First ever large format shot... Your take on the focus...

[fivebyfour]

Folks.

Apart from a couple of indoor test shots to practice developing, this is my first outdoor shot as such.
I know composition, the photo itself isn't a winner but it was more about learning the LF craft and working on focus.
I worked to get the lifeguard text in focus using the Scheimpflug principle, however I'm not happy with the focus in general, especially to the left of the hut.
Your thoughts warmly welcomed.
110127


34S at F22 with 10 stop
FP4 in 1:50 Rodinal

[Professional]

Great, nice shot, i don't believe it is your first shot.

Anyone, i don't see problem with the focus, but you have to experiment more and you will get used to focus properly within the time.

I hope i can find things to shoot with my LF without some people getting around me, because i never see anyone using LF around and i don't want to be look like a fool using LF when all are using digital, even my relatives feel bad that i do photography at all even with digital.

[bobwysiwyg]

Much bettter than my first LF shot. Good job in my book.

[Jody_S]

I see what you mean to the left of the hut, the stones are clearly out of focus. Yet, at f22, you should have had enough depth of field to keep them in focus. I think you may have concentrated so much on using movements to get the text on the wall in focus (at full aperture!) that you neglected the remainder of the frame, and did not consider the effect of stopping down the lens to f22 when taking the image.

If I were taking this image, I don't know if I would have done anything with movements except make sure the lines of the hut are parallel (I would not have used movements to get the foreground into better focus as this would have made the hut comically distorted). I would have simply chosen an aperture (f22-32) to ensure adequate detail in the stones on the ground in most of the frame, and then focused on the sign as you did.

I also carry around a smartphone with an app that calculates depth-of-field; if I were worried about it, I would have pulled it out and checked the in-focus area given the lens you used, and having focus set at whatever distance you were (30' or so?), at f22. I find that's easier than trying to judge focus on the ground glass at f22, although if you can stay under the dark cloth long enough for your eyes to adjust, it is of course possible to do so.

[Leigh]

You should not need Scheimpflug for this.
The normal Depth of Field for the lens should have covered the subject fine.

I don't understand "34S at F22 with 10 stop".
Do you mean 34 seconds at f/22 with a 10-stop neutral density filter?

If so... why?

The image seems a bit soft all over.
If the exposure really was 34 seconds, that could be attributed to camera motion.

- Leigh

[austin granger]

Yes, leagues better than my first LF photo, that's for sure.

It's a little hard to see the focus precisely on my screen, but as Jody and Leigh said above, I wouldn't have thought much about Scheimpflug in this case. It looks like you might have swung the front to the right a little? That could have caused you some trouble. Anyway though, I would have just gotten everything parallel and used front rise/fall to get the hut where you wanted it, focused on the letters and then stopped down. I know you'll hear a lot of hang-wringing about the dangers of not stopping down past f this or that, but honestly, I wouldn't be afraid of using f32 or even (gasp!) f45. It might be helpful to do an experiment with the same subject and take it using different apertures and then compare them for yourself.

I like the picture. Welcome aboard!

-Austin

[ic-racer]

I'd have set the front and rear parallel and determined the focus spread from the front-to-back of the building. Then apply the formula of Hansma (see http://www.largeformatphotography.info/fstop.html).

[Vaughn]

I like the effect of the 10-stop filter. Allowing the sea and sky smooth out allows the building to stand out.

I think a little more attention to edges of the image while composing and focusing will help. Look at the whole image on the GG and close the lens down slowly -- everything you want in focus should (in most cases) come into focus at the same time -- otherwise you have placed the plane of focus too far away or too close...or have used too much or too little movement.

Great start!

[mdarnton]

If you guys can really tell anything useful about sharpness from such a tiny image on a computer screen, you have a lot better eyes than I do.

[Vaughn]

If you guys can really tell anything useful about sharpness from such a tiny image on a computer screen, you have a lot better eyes than I do.
If you click on the image, then click again, you get the best quality image and can enlarge it quite a bit before it digitally falls apart.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Very nice feel for your first one!

[Bernice Loui]

Exposure is 34 seconds @ f22 ?


How much camera movement occurred during that 34 second exposure?
This could be the cause of perceived out of focus.



Bernice





34S at F22 with 10 stop

[Leigh]

How much camera movement occurred during that 34 second exposure?
This could be the cause of perceived out of focus.
Post #5

[fivebyfour]

Thanks for all your comments and to answer a few of the questions...

