for landscapes, do you use a bubble level?

[Daniel_Buck]

Just curious. My 4x5 camera has levels on it, and I find myself glancing at them just about every time I setup. My 8x10 doesn't have any levels (but does have a nice grid on the glass), and honestly I haven't really felt like I'm lacking anything with out them while I'm shooting or after I'm done and looking at the negatives. It's difficult to shoot my 4x5 with out looking at the levels, since they are already there.

So I'm curious, how many of you use levels when shooting landscapes? Do you find that they help you compose? Or confirm your composition? Or just as an aid when you are shooting on un-level ground before you start composing?

[Sheldon N]

They're built into the camera, so I always use them. I've found that when I frame what I think is level by looking at the ground glass, I'm often incorrect.

[Tomaas]

I often use 6" carpenter's level.

Tomaas

[Once]

I never use it. First I thought they must be there for the blind people who cannot judge the composition on the gg but then I realized they wouldn't see it there either, ehm. Its use probably depends on the focal length one uses - maybe the wide angles are more difficult to judge on the gg?

[Walter Calahan]

And I use an angle finder to make sure the lens and the gg are square to each other, it there is no need for corrections.

[Dan Fromm]

Tripod head, with built-in bubble levels, on a leveling ball.

[Once]

And I use an angle finder to make sure the lens and the gg are square to each other, it there is no need for corrections.

May I suggest, in all modesty, an Arca Swiss to use ;) ? Sorry, I know , it was a bad joke:(

[anchored]

My camera doesn't have levels, but I use line levels and small handheld T-levels, and also level the tripod and ballhead or panhead. I prefer using gridded camera screens, but haven't equipped my 4x5 with one yet (but use them on MF cameras).

[Preston]

I prefer to start with a level camera with the back and front standard plumb. This gives me a neutral starting point...

And that's on the level. :D

-PB

[Alan Davenport]

My 4x5 field camera has no built-in levels, so I carry a 6" torpedo level in my bag. It gets used each time the camera is set up. IMO it helps a lot to start with the camera and all movements in a known, neutral position.

[DuncanD]

I use a Manfrotto video tripod with slider crutch legs (fast to adjust) and a socket swivel base for the head. So I quickly start with the head base nearly level on any ground. Then my Bogen head has levels in both directions, which I usually leave fixed level relative to the tripod. Thus when I mount either my Toyo 45AII or G, the Bogen is level. Each camera has levels built in so I adjust as needed.

That gives a good starting point. From there, I ignore level and do what looks good on the glass. :)

[Nick_3536]

Torpedo level. Even with the camera and tripod having built in bubbles. Start with things level then I mess it up on my own -)

[robert fallis]

I've got a nice little bubble level. that fits in the accessory shoe of the camera, the only problem is I can't find it most of the time, so it rarely gets used, when I can find I will glue it place, till then it's what's on the GG that gets taken
bob

[BrianShaw]

I often level twice - once with the bubble level on the tripod, and again when I verify "zero position" with the bubbles on the camera. I like starting from level and making adjustments from there.

[sanking]

I always level and plumb a view camera on a tripod, even for landscapes. I then use rise and fall to compose the scenes. If the scene is still off the ground glass after maximum rise and/or fall I will tilt the camera up or down, but this only as a last resort.

Other movements are used as needed to control perspective and/or focus.

Sandy King

[Frank Petronio]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

[Kirk Gittings]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

On some landscape images, there is a kind of disconcerting feel when the leveling is off slightly. This may add strength or detract from the image. I always start out perfectly level and then sometimes adjust slightly for aesthetics purposes.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Sometimes something seems visually level on the groundglass when it isn't actually level (say, because the camera isn't square with a shoreline or line of trees on the horizon, or because you're standing on a slope), and maybe your brain is being confused by what you see when you look at the scene and then at the groundglass, and later you look at the print, and you realize something is off, maybe because the horizon is straight but the trees are leaning.

Sometimes in printing I have trouble choosing between visually level and actually level, because really level doesn't look level. After going around on this, I've decided that actually level usually looks better in the end, so I check.

