Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
My "go to" camera for many years (35) was an Ansco view. It had front rise and fall, so I just used the tripod tilt and rear tilt and swing to get what I "saw" in my minds eye. Probably I just learned how to work around the lack of front tilts. It's much easier to do this with the rear movements in my opinion.
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
For architectural work, front tilts and swings can be really a lot more convenient. However, as has been pointed out, the same result can be attained without those movements by using tripod tilt and front rise/shift. The real determining factor in controlling parallels in the image (or not) is the position of the back in relation to the subject. How the back gets there can be accomplished a number of ways.
Best,
Doremus
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
John: The OP wrote thyat he had seen photographs of the Westoins WITH their cameras, and the cameras had no provision for front tilt.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
His Century Universal as used on the Guggenheim trips has plenty of movements, including front tilt.
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
Yes. And the cameras he used before the Guggenheim trips did not. I really prefer Weston's work to Adam's, but that's just me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kevin Crisp
His Century Universal as used on the Guggenheim trips has plenty of movements, including front tilt.
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
100% everything sharp from closest to most distant subject does not necessarily make the best picture.