back rise and fall

[fronk]

how much is this beneficial on 5x4?

I'm currently contemplating between two camera, both shen hao. The TZ45 IIB and the PTB45.

The only main difference between the two seems to be back rise and fall, where as the TZ45 has some and PTB has none.

I use 54 regularly in the studio and can't get my head around why it is useful? does it just give me another way to adjust the composition?

Here are the specs for both camera:

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/images/...45-IIB_new.jpg

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/images/pages/PTBnew.jpg

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[Rafael Garcia]

I've never had it, never used it. Not that that means anything from an amateur like me, but I'm curious to hear if others find it necessary. I suppose that if you do tabletop photography it keeps you from disturbing the composition and focus...

[paul08]

It's one of those things that you might not need very often, but when you need it you need it. I use rear rise or fall (more often) when my POV is far enough off that front rise/fall alone isn't enough to give me the picture I want and I can't easily change camera position (on a roof, for example). If you edit in Photoshop you can do some perspective changes that way. I use rear swing and tilt more. You probably want to base your decision on what kind of work you plan to do with it.

[fronk]

thanks for the responses, i will be using the camera for both landscape and portraits. I will not be doing any still life studio work where selective focus may be required.

basically it will be full focus, small aperture work, so for location portraits i will need lights etc.

with that in mind, i'm still not sure what to go for out of those two cameras i'm targeting.

[Ole Tjugen]

Personally I would go for the PTB45. Not because of rear movements or not, but because it can take both shorter and longer lenses! The longer bellows is especially nice to have in a studio.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I use those movements mainly for still life, occasionally for portraits, where I want to adjust the composition without changing the position of the lens.

For distant subjects, rear rise/fall/shift aren't as important, as long as you have the corresponding movements on the front standard, and eliminating them makes for a lighter, sturdier field camera.

[cjbroadbent]

Editorials need space to write headlines and copy on your precious picture. If you just pan to leave some empty space, you lose your delicately balanced perspective and things start to slide off the composition (unless you have the bad habit of using long lenses).
So its better to shift the film sideways (or up or down) to leave room. Thats why you need 'coverage'. Here's an example on 8x10.

[N Dhananjay]

Front rise/fall and shift alters perspective since the lens position moves. Back rise/fall and shift allows you to select the part of the image circle you want from a given persepctive.

In practical terms, if you are doing exacting macro work, architectural work or table top still life/product shots where a particular perspective plus movements are required, you probably need it. For landscape f/45 and be there, you don't need it.

Cheers, DJ

[Leonard Evens]

The only thing that matters is the final position of the lens and the position of the rear standard relative to the lens. So you can in principle get to what you want using either front or rear rise/rall/shift. But that is subject to the allowable movements of the camera. Also, when you use front rise, in principle, you should change the position of the camera to bring the point of view back to where it was. I find that back movements give me more flexibility, and sometimes, in order to ge the total rise I want, I need to use rise on the front standard and drop on the rear standard.

[BrianShaw]

On my monorail camera I use rear rise/fall more than front because it is closer. Less reaching. Also it is easier to see the effect in the ground glass while making the movements (I have short arms ).

On my Graphics I use front rise/fall since there is no option.