Another nail in the view camera coffin?

Larry Caldwell wrote in message nk.net...
In article , brianc1959
@aol.com (brian) says...

All I'm saying is that once you fix the position of the lens, then you
can play all the shifting and tilting games you want with the rear
standard, and still be able to duplicate the resulting geometrical
effects in software.

No kidding? I didn't know you could adjust the plane of focus after the
fact, using software.

For some reason you deliberately snipped the last sentence of my post,
which specifically addresses the point you are making here. Why did
you do that?

Brian
www.caldwellphotographic.com

Larry Caldwell wrote in message nk.net...
In article , brianc1959
@aol.com (brian) says...

All I'm saying is that once you fix the position of the lens, then you
can play all the shifting and tilting games you want with the rear
standard, and still be able to duplicate the resulting geometrical
effects in software.

No kidding? I didn't know you could adjust the plane of focus after the
fact, using software.

For some reason you deliberately snipped the last sentence of my post,
which specifically addresses the point you are making here. Why did
you do that?

Brian
www.caldwellphotographic.com

D Poinsett wrote:
Leonard Evens wrote:

After I wrote my long explanation, I drew some pictures and realized the

snip...

I always appreciate Mr. Evens' knowledge and enthusiasm for math and
large format photography. If you have not already done so, check out
Brian Caldwell's web site (URL in his post). He has done a fair amount
of work with image transformation and many of the technical issues
discussed in this thread.

Well, I certainly didn't get it right this time.


D. Poinsett

D Poinsett wrote:
Leonard Evens wrote:

After I wrote my long explanation, I drew some pictures and realized the

snip...

I always appreciate Mr. Evens' knowledge and enthusiasm for math and
large format photography. If you have not already done so, check out
Brian Caldwell's web site (URL in his post). He has done a fair amount
of work with image transformation and many of the technical issues
discussed in this thread.

Well, I certainly didn't get it right this time.


D. Poinsett

D Poinsett wrote:
Leonard Evens wrote:

After I wrote my long explanation, I drew some pictures and realized the

snip...

I always appreciate Mr. Evens' knowledge and enthusiasm for math and
large format photography. If you have not already done so, check out
Brian Caldwell's web site (URL in his post). He has done a fair amount
of work with image transformation and many of the technical issues
discussed in this thread.

Well, I certainly didn't get it right this time.


D. Poinsett

In article ,
says...
In article ,
(Scott M. Knowles) wrote:

the two features that view cameras still
have over other formats are the ability to adjust perspective and
the plane of focus.

You must not use a view camera. Perhaps you only use a press camera, so
you would not know that the view camera allows control over the shape of
an object by using back movements. That is why a camera with an
adjustable back is used when doing 3-point perspective shots of products.

Having tilts and swings on the back of the camera is only a convenience
for the photographer. It doesn't add any extra functionality. The one
feature of view cameras that is unique is the ability to change the
relationship between the lens and the back. Whether this is done using
the front standard, the back or both doesn't matter. (Although there may
be some mechanical limitations if only one is present).
So 3-point perspective is just another way of saying that you have
tilted the back in both the vertical and horizontal planes. If you put
a fixed lens camera at the same spot and arrange it so that the back is
in the same plane as the view camera you will see the same object shapes
in the image. What you will be missing is the ability to adjust the
plane of focus independently.
The alternative is to set the fixed lens camera so that the *lens* is in
exactly the same place as the view camera and then adjust the image
shape using a digital editor. Provided the depth of field was sufficient
so that both images are sharp enough then you can create visually
identical results.

So to re-emphasize again, without the ability to change the relationship
between the lens and the film plane the one feature that you loose is
control of the plane of focus.

If anyone has a copy, the Kodak Professional Dataguide R28 has nice
diagrams explaining the whole thing, including how to use a fixed lens
camera to get the equivalent results.
--
Robert D Feinman
Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
http://robertdfeinman.com
mail:

In article ,
says...
In article ,
(Scott M. Knowles) wrote:

the two features that view cameras still
have over other formats are the ability to adjust perspective and
the plane of focus.

You must not use a view camera. Perhaps you only use a press camera, so
you would not know that the view camera allows control over the shape of
an object by using back movements. That is why a camera with an
adjustable back is used when doing 3-point perspective shots of products.

Having tilts and swings on the back of the camera is only a convenience
for the photographer. It doesn't add any extra functionality. The one
feature of view cameras that is unique is the ability to change the
relationship between the lens and the back. Whether this is done using
the front standard, the back or both doesn't matter. (Although there may
be some mechanical limitations if only one is present).
So 3-point perspective is just another way of saying that you have
tilted the back in both the vertical and horizontal planes. If you put
a fixed lens camera at the same spot and arrange it so that the back is
in the same plane as the view camera you will see the same object shapes
in the image. What you will be missing is the ability to adjust the
plane of focus independently.
The alternative is to set the fixed lens camera so that the *lens* is in
exactly the same place as the view camera and then adjust the image
shape using a digital editor. Provided the depth of field was sufficient
so that both images are sharp enough then you can create visually
identical results.

So to re-emphasize again, without the ability to change the relationship
between the lens and the film plane the one feature that you loose is
control of the plane of focus.

If anyone has a copy, the Kodak Professional Dataguide R28 has nice
diagrams explaining the whole thing, including how to use a fixed lens
camera to get the equivalent results.
--
Robert D Feinman
Landscapes, Cityscapes and Panoramic Photographs
http://robertdfeinman.com
mail:

I think the original poster should go to Calumet and look at their ungodly
expensive "view camera" adapter for 35mm style bodied digital cameras.
There's his solution. (LOL!)

I think the original poster should go to Calumet and look at their ungodly
expensive "view camera" adapter for 35mm style bodied digital cameras.
There's his solution. (LOL!)

I think the original poster should go to Calumet and look at their ungodly
expensive "view camera" adapter for 35mm style bodied digital cameras.
There's his solution. (LOL!)