Leveling...

[tgtaylor]

My standard operating procedure is to first level the tripod and then to level the camera. This has always worked for me.

Late this afternoon I shot an image along the sea coast that had a sea swept rocky beach for a foreground with the main subject in the background. The angle of the Sun dictated that this be done in the late afternoon which correlated with a rising tide and when I arrived the tide was rhythmically sweeping over the vantage point that I settled on which meant that waves reaching as much as knee high would be sweeping in.

I set my pack on a large boulder a few yards uphill, mounted the camera and lens on the tripod, took off my shoes and socks, rolled-up the blue-jeans, and then determined the exposure. Having determined the exposure I set the shutter speed and set the camera up in the pre-determined spot - sinking the tripod down into the wet sand without bothering to level it but leveling the camera according to the bubble level on the rear standard.

Try as I did, I couldn't bring the foreground and background into sharp focus using the usual front tilt, focus, front tilt, focus...procedure. In the meantime the tide was rising higher, reaching my knees at times. At the point of giving-up I decided to level the tripod and then level the camera. Only when I did this was I able to get both the foreground and background into sharp focus.

What's puzzling to me is why was it necessary to also have the tripod level when the camera was level according to the twin bubble levels on the back standard? Your thoughts are appreciated.

Note: I will be going back to re-shoot this as I discovered that a 210mm lens (which I naturally left in the trunk!) would give a better perspective.

Thomas

[Leigh]

sinking the tripod down into the wet sand without bothering to level it but leveling the camera according to the bubble level on the rear standard.
Is the level on the rear standard a "bulls-eye" level or tubular?

Field camera or monorail? Was the back square with the camera bed/rail?

My guess is you leveled it on one axis but not the other; the second being leveled when you leveled the tripod.

- Leigh

[tgtaylor]

Is the level on the rear standard a "bulls-eye" level or tubular?

Field camera or monorail? Was the back square with the camera bed/rail?

My guess is you leveled it on one axis but not the other; the second being leveled when you leveled the tripod.

- Leigh

Thanks for the reply Leigh.

1. I imagine that the level was the tubular kind. It's the typical twin levels that you see on view cameras with one indicating front to back level and the other side to side level.

2. The camera was a Toyo 45AX field camera which comes without bubble levels. I purchased the levels locally shortly after I purchased the camera but they are the large cubes and not the small bubble levels that are standard on the view cameras. Nevertheless, they seem to be accurate as long as I have the bubbles centered.

3. The back was upright and locked-down at the detente position.

Thomas

[Doremus Scudder]

Level is level. It does not matter how you achieve it. Your camera and film have no idea if you've leveled with tripod or tripod head or hung the camera with wires from the ceiling. Your difficulty using tilts must have been due to something else. Even if the camera is not precisely level, you should have been able to use tilts to adjust the plane of focus.

I often have the tripod in a rather awkward location and end up using the tripod head to get the camera level. As long as the head is locked down, the camera stays level and movements work as planned. Of course, if the tripod is not level, every time you pan with the tripod head, you will throw the camera out of level and have to re-level. The main advantage of leveling the tripod first is to avoid this, and be able to make pan adjustments while keeping the camera level. If you panned during your adjustments, you ended up with the camera not level. This could make using camera tilts trickier than when the camera was level.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[Steve M Hostetter]

Leveling the tripod legs is a waste of time unless you have a 35mm attached to a long telephoto lens where you intend to pan the camera for shooting like say water fowl in flight and you wanna keep the camera level as you pan..

[Bruce Watson]

Try as I did, I couldn't bring the foreground and background into sharp focus using the usual front tilt, focus, front tilt, focus...procedure. In the meantime the tide was rising higher, reaching my knees at times. At the point of giving-up I decided to level the tripod and then level the camera. Only when I did this was I able to get both the foreground and background into sharp focus.

What's puzzling to me is why was it necessary to also have the tripod level when the camera was level according to the twin bubble levels on the back standard?

Level is level. If your back standard is level, your film is level. Doesn't matter whether your tripod head is level or not. Front tilts are independent of the back standard by definition; your ability to move the plane of sharp focus using front tilt is independent of both the back standard and the tripod also -- neither has to be level or plumb. Those are all choices the photographer gets to make.

