Technique for focusing "into your scene"

[Michael R]

Kansas is on my bucket list.

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.

[Drew Wiley]

Mine too. My sarcastic comment about Kansas was based on a spoof topographic map I gave to a co-worker from Nebraska, next to Kansas. I would particularly like to visit the Sand Hills region, which is of course not completely flat like the stereotype of the Plains. But flying over that area for the first time was a bit of a shock to me. In fact, the entire country east of the Rocky Mountain Front is all remarkably flat and farmed out with a few exceptions, like the Missouri River Gorge and the brief ripple of the Appalachian range. I actually went into claustrophobia looking out the widow high up in a Dallas hotel once on a business trip, sweaty palms and all. It was the first time I'd ever been surrounded by "nothingness". No mountains in sight anywhere, no forests, not even any bums or flower stands on the downtown streets on weekends. Sterile, and flat every direction.

[AdamD]

So, what is this thread about? I forgot.

[AdamD]

So check it out....I shot a couple more today. They are drying now. I kind screwed one up (1-stop under exposed). Once I get them scanned and cleaned up I post them. And we can blow this thread up even more!!!

[Tin Can]

https://www.alexbond.com.au/turner-s...sta-australia/

with story how to

[Alan Klein]

I'm new to 4x5; just started last year. So now this thread has me more confused than ever. I was told in the beginning to usually use a little back tilt on the rear standard when I shot landscapes, my usual photos. I have a Chamonix with asymmetrical tilts on the rear standard. So I focus on the far and tilt for the near. Set at f/22. I think it's working for me but now I don't know after reading all this. It's bad enough everything is upside down on the GG, my glasses fog up under the dark cloth, and I need a third hand for the loupe. Now you guys want me to make complicated decisions beyond what I thought I'd need. You're giving me a headache.

[AdamD]

I started this thread trying to understand why we focus at the mid point between the max forward and max rear standard position as compared to digital strategies the often use the "focus 1/3 of the way into your delpth of field". I didn't understand the reason.

Somewhere in this thread the answer is written!

I gotta find it now....here it is....



Quote Originally Posted by reddesert View Post
Other people have explained that the 1/3 rule of thumb isn't really accurate. It also predates digital BTW. But anyway, the simple explanation for the difference in these rules of thumb is that the 1/3 rule applies to the distance in the subject space, like your subject is from 10 to 40 feet away so you focus at 20 feet. The rule you quote for 4x5 of focusing at the mid-point is in the image space, where you're splitting the positions of the standard corresponding to near and far in half.

Because the relation between image distance from the lens and subject distance from the lens is not linear, these rules of thumb are less different then you might imagine. The difference is not that 35mm/digital has a different DOF from 4x5. Rather, it's mechanical: in 35mm/digital you're usually looking at the focusing distance scale of a lens that gives subject distance, while with an LF camera you can more easily measure the position of the image (the standard).


BOOM!!

[Vaughn]

Alan, stop listening to things people say. Especially things like:

I was told in the beginning to usually use a little back tilt on the rear standard when I shot landscapes, my usual photos.

It is all on the GG. Upside down is good! It helps to remind us we are making images with light, not things.

[Oren Grad]

I think it's working for me but now I don't know after reading all this.

What are your negatives telling you?

[Alan Klein]

What are your negatives telling you?

Some seem pretty good. Others not so good. But I'm still having problems with the "fiddly" nature of large format.