Help Wanted for Close Up Plane of Focus and Sharpness on an 8x10

[Michael Finder]

Asking for some technical help please. This attached scan is a partial crop of an 8x10 negative. I am finding difficulty achieving sharpness throughout the image. The plane of focus I selected seems to run from the front of the golf clubs up through the top front of the golf bag. The golf shafts are quite soft. Is it possible to get everything sharp? The lens was pretty close to the subject with the camera tilted down plus front tilt and aperture around f22. My camera has front and rear base tilts plus front and back swing. The lens is a Fujinon 210mm f5.6.167719

[Rich14]

Michael,

What do you want to be sharp?

I assume the question, "is it possible to get everything sharp? in this case means everything in this particular crop. Yes?

If so, the plane of focus rises too steeply from the near edge of the clubs to the front edge of the bag. It may actually be rising even more steeply than that and the front edge of the bag is in focus only because it is within the acceptable DOF below the plane.

With the plane of focus tilted, the depth of field extends above and below the plane of focus and, of course is controlled by the f/stop number. In this case the DOF is quite thin and the shaft of the clubs lies too far below it.

You'll do better letting the plane drop lower toward the rear. You can empirically adjust the tilt by examining the image on the ground glass. At least 3 iterations of tilt/adjust focus/tilt are needed. Or you can adjust it precisely in one effort using Howard Merklinger's tables.

Rich

[ic-racer]

Smaller format. In my work, the only reason to use large format for closeup is the shallow DOF you can't get any other way.

[Ken Lee]

Adjustments are helpful when the subject is basically 2-dimensional, but they can't work miracles.

A 210mm lens at f/22 has the same depth of field as a 105mm lens at f/11, a 50mm lens at f/5.6, etc: not a great deal.

Try stopping the lens down to f/128 or as far as it will go. This will help bring the rest of the image into focus.

On 8x10, 210mm is a wide-angle lens. Close shots will likely exhibit foreshortening.

[Luis-F-S]

I'd use an 8 1/4" Dagor at f/45-64, or perhaps a bit longer Dagor.

L

[Doremus Scudder]

Rich 14 has your answer. You should place your plane of sharp focus so that it splits the distance between points that you want to keep in the zone of sharp focus.

Keep in mind that when you tilt the plane of sharp focus aggressively, like you are doing, the area "behind" the plane is now below it, and vice-versa. Check your focus spread by tilting and then checking points above and below the plane of focus that you want sharp. The optimum tilt will have the minimum distance between focus points; the actual distance between focus points on the rail or bed can be used to find an optimum f-stop. See here: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/fstop.html .

FWIW, f/22 is likely way to wide for what you're trying to do. I'd be starting with f/45 on 8x10...

Best,

Doremus

[Rich14]

Without starting a war, as usually happens in these type of discussions -

DOF has nothing to do with the format (4x5 vs 8x10). It's not more shallow for the larger format. It has nothing to do with lens focal length.

DOF depends on aperture and magnification of the image relative to the size of the subject.

If any camera (from cell phone on up to 5x7) and an 8x10 are both set up to have the same perspective of the subject, using any lens (as long as it can get the image onto the film) set to the same f/stop, the resulting images will have the same DOF if they are printed to the same size. They will look identical except for the higher IQ from the larger format. (That's simple physics)

Of course, an 8x10 image on the negative will have less DOF that the image from the smaller camera on its negative. But that's irrelevant. That's not producing the images to the same size. Nor is making contact prints from those negatives.

As an extreme example, a small camera using a wide angle lens and an 8x10 using a longer than normal lens will produce images with the same DOF if the lenses are set to the same f/stop and the images are printed to the same size.

[ic-racer]

In this setting, the shallow DOF is a result of the high magnification needed to fill a large format negative.

[Michael Finder]

I could shoot 4x5 IC Racer using a home-made reducing back so my subject size fills more of the frame, but that ain't 8x10 is it.
I want to shoot closer with the 8x10 so will have to rethink composition and subject matter. Oh well. Michael

[Michael Finder]

Thanks Rich 14 - I probably didn't understand my own question to make it more clear. To lower my plane of focus do I select a focus point further down into the image, use tilts and swings and then step down? Cheers Michael

[plaubel]

The lens was pretty close to the subject with the camera tilted down plus front tilt and aperture around f22. 167719

Wrong distance, in my opinion.
In cases of looking for DOF, I walk back one or two steps, and later I crop the negative.

Concerning tilt questions, I would like to see the whole picture.

Best,
Ritchie

[Drew Bedo]

167787More Tilt
Smaller Aperture
Slower Shutter speed
More light


Another approach would be to raise the camera position a little. Another thing I have done is to check the plane of focus by placing a small high contrast target in various places in the composition and check the GG. Do it wide open and stopped down if you can make it out in the dimmer view. A convenient target is a retail barcode from a package or tag. The high contrast bars can be made out when stopping down.

[Bruce Watson]

The plane of focus I selected seems to run from the front of the golf clubs up through the top front of the golf bag. The golf shafts are quite soft. Is it possible to get everything sharp?

IMHO (there's a lot of that going around these days) your plane of focus is in the wrong place. Easiest thing to do would be to align your plane of focus with the surface your subject is laying on. It's got a nice texture, should be easy enough to do. Once you've done that, pull the plane up (using your focus knob, not camera movements) to the level of the top club. Then stop down until you get everything in focus.

So what I'm suggesting is you put your plane of focus in a compromise position (half way between the extremes), and using aperture to pull the extremes in.

