# Thread: How often do you tilt for Theo?

1. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

One can certainly differentiate diffraction between f/4 and f/22 on the LCD screen of a D800E in Live View, assuming the target is sufficiently defined. Just put your camera on a tripod, focus on the target in Live View, and compare the image at f/4 and f/22 using the Playback/Zoom In button to view at maximum magnification.

There is no question but that the use of swings and tilts with view cameras can in many cases allow us to use the lens at a wider aperture and get equivalent depth of field, and greater sharpness, than just stopping down the lens. Diffraction is, as has been pointed out, a law of optics and just because it does not apply to one's specific kind of work does not mean that it does not apply at all in general view finder photography.

To differentiate the effects of diffraction between f/32 and f/64 on a view camera would be a tall order. On the other hand, the difference in depth of field is not all that great either if you compare f/32 to f/64. A better test would be to compare the effects of diffraction and depth of field on the extremes, say f/8 and f/64.

Sandy

2. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

What I learned: You don't have to tilt very much--at all. I had a very hard time with tilts--never could make them work--because I tilted much too much. A little goes a long way. Better to creep up on the plane of focus than tilt right through it and then wonder, like I did: What the heck?

3. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

I think it's important to remember that using the focus on the near and tilt for the rear method as set out in the Fred Newman link above establishes a plane of focus encompassing those two points. By definition a plane is a two dimensional object in space and has no depth or volume - length and width only. To establish the volume you stop down. The "how to" books that I consulted when first starting out in LF didn't explain that and I would go through endless repetitions of focusing on the near point and tilting for the rear point before I finally (!) decided to just to stop down and see. In reflecting back on that, I think it was due to the absence of depth of field scales on LF lens and that I had the mistaken idea that it wasn't necessary to stop down with LF lens: just focus and tilt and everything will be kosher. You can also achieve the same result by using the hypofocal point as you would with a 35 or MF camera with DOF scales on the lens by simply noting the position of the standard at the near and far point and positioning it exactly halfway between those two points on the rail/bed and then stopping down to bring everything into sharp focus. Having two methods to arrive at the same result is sometimes handy.

Thomas

4. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

Originally Posted by sanking
One can certainly differentiate diffraction between f/4 and f/22 on the LCD screen of a D800E in Live View, assuming the target is sufficiently defined. Just put your camera on a tripod, focus on the target in Live View, and compare the image at f/4 and f/22 using the Playback/Zoom In button to view at maximum magnification.

There is no question but that the use of swings and tilts with view cameras can in many cases allow us to use the lens at a wider aperture and get equivalent depth of field, and greater sharpness, than just stopping down the lens. Diffraction is, as has been pointed out, a law of optics and just because it does not apply to one's specific kind of work does not mean that it does not apply at all in general view finder photography.

To differentiate between f/32 and f/64 on a view camera would be a tall order. On the other hand, the difference in depth of field is not all that great either if you compare f/32 to f/64. A better test would be to compare the effects of diffraction and depth of field on the extremes, say f/8 and f/64.

Sandy
Finally a post I can agree with. And similar to what I wrote in post #8 of this thread:

Originally Posted by Greg Miller
From a technical point of view, you can make a decision based on the f-stop required to get the depth of field that you need. Most lenses are at their optimal sharpness at a middle f-stop. Let's say that, for a given lens, once you stop down past f32 you start losing sharpness due to diffraction (and many will argue that diffraction is not worth worrying about with LF). So if you find yourself stopping down to f64, that would be a reason to use tilt, so that you can achieve the depth of field that you want, while also using a more optimal f-stop.

5. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

Originally Posted by Greg Miller
Finally a post I can agree with. And similar to what I wrote in post #8 of this thread:
Hear hear!

I never denied the scientific fact of diffraction, but in real life in ones own situation one may or may not notice it, that's why I wrote up the circumstances of my latest shoot (applicable only to in this case, doing table top is different, landscape is different) as in post #103.

That Drew saw the need to belittle me and draw definitive conclusions is annoying.

Academic discussions are nice (and I am an academic) but in the end we are trying to help those starting out in the field, aren't we ?

Best,

Cor

6. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

I was admittedly being ornery, but I never implied the usage of the technical facts had to be religiously applied, just acknowledged. What seems "academic" to one
person might be bread and butter to another. If a sniper is off 3%, it's significant.

7. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

I did use a little bit of tilt for this image.

4x5 PocketView, 150mm/5.6 Caltar II-N
TMax 100 in HC-110

Mistaking the Map for the Territory
Sentinel Dome

(yes, that is my hand -- the other is operating the cable release)

8. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

That's classic, Vaughn!

9. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

Amazing picture, Vaughn.

10. ## Re: How often do you tilt for Theo?

Use tilt almost always unless subject is so 3-dimensional, movements have no benefit. And if the latter is the situation will focus mid subject, stop down to the max, to hell with diffraction. However usually when a subject is that difficult won't even bother. More often am looking for subjects where besides being aesthetic/interesting, I can adjust camera position and use movements to get a full frame in acceptable focus for a large print.

Tilt of course is just part of movements. Here is an example of an oblique sloping subject on an even plane where the frame is closer at bottom than top and horizontally closer on the right than left. For that I used a combination of tilt and swing. With an ideal subject one can then open a lens up more to the sharpest aperture with best image quality. In this case I also stopped down a bit more simple because at each point on the average plane of flowers there was also depth between the flower tops and stems/leaves below. One of the great things about using a view camera is there is much for the skilled mind to think about.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•