View camera alignment for "full frontal architecture"

[ROL]

Few things in the architectural world line up perfectly believe it or not.

Oh, I believe. Just try using one of those laser levelers that shoots 360º around, and watch those lines climb or fall precipitously upon turning a corner in a room. It will make you want to fire your contractor.


OP, you may find that something as simple as doubling your focal length, and retreating to twice the distance, if possible, may further mitigate the possibility of any off axis convergence/divergence.

It would be helpful if you would post your own images of your issues. The reason I think this worth mentioning here (besides being worth a thousand words) is that the pic posted strikes me a bit weird, and thus may not be what your shooting for. The clouds in the sky look unnaturally elongated to me, yet the structure that intrudes into that sky appears acceptably true. The pic itself is really too small for close inspection, but it appears to me that there is distortion and color fringing around the periphery of the building. This suggests to me that the pic may be a composite (PS). I don't even know whether any of this is relevant to your process, but there it is.

[Rollinhofuji]

Kirk and Luis: Thanks for sharing your experience! In fact this helps me a lot, because I almost thought I was going insane... I thought all lines would be either perfectly horizontal or vertical, but this seemed to be wrong. So, I guessed it was my fault. Will keep that in mind and try to trust my eye more than the spirit level when composing.

Doremus: In principle, I think I do it exactly as you described it, but maybe I'm wrong. I use the shift of both standards (same direction!) to move the camera horizontally. Simply shifting one standard wouldn't work, that's clear. My approach was to align the tripod by eye as good as possible, then align the camera perfectly parallel to the building by panning. When all horizontals and verticaks are parallel, the back is perfectly parallel. Then, use shift (both standards, same as moving the tripod laterally) for fine-tuning of the lateral position. In theory, this should work (if you have enough lateral shift on the camera), but obviously not all horizontals were really horizontal...Kirk and Luis explained me why.

ROL, I agree with you about the look, but I doubt there was any digital correction applied, it is a shot shown on Linhofs Website, said to be taken with an MT 3000 (and a 47mm SA, probably causing the distorted look)). Just have shown it to make clear what I mean by "full frontal". Anyway, I guess you are right, I should show my images - as soon as I have them developed :-)

By the way, I currently work hybrid (just about to set up my first makeshift darkroom), but hate digital distortion correction and stuff like that...it simply feels like cheating to me.

Thanks again for your help, Gentlemen!

[Kirk Gittings]

“Photography is not about the thing photographed. It is about how that thing looks photographed.” Garry Winogrand

[Ari]

...but hate digital distortion correction and stuff like that...it simply feels like cheating to me.

Don't sweat it; a photo has no inherent morality.
Do whatever serves the photo best.

[Kirk Gittings]

Exactly, when I had to I used to do further alignment correction in analogue in the enlarger by tilting the negative stage and paper. Cheating? I call it problem solving.

[Rollinhofuji]

Oh I might have to add that I am quite a fanatic analogue freak...I don't like digital post-exposure alterations. OK, usually I accept all kinds of processes which don't change the image content (i.e. add or remove objects).
Maybe I am a bit too extreme on that :-)

[lfpf]

Jan and all,

Just an easy thought that might be handy: to keep film plane and building elevation parallel with nothing but a tape measure and maybe some binoculars, locate lines parallel to the building's left and right sides at camera range, set camera at midpoint, keep lens and back vertical (Brunton or other), do the usual shift/rise and call it good.

Ok, if the building's not a rectangle (plan view or elevation) and irregular, will parallel matter to anyone but a photogrammetrist?

Best,

Steve, keep it simple and fun

[Bob Salomon]

Oh I might have to add that I am quite a fanatic analogue freak...I don't like digital post-exposure alterations. OK, usually I accept all kinds of processes which don't change the image content (i.e. add or remove objects).
Maybe I am a bit too extreme on that :-)

So what is your feeling about Ansel Adams prints or Jerry Ulesmann or John Sexton prints?

[Rollinhofuji]

Hi Bob, I definitely "accept" a lot of darkroom magic for my work (even when I do it in the digital darkroom, like I had to until now, simply because I didn't have space for any kind of real darkroom). Tilting the enlarger, dodging, burning, cropping, unsharp masking... I think these techniques are essential. But for my work, I would for example never do any editing like remove any objects from the image (neither in the darkroom nor in digital post-pro). Like, would never remove electrical powerlines from a landscape shot. I have some kind of "straight photography" approach, but would not consider myself as a hardliner.

Let me add that I do not judge about other people's work. It's just my choice for my work.

[Bob Salomon]

Hi Bob, I definitely "accept" a lot of darkroom magic for my work (even when I do it in the digital darkroom, like I had to until now, simply because I didn't have space for any kind of real darkroom). Tilting the enlarger, dodging, burning, cropping, unsharp masking... I think these techniques are essential. But for my work, I would for example never do any editing like remove any objects from the image (neither in the darkroom nor in digital post-pro). Like, would never remove electrical powerlines from a landscape shot. I have some kind of "straight photography" approach, but would not consider myself as a hardliner.


Let me add that I do not judge about other people's work. It's just my choice for my work.

Jan,

That is fine but those types of manipulations have been common in analog darkroom work for decades, if not centuries. People added or removed, flaws retouched, things added, things removed, a National Geo cover manipulated the pyramids and the moon. Centerfolds ir brushed, etc.

It has nothing to do with the medium. It is what the printer is capable of doing and if they want to do it.