You're way overthinking this. Use the center hash and grid on your ground glass. Make the building look right. Done. Who cares if you're actually centered, parallel, etc. if the photo looks like you're centered and parallel?
You're way overthinking this. Use the center hash and grid on your ground glass. Make the building look right. Done. Who cares if you're actually centered, parallel, etc. if the photo looks like you're centered and parallel?
-Chris
Chris and Steve, I wouldn't be asking if there wasn't a problem in the final image...I already messed one up some months ago, the other one was barely acceptable. I am quite easily disturbed by this. It's not for technical, but for aesthetical considerations :-) So, I tried to be extremely precise during my last shoot, to avoid such problems. It took way too much time, so I was asking for some hints, which I fortunately got from here. It isn't always easy for me to judge on the GG how the final image will look like - especially when the grid lines are gone.
So, the essence for me:
- Don't consider all horizontals and verticals to be 100% horizontal or vertical, so no need to be over-precise.
- Use some of the tricks described above to center the camera
That's what I will keep in mind for my next shots.
Unless I am misunderstanding something, I must ask; why are you panning to get the horizontal lines accurate? If you are centered (or close to centered) on the subject, a simple shift one way or the other should put the subject in the center of your composition. As you stated, your back is vertical and your subject is vertical so no problem there, just a rise to get the subject where you want it. Once you start panning you are throwing off being parallel to the building. We run up against this photographing paintings in the studio. If we are not exactly centered on the subject one of the corners of the frame will be off. Also, using the longest lens possible makes things so much easier. Hope this helps.
Something I do in the studio is to stand at the subject position and look back at the camera. You'd be surprised how off center your camera position can be even though from the camera position you think you are centered.
Look up the following links for alignment of the camera standards (ZV1.1 STANDARD ALIGNMENT MIRROR SET) , Replacement Parts.Originally Posted by Rollinhofuji
http://www.betterlight.com/zigAlign_options.html
http://www.betterlight.com/zigAlign_parts.html
It is the Zig-Align kits for art copying. Go through the summary and photos of the products and you may have some idea for DIY, it doesn't look like high tech. Not suggesting to buy it, and not affiliate with that site neither. Just happen having one of the kit included in purchase of a BetterLight scan-back from other private person, but that is different version for align the film plan and subject plan.
Thom, the reason for panning is to get horizontal lines parallel (not converging). You don't get the horizontal lines parallel by leveling the camera horizontally.
Leveling horizontally by right/left tilt of the tripod head only rotates the image on the GG, it does not affect the convergenze of vertical or horizontal lines. It only ensures that subject verticals in the middle of the GG are vertical on the GG (and subject horizontals in the middle of the GG are horizontal).
Forward/backward tilting of the tripod head makes all verticals parallel (so they don't converge). So, if the camera is level in both left/right and forward/backward directions, the subject verticals are parallel and also vertical on the GG.
You need to use pan to remove any converging horizontal lines. It is basically the same movement as forward/backward tilt of the tripod head, but rotated by 90°.
Anyway, I will follow our suggestion and have a look from the subject to the camera!
Nicky, Zig-Align looks good...
Jan,
You are quite right in your assessment above. Panning to bring horizontal lines parallel is essentially positioning the ground glass parallel to the face of the building you are photographing. Your grasp of how the movements work seems just fine.
The thing you need to be aware of, if you are really concerned with the center of the building being the exact optical center of the image you are making is this: Unless the camera is positioned exactly on a perpendicular line from the center of the building, when you pan to get the horizontals parallel, your camera will not be pointing directly at the center of the building, rather at a point equally as off-center as your camera position.
If you can live with that (many can) then fine. However, if you really want the middle of the building to be in the optical center of the image, you need to really work on positioning your camera first and foremost. If you nail the camera position, then all you should have to do is simply camera center the building on the ground glass. If you camera position is correct, the horizontals will be parallel. If the aren't, you need to reposition the camera.
FWIW, I often intentionally position the optical center of an image way off center with a combination of shift and cropping. This gives a spatial feeling for the viewer of standing at one side of the image, and gives a feeling of length to the long side while still preserving parallel lines. I first discovered this technique in paintings by the Venetian artist Canaletto. He used it quite extensively to great effect. An example is here: http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/cana...intings-250486
You can see that the optical center (i.e., vanishing point) is set far to the left of the center of the image, reinforcing the 1/3-2/3 composition and giving the whole image a feeling of movement and dynamicism by directing the viewers eye back and forth, not just at dead center.
Best,
Doremus
Thanks Doremus!
This all makes sense. Especially that, if I position the camera correctly, I just need to pan so that the center is in the center of the GG.
Good point about the directing of the viewer's eye. I Think the image of Canaletto is a good example for that. I will give this a try.
Funnily, this would have probably been a better choice for the building I recently shot (developd the neg yesterday). Will post it here soon.
By the way, just learned from your website that you also chose a "straight photography" approach. Although I don't consider myself as a straight photography hardliner (i.e. I sometimes remove "disturbing" objects like small branches or so), I also follow these rules and do not use "artificial manipulations" (as youc all them) after the exposure has been made. Your website shows great work, really inspiring.
Servus,
Jan
I would just like to add that instead of chalking signs on the ground, which is not always practical, you can simply use 2 strings of the same length and use their meeting point as the point you're looking for.
Thanks Hoffner, the principle is clear. Your suggestion sounds more practicable, especially without an assistant.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks