooting the aerial image. Sweet dreams,
chibitul.

"chibitul" wrote in message
...
In article Q2YPc.18274$Oi.4714@fed1read04,
"Mark M" wrote:



How will the "image act as an object" without the glass?

just to clarify, the image is there regardless if you have the glass or
not. The rays will keep propagating toward the digicam, and they
"emerge" from the real image, no glass needed. as I said, optics.

Magical thinking.

"IRO" wrote in message
...
In article
,
chibitul wrote:

just to clarify, the image is there regardless if you have the glass or
not. The rays will keep propagating toward the digicam, and they
"emerge" from the real image, no glass needed. as I said, optics.

The problem at this point is that the light rays from the big camera's
lens are radiating outward in a cone, focused on the glass screen (or
film). The P&S can only ever see a tiny fraction of that cone where-ever
you put it, except perhaps very close in behind the camera lens where
its tiny lens can intercept the complete cone. Unfortunately the image
would be wildly out of focus there, plus it would negate all the
features of the large format camera you are hoping to utilise.

A couple of years ago, there was a similarly confused poster here, who swore
endlessly that one could copy slides using a slide project WITHOUT a screen.


--He stubbornly clung to the idea that by pointing a camera directly at the
slide projector from accross the room...and focusing the camera on the same
PLANE where the screen would have been (where the projector was also
focussed)...that one could photograph the entire picture--as though this
created (I guess) some sort of new magical light-radiation point (or some
such thing) in the air at that unreflected point fo focus.

-No amount of explaining would persuade him otherwise.
I finally suggested that he try it.
....I didn't see any posts from him after that.


It's easy to forget, I guess, that some of these basic directional concepts
are not necessarily intuitively understood by everyone. Perhaps it's a case
of too many Star Trek episodes where they have the magically impossible
capability to...from and single point...project an image, and have it show
up with no point or field of reflected light in the middle of the room's
air.

"IRO" wrote in message
...
In article
,
chibitul wrote:

just to clarify, the image is there regardless if you have the glass or
not. The rays will keep propagating toward the digicam, and they
"emerge" from the real image, no glass needed. as I said, optics.

The problem at this point is that the light rays from the big camera's
lens are radiating outward in a cone, focused on the glass screen (or
film). The P&S can only ever see a tiny fraction of that cone where-ever
you put it, except perhaps very close in behind the camera lens where
its tiny lens can intercept the complete cone. Unfortunately the image
would be wildly out of focus there, plus it would negate all the
features of the large format camera you are hoping to utilise.

A couple of years ago, there was a similarly confused poster here, who swore
endlessly that one could copy slides using a slide project WITHOUT a screen.


--He stubbornly clung to the idea that by pointing a camera directly at the
slide projector from accross the room...and focusing the camera on the same
PLANE where the screen would have been (where the projector was also
focussed)...that one could photograph the entire picture--as though this
created (I guess) some sort of new magical light-radiation point (or some
such thing) in the air at that unreflected point fo focus.

-No amount of explaining would persuade him otherwise.
I finally suggested that he try it.
....I didn't see any posts from him after that.


It's easy to forget, I guess, that some of these basic directional concepts
are not necessarily intuitively understood by everyone. Perhaps it's a case
of too many Star Trek episodes where they have the magically impossible
capability to...from and single point...project an image, and have it show
up with no point or field of reflected light in the middle of the room's
air.

In article ,
PGG wrote:

They make digital scanning backs for large-format cameras. $20,000 I
think.

Lower, down to 5.5k.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
PGG wrote:

They make digital scanning backs for large-format cameras. $20,000 I
think.

Lower, down to 5.5k.

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

Does anyone remember that 4X5 or other LF transparencies can be SCANNED and are
then DIGITAL and can be played with accordingly? Are there really folks out
there who have so much time on their hands that they have to find Rube Goldberg
solutions to simple problems or have some folks just become so hung up on
digital that they just can't think in any other terms?


argon