Technique for focusing "into your scene"

[Drew Wiley]

Well, that explains our difference in orientation, Oren. I recommended getting a handle on movements FIRST because that is how I learned depth of field control using a view camera VERSUS conventional smaller gear. Otherwise, it's just an ordinary camera but bigger. For example, learning front/rear tilt can potentially put things in acute focus all the way from your own toes to a mile away, even with a relatively long lens; doing so based on lens theory alone would be impossible. Studio tabletop product photography is unthinkable without use of movements. Point-blank studio portraiture might not need movements; but I can't imagine LF environmental portraiture without at least that option being available. As far as I'm concerned, the availability of movements like swing and tilt is the no.1 solution to depth of field issues, the very first thing I think of. Even small format manufacturers have figured that out, and are now offering special tilt lenses, though these are only a partial substitute for the full movements view cameras provide.

[Oren Grad]

Of course they should try it and experiment/practice - never would I say otherwise.

+1.

One of the hazards of this kind of discussion is that people extrapolate from what you say to argue against things you didn't say and didn't mean. Yes, I make that mistake too sometimes.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, I take a hard position, not for the sake of discounting other methods which apply well to others, but as an illustration that in certain cases like mine, movements are basically the name of the game. One specific reason is that I generally prefer the look achieved by long focal-length lenses versus "normal" or wide-angle ones. And in that case, depth of field becomes quite a problem if tilts and swings aren't factored, especially in 8x10 work.

[Corran]

How does one detect over-use movements? You the only thing I can think of is this effect below.

Attachment 214453

FWIW, this is not "over-use of movements," this is specifically the use of backwards tilt to achieve the "miniature" look, similar to shooting small toys models in macro range with extremely limited DOF. This practice was in vogue with digital photographers with their new shiny T/S lenses for a while, and I still see it occasionally at art fests and the like...

[Oren Grad]

Well, I take a hard position, not for the sake of discounting other methods which apply well to others, but as an illustration that in certain cases like mine, movements are basically the name of the game.

Agree on both counts - one size doesn't fit all, and if you need it, and your photographic tasks lend themselves to it, then by all means!

[Michael R]

Well, that explains our difference in orientation, Oren. I recommended getting a handle on movements FIRST because that is how I learned depth of field control using a view camera VERSUS conventional smaller gear. Otherwise, it's just an ordinary camera but bigger. For example, learning front/rear tilt can potentially put things in acute focus all the way from your own toes to a mile away, even with a relatively long lens

Yes indeed, assuming your subject is a mile long flat surface.

[Tin Can]

Not sure who benefits from experts debating

I took a break, drank a beer in the Sun. Good

Then found this guy, who has a page describing it all with useful pictures

https://www.alexbond.com.au/understa...mera-movements

The first ever movement I tried was close focus, with the wrong box/lens, indoors. Finally I got there...

Then rise/fall and shift looking at GG and subject. I found that fascinating

The rest comes much later in learning

[Vaughn]

... As far as I'm concerned, the availability of movements like swing and tilt is the no.1 solution to depth of field issues, the very first thing I think of...

I work along the same lines, so I am biased in that direction. I think about it as image management on the GG, with depth of field being just one of the factors I am working with. In my mind's eye I have the image semi-constructed and includes a sense of the DoF I want. The next step is to set up the camera and fine-tune that image on the GG. It is that image management that has helped to keep LF around. The large negatives are nice, too...
But alas -- anything tool that helps can also hinder.

[Drew Wiley]

Mile-long flat surfaces aren't in my wheelhouse, Michael. Around here contour maps are drawn in either 200ft or 500ft intervals, with the darker lines at thousand foot intervals, not in millimeters like in Kansas, where the highest mountain differs every morning depending on what the cattle left behind the day before. But even if a cornfield is the subject, Schiempflug still applies (I just pulled my own copy of Stroebel to check the spelling of that), especially if someone has placed a platform atop their van or truck roof to take advantage of the bigger perspective. The other strategies come into play next. No, not everything ls going to be in perfect focus,
regardless; but that's not the point anyway. The objective is to intelligently control the distribution of focus to the advantage of the composition itself, and not just as a default to what a certain lens can do by itself, with or without some fancy math.

Now out in the Great Basin, Nevada or Death Valley, for example, one does encounter flat playas many miles long, the Bonneville Salt Flats Speedway being a remarkable example of that. I bagged a sudden dramatic moonrise almost by accident near there a few years, which actually reflected in the salt and nearby shallow brine pools. But alas, I didn't even have time to set up the view camera, the light was changing so fast. So I grabbed the 6X7 instead, and did indeed employ hyperfocal theory. So I know how to do that. The print came out great.

[h2oman]

i need a t-shirt with this printed on it.

no!!