I was deliberately using Scheimpflug not because the composition as such required it, just because I am trying to learn it/practice etc.
By 10 Stop, yes I meant a 10 Stop Neutral Density filter, two reasons for using really, 1 to smooth the sky and sea and secondly its a relatively new purchase and wanted to test out exposure times etc. I also shot some colour and wanted to see how much of a cast it produced.

The shot is certainly sharp enough in certain areas, the full scan with sharpen produces a very good print, it is just soft in certain areas which are out of the plane of focus due to using Scheimpflug (I think anyway!). So I think I will be doing a little more reading about the physics of DoF and Scheimplug and as they say, practice makes perfect!

I do find the ground glass difficult still but I suppose that's something you just get used to.

The camera was mounted on the manfrotto 058B which is a beast of a tripod but I love its weight and stability and it certainly burns a few extra calories when you are out of the studio and carrying it outdoors!

Cheers
Clive

[Leigh]

I was deliberately using Scheimpflug not because the composition as such required it, just because I am trying to learn it/practice etc.
Hi Clive,

There's certainly nothing wrong with experimenting. I highly recommend doing so.

Scheimpflug is used for gross changes in the plane of focus.
With all camera controls at neutral, the plane of focus is perpendicular to the lens axis, usually vertical.
Depth of field extends from in front of the subject to behind it.

When you rotate the camera planes (lens or film or both), the plane of focus (including lens depth of field)
turns into a wedge, with the narrow end at the camera and the wide end beyond the subject.

An excellent example is photographing a building with an interesting lawn between it and you.
You can use Scheimpflug to bring the entire image into clean focus, right up to the closest visible grass.


By 10 Stop, yes I meant a 10 Stop Neutral Density filter, two reasons for using really, 1 to smooth the sky and sea and secondly its a relatively new purchase and wanted to test out exposure times etc. I also shot some colour and wanted to see how much of a cast it produced.
Again, perfectly reasonable and desirable.

The 10-stop is rather extreme, resulting in exposure times that may exceed the reciprocity limits of the film.

A lighter filter would give you exposures of 1 to 2 seconds, which should accomplish what you want, but maybe not.


The shot is certainly sharp enough in certain areas, the full scan with sharpen produces a very good print, it is just soft in certain areas which are out of the plane of focus due to using Scheimpflug (I think anyway!).
DoF covers distances from in front of the subject to behind the subject when the plane of focus is vertical.
The DoF behind is always twice the distance of the DoF in front.

That same rule applies to use of Scheimpflug, except that the Dof is now above and below the plane, rather than
in front of and behind. Also, DoF increases with distance, so the area that's in focus is narrow in the foreground
and broadens the farther the particular item is from the camera.


I do find the ground glass difficult still but I suppose that's something you just get used to.
Ground glass is a challenge, particularly when trying to determine actual focus off-axis. It works pretty well at the center.

Some focusing screens are better in this regard than others.

Sounds like you're making great progress. Let us know how we can help.

- Leigh

[Doremus Scudder]

I'll take on a couple of other things to augment Leigh's excellent response above:



Thanks for all your comments and to answer a few of the questions...

I was deliberately using Scheimpflug not because the composition as such required it, just because I am trying to learn it/practice etc.

One thing you've just learned is that when you move the plane of sharp focus around, you are moving the corresponding out-of-focus areas around as well. These can end up in pretty unintuitive places sometimes. One thing that really helps me is to visualize where the plane of sharp focus lies in the scene, or where I want it to lie. Finding near, far and at one side point of sharp focus gives you three points that define a plane. I focus on the ground glass, but do the visualization looking at the scene, not at the camera.


I do find the ground glass difficult still but I suppose that's something you just get used to.

I use the ground glass for focusing, but do the framing/composing by viewing the scene through a viewing frame. This helps me find the best camera position before I unpack and helps me in choosing the right lens (viewing filter close to my eye, shorter lens; viewing filter farther from my eye, longer lens). I usually choose where I want the plane of sharp focus to be before going under the dark cloth. Then I only have to frame and find my chosen focus points. It is a very different process than working with a small camera held to your eye.

Great shot, BTW. You'll master the techniques you need soon enough. It's not difficult, just a lot. Time is your friend.

Best,

Doremus