Now... are you sure you want everything in focus? Because the end result of all this is likely going to be fairly boring. It's often better to let the uninteresting things go out of focus. Like you've already done. Nothing wrong with using focus as a tool. :cool:

[Michael Finder]

Wrong distance, in my opinion.
In cases of looking for DOF, I walk back one or two steps, and later I crop the negative.

Concerning tilt questions, I would like to see the whole picture.

Best,
Ritchie

Here it is. I am wanting to include as much as i can in the frame.
167788

[Michael Finder]

IMHO (there's a lot of that going around these days) your plane of focus is in the wrong place. Easiest thing to do would be to align your plane of focus with the surface your subject is laying on. It's got a nice texture, should be easy enough to do. Once you've done that, pull the plane up (using your focus knob, not camera movements) to the level of the top club. Then stop down until you get everything in focus.

So what I'm suggesting is you put your plane of focus in a compromise position (half way between the extremes), and using aperture to pull the extremes in.

Now... are you sure you want everything in focus? Because the end result of all this is likely going to be fairly boring. It's often better to let the uninteresting things go out of focus. Like you've already done. Nothing wrong with using focus as a tool. :cool:

Thank you, all opinions are welcomed by me. I am new to 8x10 and have many close up subjects I'll like to shoot. I agree that everything sharp may be monotonous however I would like to learn how to do it in case I need/want to.

[Michael Finder]

167787More Tilt
Smaller Aperture
Slower Shutter speed
More light


Another approach would be to raise the camera position a little. Another thing I have done is to check the plane of focus by placing a small high contrast target in various places in the composition and check the GG. Do it wide open and stopped down if you can make it out in the dimmer view. A convenient target is a retail barcode from a package or tag. The high contrast bars can be made out when stopping down.

Thank you. This makes sense to me.

[Rich14]

167788

You don't need to change your camera position. This is a classic exercise in rotating the plane of sharp focus from one that is some distance out in front of the camera and at 90 degrees to the lens axis, and parallel to the front and rear standards, which themselves are rigidly parallel to each other.

The plane of sharp focus is rotated so that it intersects with the plane of the table just about directly under the lens and slowly rises to about halfway up the "width" of the bottom of the golf bag at its far end.

(Optional - to maintain perspective - important with rectilinear subjects) With the camera pointed slightly downward, as it appears to be from the picture, tilt both the lens board and the rear standard back to be true verticals. Then drop the front standard or raise the rear standard, or both to center the image.

1. Focus (by moving the rear standard) on the near edge of the clubs. Tilt the lens board forward slightly to bring the rear edge of the bag into focus. Adjust rise or fall if needed.

2. Re focus on the front edge of the clubs. Slightly re-adjust lens board tilt to again bring the rear edge of the bag into focus.

3. Re focus on the front edge of the clubs. Even more slightly, re-adjust the tilt to again bring the rear edge of the bag into focus.

Ever so slightly tweak the focus on the front edge of the clubs, Stop down and shoot.

There are tables that will tell you exactly what tilt and f/stop to use, after measuring your distance above the plane of the table to your lens. But without them, I'd bet that f/22-32 will do it.

Rich

[Ron (Netherlands)]

You can also have a look at how Edward Weston did close up shots with (U)LF gear, raising the f-stop to a very high number. I think he even put in extra cards which further raised the f-stop.

[Jim Noel]

The answer provided by Rich is excellent.

[Michael Finder]

You don't need to change your camera position. This is a classic exercise in rotating the plane of sharp focus from one that is some distance out in front of the camera and at 90 degrees to the lens axis, and parallel to the front and rear standards, which themselves are rigidly parallel to each other.

The plane of sharp focus is rotated so that it intersects with the plane of the table just about directly under the lens and slowly rises to about halfway up the "width" of the bottom of the golf bag at its far end.

(Optional - to maintain perspective - important with rectilinear subjects) With the camera pointed slightly downward, as it appears to be from the picture, tilt both the lens board and the rear standard back to be true verticals. Then drop the front standard or raise the rear standard, or both to center the image.

1. Focus (by moving the rear standard) on the near edge of the clubs. Tilt the lens board forward slightly to bring the rear edge of the bag into focus. Adjust rise or fall if needed.

2. Re focus on the front edge of the clubs. Slightly re-adjust lens board tilt to again bring the rear edge of the bag into focus.

3. Re focus on the front edge of the clubs. Even more slightly, re-adjust the tilt to again bring the rear edge of the bag into focus.

Ever so slightly tweak the focus on the front edge of the clubs, Stop down and shoot.

There are tables that will tell you exactly what tilt and f/stop to use, after measuring your distance above the plane of the table to your lens. But without them, I'd bet that f/22-32 will do it.

Rich

Well, I am ever so grateful for the assistance rendered to my question. I reshot the golf clubs and I'm pretty sure I achieved sharpness throughout and depth of field. Here is the result. I shot on 4x5 not to waste a sheet of 8x10.
167991

[Michael Finder]

The answer provided by Rich is excellent.

I know. It's how I managed the result I was chasing.

[Rich14]

Michael,

Glad you got the shot.

Rich

[Drew Bedo]

Glad you got the shot!

Another way to get a similar shot of a different subject:

In the past, I have done table top still lifes with oversized props to mionimize the DOF issues. In one series, I used a pulpit sized Bible. In another series I used huge sea shells. The DOF problems are still there, but because the size of the subject prop is larger, the camera may be further away and still fill the frame.

This image of cut stones are acrually glass decorater items; each is palm sized . . .maybe 3" across.


168124

210mm f/ 5.6 Caltar II N, 8x10 Kodak 2D, Ektachrome