What Vibration Does A Wood Tripod Dampen And Why Does It Matter?

[Bob Salomon]

It's a theory, Merg.

Tripod manufacturers have been using it as a sales gimmick for years.

Has anyone actually tested it by means of scientific methods?

Leica Photography Magazine (LFI) did a test in their December/January 2006 issue (1/2006) that took a laser pointer that was mounted to a Manfrotto 410 geared head which had a digital camera with the equivalent of a 1700mm lens mounted on the head. They then placed tripods on double layers of corrugated cardboard and pointed the set-up at graph paper with mm sectioning 6.5 meters away. They then induced vibration by dropping a pendulum and photograhing the laser dot with a 15 second time exposure. The recorded field was 8,5 x 13 cm. They could then measure the maximum horizontal and vertical oscillations in arc seconds.

They tested 8 tripods. A Berlebach Report 2022, Giottos MT 8170 (now discontinued) Berlebach Report 8023, Giottos MT 9160 (discontinued), Manfrotto 055ProB, Manfrotto 055MF3, Gitzo G1257LVL and a Gitzo G1198.

The tripods are listed above in the order of least vibrations according to the teat. The published article shows the laser dot images for each tripod tested and gives the deviation in arc seconds for each test.

If you would like to see the test Leica can probably supply back copies of that issue. It was an article titled "Sure Shot".

[Ivan J. Eberle]

I came to photography from a flyfishing, bicycling and R/C helicopter engineering background. While I'm not so old that I remember wooden bicycles, I can appreciate the difference in modulus between carbon fiber ("graphite") rods, fiberglass, and bamboo (err, I actually am old enough to have used a beryllium copper casting rod a time or two). CF clearly "telegraphs" more information (vibration) up the line to the angler.

That CF works for tripods at all is entirely due to its being extraordinarily stiff. Aluminum is so similarly stiff that it rings like a bell from the harmonics once disturbed. Drop an aluminum tube on the floor (or go to a Little League game) to hear for yourself. As I discovered with helicopters self-destructing in mid hover, either can develop catastrophic fractures (stress cracks) from such harmonics in a vibration prone environment. Spectra composite material would be more space age than either Al of CF as one of its properties is absorption of vibration.

Specifying "wood" is overly broad... Snakewood as used in violin bows would be a terrible choice for tripods, it's used in violin and cello bows for it's resonance. Bamboo is also hard as nails but light due to the voids it contains, never have seen a bamboo tripod. Ash, oak and maple would be somewhere in the middle and pine at the other end of the spectrum, along with balsa and cork.

As you say, you're unlikely to notice your leaf shutter vibration causing camera shake with LF, not at typical landscape f/stops and shutter speeds averaging a second or so. (Particularly with a wooden camera). Wind is much more of a bugaboo.

In my case, for more than 20 years before getting into LF photography, I'd used motordriven 35mm gear with long teles. In the days before image stabilization allowed the use of lighter CF tripods, sufficient mass was needed to overcome the inherent vibration amplification deficiencies of Al tripods. Since I tend to use the same tripods with all of my cameras and lenses, light CF or Al tripods just don't cut it for some of my needs.

FWIW, I've successfully substituted cork for rubber as the bedding material between the lens foot and Q/R plates on a lightweight motordriven camera and lens combo that was transmitting so much vibration as to not render sharp images between 1/8s-1/125s. In such case the popular notion of "mass coupling" only works if your camera isn't the source of the vibration or if your tripod absorbs it.

SLRs built since the late 80's tend not to have this problem for better mirror and shutter brakes. But a Speed Graphic might. Or a Super Speed with that 1/1000 shutter that is purported to go off like a shot. Certain MF SLRs are notoriously atrocious in this regard.

Though the cost might be prohibitive, I'd like see someone make a Spectra tripod.

[Vaughn]

With view camera use there are several user-caused vibrations. Pulling the darkslide, setting the f/stop, cocking the shutter, not keeping some slack in the cable release, etc. On my barrel lenses, removing the lens cap to make the exposure must be done carefully.

Non-user caused vibrations exist, such as gusts of wind, traffic, setting up in moving water (creeks), etc.

Most of the time it is just a matter of waiting for the vibrations to settle down, which just about any material a pod can be made from will eventually do. In general, wood seems to settle down the quickest...but there are other factors that come into play (just try a heavy camera on an extended center column!) I did a quick Google search for the scientifically studied effects of vibration dampening of different materials, but I'll let someone else wade thru all that info. I am sure it is there somewhere.

