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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
"Sir John Howard" wrote in message ... | C J Campbell wrote: | On 2009-02-02 11:59:33 -0800, "Focus" said: | | http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg | | Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without | filters, you can create this effect quite easily. | Here's one tutorial: | | http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/p...ftTutorial.htm l | | | If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny, interesting | pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some miniature | street or scene. | | This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift | lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in | Photoshop with a single image. | | A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture | controls depth of field. i think he meant plane of focus |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:24:33 +1100, Sir John Howard wrote:
This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture controls depth of field. That's not entirely correct. Perspective can be manipulated with shifts, but depth of field is controlled both by aperture and tilt. [Page 20 of the 24mm PC-E Nikkor manual] This is a retrofocus-type perspective control (PC) lens that lets you emphasize or correct near and far perspective, or control depth of field. It also lets you correct distortion caused by the camera angle. Moreover, you can use the lens’ tilt and shift mechanism to achieve focus of the entire subject plane when it is not parallel to the camera. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Sir John Howard wrote:
C J Campbell wrote: On 2009-02-02 11:59:33 -0800, "Focus" said: http://atlantic-diesel.com/Miniferrari.jpg Of course the picture was taken with a normal lens. With PS, without filters, you can create this effect quite easily. Here's one tutorial: http://martybugs.net/blog/blog.cgi/p...tTutorial.html If you Google Fake shift tilt, you can find some very funny, interesting pictures. Specially those taken from above look like it's some miniature street or scene. This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture controls depth of field. Lens shift changes perspective. Lens tilt tilts the plane of focus. This is a quite a different effect from aperture related depth of field. -- Chris Malcolm |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said:
On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote: Mr.T MrT@home wrote: "Sir John Howard" wrote in message This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/s hift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens apert ure controls depth of field. Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute for a full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow the depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane. And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone. I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need. -- Ray Fischer * * * * * There is software to handle the extended depth of field. You take a series of pictures and merge them. Say you start by focusing 6 inches out. Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focus 8 inches out. If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at 12" or so. You then merge the photos together and get one picture with extended DOF. I've never used the software but I've read articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy). It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the images to give a larger dynamic range. Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that you can merge them together. After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixels in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures? Maybe the bride won't sit still? -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On 2009-02-04 15:39:05 -0800, Pat said:
On Feb 4, 5:27*pm, C J Campbell wrote: On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said: On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote: Mr.T MrT@home wrote: "Sir John Howard" wrote in message This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/ s hift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that i n Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens ape rt ure controls depth of field. Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute fo r a full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow the depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane. And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone. I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need. -- Ray Fischer * * * * * There is software to handle the extended depth of field. *You take a series of pictures and merge them. *Say you start by focusing 6 inche s out. *Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focu s 8 inches out. *If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at 12" or so. *You then merge the photos together and get one picture with extended DOF. *I've never used the software but I've read articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy). It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the images to give a larger dynamic range. Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that you can merge them together. After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixels in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures? Maybe the bride won't sit still? -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor Actually, if you took 10 images where you did nothing except changed the focus and you merge them together, you'd still have your original resolution. You wouldn't be gaining any information, you'd just be making sure that all of it was in focus. I said nothing about changing focus. As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
"C J Campbell" wrote in message news:2009020508360875249-christophercampbell@hotmailcom... As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) I'll bet camera vibration will probably do that for you already :-) MrT. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
Pat wrote:
On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote: Mr.T MrT@home wrote: "Sir John Howard" wrote in message This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a tilt/shift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that in Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens aperture controls depth of field. Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute for a full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allow the depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane. And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone. I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, TS lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need. There is software to handle the extended depth of field. You take a series of pictures and merge them. Ick. Say you start by focusing 6 inches out. Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and focus 8 inches out. If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is at 12" or so. Which is okay if you have a tripod and a subject that isn't changing. That is rarely the case for me. -- Ray Fischer |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
On 2009-02-05 20:05:27 -0800, Pat said:
On Feb 5, 11:36*am, C J Campbell wrote: On 2009-02-04 15:39:05 -0800, Pat said: On Feb 4, 5:27*pm, C J Campbell wrote: On 2009-02-04 10:59:04 -0800, Pat said : On Feb 3, 3:35*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote: Mr.T MrT@home wrote: "Sir John Howard" wrote in message This is fine if you want to reduce depth of field. However, a til t/ s hift lens is often used to increase depth of field. You cannot do that i n Photoshop with a single image. A tilt/shift lens is primary used to correct perspective. A lens a pe rt ure controls depth of field. Partly true, a simple tilt-shift lens is not a complete substitute fo r a full view camera with tilting film back and lensboard which DO allo w the depth of field to be non parallel to the film/image plane. And you cannot do that with lens aperture alone. I've taken photos that had subjects from six inches to infinity, and even at f22 it's hard to get everything to be sharp. *Of course, T S lenses tend to be too expensive for the occasional need. -- Ray Fischer * * * * * There is software to handle the extended depth of field. *You take a series of pictures and merge them. *Say you start by focusing 6 inc he s out. *Then if your DOF ends at 12", you take another picture and fo cu s 8 inches out. *If your DOF then ends at 16", your next picture is a t 12" or so. *You then merge the photos together and get one picture with extended DOF. *I've never used the software but I've read articles about it and it's pretty slick (and easy). It is the same concept of bracketing exposures and blending the image s to give a larger dynamic range. Sure, but it is not always possible to take multiple exposures so that you can merge them together. After all, you can take two exposures and effectively double the pixel s in your camera, too. So why bother getting a 24 megapixel camera when you can get nearly the same resolution with two 12 megapixel exposures ? Maybe the bride won't sit still? -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor Actually, if you took 10 images where you did nothing except changed the focus and you merge them together, you'd still have your original resolution. *You wouldn't be gaining any information, you'd just be making sure that all of it was in focus. I said nothing about changing focus. As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor I don't think you understood my 1st post re multiple exposures. You take multiple exposures but don't move the camera -- just move the focal point. That, obviously, changes what's in focus. My merging the photos in much same way you would merge photos for a high-dynamic- range photo; you can get a photo with a huge depth of field (which is what the thread was about). It was not about merging to make a panoramic or something. No, Pat. We all know about this technique. I use it most often in macro shots. -- Waddling Eagle World Famous Flight Instructor |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
"John A." wrote in message ... As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could be firmware-hacked to do that. No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by accident :-) MrT. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Faking and expensive tilt-shift lens
In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Mr.T MrT@home wrote:
"John A." wrote in message ... As for gaining information, perhaps if you moved the camera to the left a half a pixel for the second shot. :-) I wonder if any of the cameras with in-body image stabilization could be firmware-hacked to do that. No way could they move only half a pixel, including vibration, unless by accident :-) I don't know whether any of the current in-body stabilisers can actually do it, but very similar technology has been employed for decades now to adjust the position of slides in automated microscopy, and that technology is certainly capable of well under half a pixel adjustments. -- Chris Malcolm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canon Telephoto Tilt-Shift TS-E EF 90mm f/2.8 Manual Focus Lens for Canon EOS Bodies | cbgjr | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 24th 07 01:38 AM |
Tilt-Shift Lens: Any Experiences? | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 44 | April 9th 06 06:59 PM |
No need for a tilt shift lens. | Scott W | Digital Photography | 48 | November 2nd 05 04:06 AM |
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens | clive | Digital Photography | 13 | October 25th 04 12:29 AM |
ARSAT 2.8/35 tilt and shift lens | clive | 35mm Photo Equipment | 14 | October 25th 04 12:29 AM |