Weston's lack of front tilt
I've been on a Weston's kick lately. Been reading about Edward and Brett and studying there images. Something I've noticed in all the photos I've come across of either of them with there cameras is the lack of front tilts. I often read posts on forums about which camera to buy. Which has the most movements etc... But they seemed to have done just fine with front rise only. The best answer I've been able to come with for this is that they ALMOST exclusively contact printed so careful focus and depth of field may have been enough. Any thoughts?
Rich
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
I second the use of rear tilt to replace front tilt in EW's case. Along with front rise/fall, it can replace the need of front tilt.
Vaughn
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
Remember that many US LF cameras had no front tilt, so you had to use rear tilt, it was only the better models that came with front tilts and if you were very lucky front swing as well.
Ian
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
I believe Century Universals have front tilt.
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
Both Brett and Cole eventually used Calumet C-1's which have both front and rear axis tilts fwiw :)
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
How can you tell that they didn't use front tilt?
Jon
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
I am assuming there was something in the supporting text. If not, presumably some ability to communicate with the long-since departed :D I'm intrigued!
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
On a camera without front tilt, you can aim the camera down, and tilt the back to get the same effect. It can be a pain, but it is very doable. Having real front tilt is much nicer.
Re: Weston's lack of front tilt
Quote:
Originally Posted by
David Karp
On a camera without front tilt, you can aim the camera down, and tilt the back to get the same effect. It can be a pain, but it is very doable. Having real front tilt is much nicer.
Or just tilt the back backwards if perspective is no big deal...