We have some old Bogen 3046 pods with 3047 heads for our Calumet Studio (rail) cameras. I feel they are vibration-pron due to the fact that the cameras on top of the heads are quite a bit above the apex formed by the tripod legs. So the geometry of the set-up plays a part, also.

I like my Ries -- it has taken abuse that would have damaged my old Gitzo 300 series (I had to do one leg replacement with the Gitzo), or shattered a carbon fiber leg. One can't baby a pod unless one stays on wimpy flat land and smooth trails. I have had to toss (as gently as possible) my pod ahead of me in places where it took two hands to climb. But I guess I am getting off of the vibration issue so I'll quit here.

Vaughn

[Bob Salomon]

What about just putting your hand on the tripod? That's going to dampen movement more than the difference in tripod construction. I like the wood alternative for several reasons, but the part about greater motion absorption seems nebulous to me.

If the wind's blowing, you can't just stand idly by and assume your wooden tripod has got you covered.

Rather then use your hand take a shot glass and half fill it and then place it on top of the tripod. Tap the leg gently and time how long it takes for the vibrations to stop. The vibrations will be seen as waves in the shot glass. To do this test you don't hit the leg. You just tap gently with your index finger. I usually do it on a lower leg as well as on an upper leg.

[tgtaylor]

It seems to me that putting a hand on the tripod will tend to make it vibrate. If you hold you hand out and look at it you will see small but perceptual vibrations which are caused by nerves, muscle contractions, blood flow, etc.

One of my cameras is a Pentax67II. Although an excellent camera that has found a loyal following among landscape photographers, shutter speeds at 1/30 second and slower have been designated as "the kiss of death" speeds due to the vibration produced by the movement of its large focal plane shutter.

When I first acquired this camera, I supported it on a Manfratto 3441 carbon fiber tripod and Gitzo 1275M ball head. Upon triggering an exposure with the cable release, I would notice a slight vibration or movement of the camera. I use the mirror lock-up function on 99.99% of my exposures. I have since switched to a Gitzo G1348 carbon fiber tripod and Arca Swiss Z1-sp ball head and observe zero movement or vibration of the camera during exposure,or on the resulting negative/print regardless of whether the mirror is locked up or not.

However if the ground under your feet is bouncing up and down, going left to right, then so will you and your camera regardless of what either of you are anchored on. Celestron and/or Meade make vibration reducing feet for telescope tripods that should also work on camera supports. But those feet are probably designed to reduce vibrations emanating primarily from the telescope (focusing, etc). Likewise a strong wind will tend to torque your equipment. My current tripod and ball head handles light to "moderate" wind well but I usually wait for the brief lull before triggering an exposure.

Thomas

[nathanm]

Weight is your friend, when shooting that is, not so much when you're humping it over the terrain. I've hung my 30lb. backpack from the center column on my Berlebach Report tripod, and that sucker ain't going anywhere. Levels REAL easy too! Most of the time I don't need to add any weight. In its stock configuration the tripod weighs twice what the camera does so it's all good. Perhaps carrying a light tripod and only photographing in locations where there are plenty of environmental rocks to use as ballast would be ideal.

[Archphoto]

This reminds me of a couple of shots I took years ago in Rotterdam, an underground restaurant in soft soil and lots of heavy trafic above.
The tripod, a heavy duty Gitzo Studex Performance did not help, the olny thing to do was to wait for the trafic to be quiet for a moment and make the shot wide open with 400 ASA color neg film on 4x5 inch.

No damping in my tripod would have made this shot easier.

Peter

[nathanm]

Rather then use your hand take a shot glass and half fill it and then place it on top of the tripod. Tap the leg gently and time how long it takes for the vibrations to stop. The vibrations will be seen as waves in the shot glass. To do this test you don't hit the leg. You just tap gently with your index finger. I usually do it on a lower leg as well as on an upper leg.

Then just for fun say, "Maybe it's the power trying to come back on!" If the vibrations aren't stopping quickly enough, drink the shot and try again. Repeat as necessary. Sooner or later you will realize that shooting a blurry picture is actually desirable, as it better represents your vision.

[toyotadesigner]

http://www.optiline.no/berlebach/ima..._lfi1_2006.PDF

it says all you need to know. no additional comment necessary.

[Bob Salomon]

http://www.optiline.no/berlebach/ima..._lfi1_2006.PDF

it says all you need to know. no additional comment necessary.

Link doesn't work for me.