[arthur berger]

For many years I searched for the perfect level to use with my view camera that didnt have built in levels.One day while photographing next to Jay Dusard at a workshop I saw him pull out the perfect level to check his 4x10 camera. It was an acrylic block measuring about 3" x 1 1/2 with 2 bubbles inside.I found it made by Horseman. Now I NEVER leave home without it.

[Gene McCluney]

For 4x5 all the way up to the largest camera I own (11x14) I use bubble levels, you bet. I like as accurate, level, distortion free images as possible. I have been shooting about 60 sheets of 5x7 a week (one day a week) on one of my personal projects. I am pretty fast at setting up camera and leveling in 2 dimensions.

[Mattg]

Sometimes in printing I have trouble choosing between visually level and actually level, because really level doesn't look level. After going around on this, I've decided that actually level usually looks better in the end, so I check.

And this is one reason I always level the camera; so I know once I get to the stage of enlarging what actually level actually is.

It's also handy if you want to make the most of your negative and not crop too much as any levelling done under the enlarger means a crop.

For urban landscapes I level the camera in both directions. For scenes with no recognisable geometric shapes I still level the horizon.

[Brad Rippe]

I start with the camera level, but then rotate as needed for the best composition. I'm extra careful if there's a horizon in the image, but for most non horizon scenes, you should feel free to adjust the image as you want, without worrying too much about level.
-Brad

[Ben Chase]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

Some of us are overly anal Frank :)

If I see that my image is off level even slightly it irritates me to no end, even though "fixing" it in PS is pretty trivial - it's just extra work to do later that I wouldn't normally have to do.

[Frank Petronio]

Actually I'm anal too and I figure the film shifting in the holder and the holder introduce a degree or so of possible shift.... so you're going to be fixing it and checking the guides in PS anyway.

And I've been know to tilt the camera down, line up the horizon with the horizontal edge of the ground glass and know I have that axis lined up, optically at least.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I use a level with my medium format camera when it's important, and I have a level more or less permanently in the flash shoe of my 35mm camera (if I use flash, it's on a bracket, and connected to the PC contact).

David Muench is often pointed down, but his horizons are usually level.

But all this talk of level horizons makes me want to experiment with some non-level horizons. Of course there's the "Dutch angle" used in film to create a feeling of motion, but it's got to be way tilted to be convincing or it just looks like a mistake. But does anyone use the subtle tilting of the horizon--just enough to make the whole thing disturbing and not quite right--as a conscious effect?

[Frank Petronio]

Landscapes with rivers should always be tilted towards the downstream end of course.

[Doremus Scudder]

Using the gg is certainly a possibility, but I find it faster to get the camera into "starting position" by using the level. I do, however, often check horizon against the grid or by panning down to check it against the top edge. Often slight adjustments are necessary, even though I have used the level to get things straight to begin with.

Of course, if there is nothing in the composition that needs to be level (horizon, verticals, etc.) then I simply make the best composition. And, nowhere is it carved in stone that the horizon must be level (or verticals for that matter), it depends on you vision for the photograph. That said, level is often the best starting point, especially if you anticipate lots of movements...

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[ljb0904]

It sort of depends on what I'm photographing. If the focus is down (like the classic near/far comp), I just point the camera down using grid lines to fix the horizon right. If it's trees or other things sticking up, I start level (using levels) and shift from there. Plus, it depends on whether I'm using the Arca or the Osaka. I like to be precise, but I'm not anal about it :-)

[Clay Turtle]

As a matter of fact I also use the leveling of the tripod head then move to the on camera frame levels. Part of the ritual of setting up of setting everything square & plumb . . . then I go on viewing & composure which like construction sometimes things have to be eye balled to look square or level

[mrladewig]

Why would it matter for landscape work unless you were blind? No offense but I just don't see how leveling the camera to the last degree could possibly make any difference.

Frank, It especially comes into play in my experience when there is water in the scene. If it is a mountain lake, misaligned reflections often give the viewer a feeling of something being wrong (like Kirk mentioned), though its sometimes difficult to place. And with open water like the ocean, it can give a feeling like the world is slipping to a side even if its only a degree or two of tilt.

If there isn't a body of water or any other indicator of level then I tend to not worry about it, just setup and use my eyes to level.