I don't know what your trouble was, but I'm sure what it was not, and that's that your tripod head was level, or not.

You of course have no reason to believe me. But it's easy enough to prove it to yourself. Go try to make photographs without first leveling your tripod. What could be simpler?

I should also say that I don't have a level for my tripod at all, and I've made thousands of nicely focused exposures never having leveled my tripod. My first procedure normally is to level and plumb the back standard. Works every time.

[Greg Blank]

I never do this. I always select the view point and get the camera there. I never start the camera at zero either. I have become accustomed to leaving the camera on the pod and the camera is open unless its the first photo of the day and I have had to walk a long distance to get to the area being photographed. Most of the time I never bother with an exact level tripod. I visually level the camera. I have a level I just don't use it. I worked for three years as a land surveyor setting up a twenty thousand dollar transit that had to be exactly level each time on hillsides etc. Once you get the technique down after your first several thousand set ups its child's play ;)



My standard operating procedure is to first level the tripod and then to level the camera. This has always worked for me.
Thomas

[Steve M Hostetter]

Depends a great deal on what type head your using ,,, would be absolutly no reason to level a tripod while using a ball head.. I know quite a few ppl that don't like to use ball heads with LF but for me it's more fast and convenient..

[tgtaylor]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

Your views sums-up what I always thought and previously experienced. But yesterday things didn't work as usual. I checked everything - that the back was upright and locked-down, the bubbles were exactly centered... Maybe I had a floater that remained fixed in placed until I leveled the tripod or maybe because yesterday was Friday the Thirteenth...but only when I leveled the tripod according to the bubble level on its base and the the camera which was mounted on an Arca Swiss ball head with the twin bubbles on the rear standard did focusing quickly follow.

Strange, but that's how it went yesterday.

Thomas

[Brian Ellis]

Depends a great deal on what type head your using ,,, would be absolutly no reason to level a tripod while using a ball head.. I know quite a few ppl that don't like to use ball heads with LF but for me it's more fast and convenient..

I don't understand why the type of head would have any effect on the need to level the tripod as well as the camera. Why is that?

[Leigh]

I don't understand why the type of head would have any effect on the need to level the tripod as well as the camera. Why is that?
If you're doing any kind of pan shot, and the head rotates relative to the tripod mount, then the tripod must be leveled.

It's of less importance with a pan/tilt had if you're not panning.

It's of zero importance with a ball head since that doesn't know what level means in the first place. :p

- Leigh

[ROL]

Level is level. If your back standard is level, your film is level. Doesn't matter whether your tripod head is level or not. Front tilts are independent of the back standard by definition; your ability to move the plane of sharp focus using front tilt is independent of both the back standard and the tripod also -- neither has to be level or plumb. Those are all choices the photographer gets to make.

I should also say that I don't have a level for my tripod at all, and I've made thousands of nicely focused exposures never having leveled my tripod. My first procedure normally is to level and plumb the back standard. Works every time.

I often ignore my top-mounted bulls-eye level (mostly difficult to use anyway in that configuration), depending mostly on the GG's grid lines for reconciling perpendicular elements and horizon.

I've had this happen before. Your description of the circumstances leads me to believe that the tripod wasn't able to maintain level after the surf began washing away at its initial set position. But, I can't say as to whether or this is at the root of your near-far focus difficulties.

[Struan Gray]

The most likely explanation is that you had some unintentional swing on one or other standard. That would make your tilts produce a focal plane canted to one side or the other, preventing a near-far focus. When you levelled the camera you also nulled out the movements and removed the swing.

I'm a very intermittent Toyo user, and seem to often get unintentional movements on the front standard. It's mostly lack of practice, but still easy to do.

[engl]

I don't understand why the type of head would have any effect on the need to level the tripod as well as the camera. Why is that?

There are some heads that pan above the ball instead of under it. I use such a head, the Arca Swiss P0, but there are also heads like the Z1-DP and Acratech GP-S.

The nice things about these is that you level once using the head only. After this, you can pan without a need to re-level. For those like me keeping the back vertical, it is in my opinion easier to use than a 3-way head which needs re-leveling after panning unless the tripod is also leveled.

