Large Format Landscapes

That's a fair point Vaughn, about the "negative connotations."

I get perplexed by this discussion sometimes. No one says that front tilt is the only way to manipulate DOF - of course it is understood that rear movements can also change the DOF in a similar manner, albeit with opposite angles. But it seems rear tilts have been pigeonholed as the only way to change the geometric shape of objects relative to the camera, in many discussions. Therefore, someone without rear tilt movements, say someone using many older press-type cameras, may think they can't use movements to alter shape. But they can - just use front movements and tilt the entire camera itself to compensate. I have seen posts here on the forum about this, folks thinking they need a camera with rear tilts to do shape-altering movements.

I personally ran into this with my first 8x10, which didn't have front tilt. I wasn't used to using rear tilt and discovered the change in shape to sometimes be undesirable. I then figured out I could use rear tilt and then tilt the whole camera to have, essentially, front tilt and a perpendicular image plane. That's when I figured out that movements of the front or rear standard can be made to be identical, in terms of DOF/shape.

Okay, so why get upset over semantics? Tilting the back relative to the scene will always change the shape of the scene. Does not matter if you tilt the whole camera or just the back of the camera.

As far as semantics, it is not the image plane that has anything to do with shape-changing, but the film plane. The image plane exists as a result of the positioning of the film and lens planes.

Sometimes, of course, rear tilt must be used if there is no excess coverage of the lens.

Forgive me, I was using image plane and film plane interchangeably. Anyway, like I said I've seen folks think they can't change image shape w/o the use of rear movements so apparently it is sometimes misunderstood, semantics or not.

Sounds good...of course anyone who has used a small or medium format camera for any length of time knows this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaughn

Changing the position of the film plane (same as the plane of the back) relative to the scene will reshape the image of the scene on the GG. This power to change the shape of the image is sometimes called a distortion, but should have no negative connotations. We are manipulating the shape (the geometric properties?) of the scene, not 'distorting' it.

---

Yeah, lots of people use the term distortion, when they're really talking about geometric projection.

Projection - rectilinear, fisheye, cylindrical, etc.
Distortion - barrel, pincushion, mustache, etc. (flaws in the intended projection)

Glad this came to some clarity. Thank you all.

So I guess my ultimate point was, does anyone use rear tilt for creative departure, that is, for other than DOF management? Rear tilt backward from perpendicular film plane with a landscape would elongate, flatten out the view, decreasing the relative size of the distant points (as if with a wider lens), and perhaps with front rise to compensate for the increase in converging diagonals of trees in the distance, for instance. A rear tilt of say 10-15 degrees might be the limit (my guess) where the impact is not too disproportional from norm. Anyone use it intentionally to "distort" the normal view? The Dune image not having any converging issues i.e. trees, it wasn't clear how much rear tilt was used; hence my question.

Yeah...geometric projection - That's what I meant! Jeesh guys!

About to mix me and the missus our Friday evening Manhattan (actually an East River, but close), and put a match to what will soon be a warm crackling fire. We'd truly love to have all of you join us - but seeing as that's not possible...we'll just wish you all the best for a smooth (and safe) slide into the holidays.

Here...from us to you all - Just replace the word "Madison" (our 48th and final NH 4K peak) with "Manhattan," and you'll be good to go! :cool:

Attachment 210705

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pdmoylan

Glad this came to some clarity. Thank you all.

So I guess my ultimate point was, does anyone use rear tilt for creative departure, that is, for other than DOF management? Rear tilt backward from perpendicular film plane with a landscape would elongate, flatten out the view, decreasing the relative size of the distant points (as if with a wider lens), and perhaps with front rise to compensate for the increase in converging diagonals of trees in the distance, for instance. A rear tilt of say 10-15 degrees might be the limit (my guess) where the impact is not too disproportional from norm. Anyone use it intentionally to "distort" the normal view? The Dune image not having any converging issues i.e. trees, it wasn't clear how much rear tilt was used; hence my question.

---

It sure is sometimes used this way for “visual”/creative purposes, to emphasize near/far relationships and/or manipulate the sense of relative scale of foreground and background objects. Of course, like anything else, often subtle effects are preferred to more exaggerated or obvious ones, but not always. Whatever suits the person making the photograph is fair game. There are no rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Layton

Yeah...geometric projection - That's what I meant! Jeesh guys!

About to mix me and the missus our Friday evening Manhattan (actually an East River, but close), and put a match to what will soon be a warm crackling fire. We'd truly love to have all of you join us - but seeing as that's not possible...we'll just wish you all the best for a smooth (and safe) slide into the holidays.

Here...from us to you all - Just replace the word "Madison" (our 48th and final NH 4K peak) with "Manhattan," and you'll be good to go! :cool:

Attachment 210705

---

That's a nice one to do last, and you had beautiful weather!