Keeping Camera On Same Plane for Diptych, Ttriptych, Panorama

[spacegoose]

I'm interested in doing some 4x5 multi-panel images and am wondering what's a good method for keeping the camera on the same plane for each image?

So far, I've been carefully moving the camera, and although the images are close, straight lines in each image do not quite align. For example the straight edge of a rug, the top of a shelf, etc. where they continue from one image to the next.

I imagine it's something to do with slight movement of the camera from shot to shot, or the camera/flim not being on quite the same plane for each shot.

Thanks,
Bill

[Jim Michael]

You could buy/build a slider like used for cinematography. Or for larger scale moves, a dolly and track. Lot of diy plans for either.

[AA+]

It sounds like a problem with converging horizontal lines not matching in the photographs

It could be convenient (but not necessary) to keep the back vertical.

Could you shift the front/back of the camera (assuming sufficient lens covering power) to take your additional photographs? That would keep the camera back in the same plane for all pictures which should keep your lines consistent.

Best wishes --- Allen

[C. D. Keth]

You need to either be panning the camera around the nodal point of the lens or you need to be moving the camera laterally without changing the camera's bearing. It sounds like you prefer the look of the latter. You could construct a camera platform out of a 12 foot 2x4. Multiple point along that would always be in precisely the same line and then, with the aid of a compass and inclinometer, you could keep the camera bearing the same as well.

You can also refine the way you've been doing it by laying out the camera positions with a chalkline and/or laser level. Use a pocket digital camera to take a photo of the groundglass of each composition so you can have reference for the next shot in the line.

[spacegoose]

Thanks for the ideas. I need more than just shifting for the scene I want, and am not sure what other effect that could have. I think a dolly / track setup might be what I seek, the 2x4 method could be another possibility.

I am trying to maybe do something similar to : http://www.davidhilliard.com/The_Tale_is_True.html

Bill

[C. D. Keth]

It's tough to tell in some, but in many (maybe most) of those photos the camera is being panned, not moved. In that case, you would need to construct an offset so you could put the nodal point of the lens over the pivot point for the pan.

[Leszek Vogt]

The approach to these are not the same. You should be able to pull these off by using longer lens....I mean, longer than "normal". Another way is to do it is a pano, stitch it...and then put the breaking lines where you need them.

Les

[spacegoose]

Actually if you look at some of those panels, I think the straight lines (in some) also do not line up entirely. Chris, I will try panning, though to me it seems panning will capture the scene from different angles and distances and necessitate more focusing from shot to shot, and therefore make it even harder to line up the images to look panographic (then if using a dolly / track)?

Bill

[Nathan Potter]

As Chris says it is necessary to have the lens nodal point exactly over the pivot point for panning in cases where you need to have horizontal lines in the image line up.

There is a secondary misalignment that occurs when using wide angle lenses where, roughly, the lens focal length is less than the diagonal of the format. Even with wide lenses that are rectilinear there is image distortion (elongation) which becomes severe as it approaches the corner of the format. Thus when one tries to stitch the left hand side of a right image to the right hand side of a left image the distorted edges will not line up due to that image elongation.

Check out the "Really Right Stuff" web site for good equipment and an explanation of pano shooting.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Kimberly Anderson]

I think you guys are confusing two things:

1. The way the OP is referring to David Hilliard's method.

2. The way *you* would shoot a panorama using the lens' Nodal Point, and thusly think that the OP should shoot that way as well.

I shoot a LOT of panoramas like this and the thing that allowed the easiest leveling of the camera is the use of a cinema bowl-mount leveling head. There are several ways to skin that particular cat, but IMO, looking at David's panoramas, the only thing he's really that concerned about is keeping the camera level and the lines straight. Nodal Point panoramas are a much different beast and are usually used when stitching or perfect matching of the images is intended.

The way Hilliard is achieving his alignment is by leveling out the head, then in a separate move, he's leveling out the camera. There are many occasions where a front rise/fall will be used instead of tilting the camera up or down. Only by leveling out the bed of the camera and making sure it's level *during* the pan is there any hope for horizon lines and elements that are level not ending up all over the place.

I have used bowl-mounted self-levelig heads by Gitzo, Bogen, Miller and my current tripod is a cine-tripod from O'Connor from the 60's. I also use 3-4 different levels simultaneously on a very regular basis. I triple check my levels against each other and have taken back many levels to the store telling them that my reason for returning it is that "This level ain't".

If...and this is a long road filled with expensive brackets, calculations, naval-gazing and second-guessing...if you want to approach the Nodal Point method of shooting panoramas there are a plethora of wonderful tools that the above posters have alluded to. I am keeping my comments within the scope of the OP and looking at Hilliard's work.

There is a large group of people who shoot LF diptychs and triptychs like this. It has a rich tradition and I would encourage the OP not to get hung up on equipment but instead emphasize composition and story.