There are of course many ways of matching this functionality with a combination of leveling bases, various heads and panning bases. The nice thing is that the P0 weighs 300-400g, does not add much height and is extremely strong for its size (P1 is bigger/stronger).

[Bob Salomon]

There are some heads that pan above the ball instead of under it. I use such a head, the Arca Swiss P0, but there are also heads like the Z1-DP and Acratech GP-S.

The nice things about these is that you level once using the head only. After this, you can pan without a need to re-level. For those like me keeping the back vertical, it is in my opinion easier to use than a 3-way head which needs re-leveling after panning unless the tripod is also leveled.

There are of course many ways of matching this functionality with a combination of leveling bases, various heads and panning bases. The nice thing is that the P0 weighs 300-400g, does not add much height and is extremely strong for its size (P1 is bigger/stronger).
Or you can add a Novoflex PANORAMA to the top of any head on the market. The PANORAMA is available with or without an Arca compatible quick release built-in and is also available with progammed stops from 6 to 36 by turning a knob, also with the Arca release.

[Steve M Hostetter]

I don't understand why the type of head would have any effect on the need to level the tripod as well as the camera. Why is that?

Brian,

once you loosened the tension dial (to frame image) you'd lose any preset position you intended to accomplish

pan/tilt head is basiclly a video head .. will keep it's horizontal level

[engl]

Or you can add a Novoflex PANORAMA to the top of any head on the market. The PANORAMA is available with or without an Arca compatible quick release built-in and is also available with progammed stops from 6 to 36 by turning a knob, also with the Arca release.

Yes, which is what I said in my last paragraph :) The point I was making is that you will end up with a higher weight and height (more demanding for a tripod) which such a setup.

Another way is to replace the quick release on a ballhead with a panning quick release like the Sunwayfoto DDH-01.

[Mike Anderson]

There are some heads that pan above the ball instead of under it. I use such a head, the Arca Swiss P0...

That Arca Swiss P0 looks like an interesting design (reasonably priced too), and I haven't heard much about it. How do you like it? Do you use it with LF?

...Mike

[Bob Salomon]

Yes, which is what I said in my last paragraph :) The point I was making is that you will end up with a higher weight and height (more demanding for a tripod) which such a setup.

Another way is to replace the quick release on a ballhead with a panning quick release like the Sunwayfoto DDH-01.

Yes, a Novolflex PANORAMA adds 170 grams in weight (6 oz) and 18mm in height. If you use the PANORAMA Q with Arca compatibility you do add more in weight and height. But if it replaces an existing QR then you would add 100 grams and another 16mm.

[engl]

I do use it with LF, or did, as I sold my MPP Mk7 4x5 and now I'm waiting for a Chamonix. I'd like to use it more before giving a verdict, but so far I like it, it suits my way of shooting very well. I level it once when I set up the tripod, then it stays locked and I only use the pan. It locks down very hard for its size, using their "planetary gears". I like the way the head locks using the ring, I can adjust the camera using both hands and still lock it from wherever I'm standing (the lock is on the upper moving part of the head). Very little force is needed to lock the head.

There is no friction control, the bigger P1 has this. The lock on the P0 is progressive though. It does not feel as smooth in operation, for small precise adjustments, as a Markins Q10 head that I have tried.

[Heroique]

My sneaky suspicion – your second attempt was successful not because you leveled your tripod, but because you applied a specific camera movement that wasn’t applied the first time (probably a small one). With ocean tides rising higher & rushing you, it might be easier to overlook such things.

[dperez]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

Your views sums-up what I always thought and previously experienced. But yesterday things didn't work as usual. I checked everything - that the back was upright and locked-down, the bubbles were exactly centered... Maybe I had a floater that remained fixed in placed until I leveled the tripod or maybe because yesterday was Friday the Thirteenth...but only when I leveled the tripod according to the bubble level on its base and the the camera which was mounted on an Arca Swiss ball head with the twin bubbles on the rear standard did focusing quickly follow.

Strange, but that's how it went yesterday.

Thomas

This may not apply to you, but just in case; make sure your loupe is focused correctly and has not moved on you. I've had this happen a couple of times where I couldn't seem to get the focus right, only to find out that my loupe's diopter adjustment moved on me (which is very easily done with the Rodenstock loupes).