Good luck! I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[Jason Greenberg Motamedi]

...I would encourage the OP not to get hung up on equipment but instead emphasize composition and story...

I fully agree.

That said, the way I have done this with the most success is to use the massive back shift built into the wooden Canham cameras. Using a 210mm lens (you need a big coverage for this, so something like a f8 Computar, WA Dagor, or Angulon) I can expose three vertical 5x7s, or two horizontal 5x7s keeping the camera and lens in the exact same place, and only moving the rear standard. It works perfectly and is much easier than dragging the camera back and forth, or using a track...

Maybe there are other cameras that can do this?

[gleaf]

Random scrambled thoughts. Wider sturdier is better. For field survey instruments we use 3 5/8" -11 thread hold down screws and wide smooth top-plates on the tripod top. Also fairly precise levels. For optical tooling work we use 3.5 inch 8 thread bases. The hold down and surface are critical stability of the instrument to hold the level reference plane around a full circle. Not only may the mount need to me level but the internal film orientation of the camera needs to match the cameras mounting plane perhaps.
$0.02 worth maybe...

[Kimberly Anderson]

Gleaf has a good observation, and one that has burned me before. Film orientation can be a problem, and I have started rapping the holder in the orientation I intend to shoot in to make sure the film is seated squarely within the holder. It's easily overlooked and I'm glad that gleaf pointed it out.

[tangyimail]

Agree with Jason, back shift + wide angle works probably easiest.


I fully agree.

That said, the way I have done this with the most success is to use the massive back shift built into the wooden Canham cameras. Using a 210mm lens (you need a big coverage for this, so something like a f8 Computar, WA Dagor, or Angulon) I can expose three vertical 5x7s, or two horizontal 5x7s keeping the camera and lens in the exact same place, and only moving the rear standard. It works perfectly and is much easier than dragging the camera back and forth, or using a track...

Maybe there are other cameras that can do this?

[David R Munson]

For panning, adding a panning stage to the top of your tripod head can be a lifesaver. I use an Induro head that has this built in and it's great, as it allows you to level everything out, and then pan without things going out of level. A bunch of panning bases are available now, some with integrated QR clamps.

[DrTang]

he has an email on that site - why not ask him


I'm thinking he uses lenses with huge coverage so he's always shooting in the middle of the lens where there is less distortion

[Scott Davis]

By the time you've spent all the money on accessories, construction, and time figuring out how to make this work, you might be better off just getting a 5x12 and shooting a single panoramic, if the panoramic is more important than the triptych effect.

[C_Remington]

Levelling base.

[spacegoose]

Thanks All,

I appreciate the replies. Interesting to hear about your conversation with David, Greg.

I'll give panning a go next time I try this.

Bill

[miesnert]

I have been working on a different problem, but maybe my solution is helpful for you too.
I have been doing a lot of multiple exposures of different locations where I want certain elements to line up, for this I have been using transparant sheets that are exactly the same size as my groundglass, I stick this to my groundglass with tape and when I take a shot I simply draw the most important lines in the shot on the sheet, that way while composing I can make sure the next shot lines up exactly with the first one.

[spacegoose]

I got a reply from David, to paraphrase, he said he keeps the camera as level as possible in all directions and pans across.

Also, his lens is slightly wide, which causes things not to "match up" - which he said is fine and what he prefers, as within reason, the breaks and bumps add to the shifting time and space feel.

Bill

[Bernard_L]

If I understand well, the OP wants to photograph a flat object (triptych, rug, ext) such that the various shots will merge properly.

Lots of answers are off the mark. Talking about panning, nodal point. That is for a panoramic landscape, avoiding front/background parallax errors, and still requiring a panorama software to do the proper geometrical transforms (to rectilinear, cylindrical, etc). And, by the way, everybody parrots "nodal point", it's actually the entrance pupil that must be kept fixed.

Spacegoose, what you need is:
(1) To have your film plane parallel to the plane of the object. That would be required even in a single shot so that parallel lines remain parallel.
(2) To move your camera in that plane. There you have options:
(2a) Professional. Buy a length of optical-bench style extruded Aluminum bar; they exist in lengths up to at least 2.5m (8 foot). You can also buy a kind of trolley. Just an example:
http://www.newport.com/X95-Structural-Rails-and-Carriers/645115/1033/info.aspx
(2b) DIY. Lay down and somehow keep fixed on the ground something like a straight U-profile of steel, measured to be parallel to the object. Start with two of your tripod feet against that rail, and keep them that way when you move the camera.

Hope this helps

[Andrew O'Neill]

I read an article about this once years ago I think in PT magazine... the photographer stuck clear acetate on the GG and traced the main lines of the scene with a non-permanent marker. This helped him to line up lines when he turned the camera. I can't remember if he panned on the lenses nodal point, though...