The upside down thing

[Maris Rusis]

It's a long time since I noticed the image on the ground-glass of a view camera is upside down BUT looking down at the 4x5 image in a Graflex with its right to left reversal is truly disconcerting. Is there something about the brain's visual lobe that makes mentally rotating images easy but flipping them so hard? Or is it me?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

When you look at the GG do you see any relationships between elements in the image on the GG that when printed don't seem to be all that important or lack the power you saw on the GG?

Not at all, I beleive that everything or every element in the photograph should be there for a reason. There are times when an element intrudes and no matter how you place the camera it is always there to mess things up, this cannot be helped, but in my case I try to think of all the elements within the picture and how can I arrange them to make a better photograph.

Do you think this inverted relationship and visible connection on the GG has a subconscious connection to the viewer of the final print?

I don't think it does, nor do I think it should if you have a finished picture in your mind before you even pressed the shutter. for example, in this shot, I knew I was going to print it upside down, the bottom part of the picture is the top part of a door.



If you turn this image around you will see that the "content" is enterely different and IMO not as good.

[Gary L. Quay]

My eyes are not so good these days. I spend so much energy switching between a loupe, my glasses, or just my eyeballs for focusing that I really have to compose while looking at the scene, object or model, and just making sure that the image on the GG contains the parts that I want. I try not to have to make camera movements unless I absolutely have to, and I really appreciate having a grid on the GG for that. I can't say that I find that upside-downness adds or subtracts anything.

Yet.

--Gary

[Murray]

I agree with Domenico about the abstraction idea. I noticed that helping customers with picture framing. I have a different view than they from the other side of the table, but the composition is already done in most cases there.

I will try to think about that behind the glass in the future.

[Eric Woodbury]

It's upside down?!

Years ago I was setting up a picture of a reflection. When I looked through the camera, the image was right side up and I found it confusing.

(Actually, the image is rotated.)

[jetcode]

Yesterday while bottling a very tasty Belgian dark ale with a friend we were discussing the images of Edward Weston and other famous large format photographers. We were looking at published works from various books.

Our discussion centred around "what did they see" and "how did they react" to their GG images.

To illustrate this point we looked at a large majority of EW's [and other's] work upside down [not reversed] instead of the normal manner of viewing and it highlighted some very interesting aspects of the way they approached their work.

Questions??

When you use your GG do you relate to it in any particular manner?

What does the GG tell you?

And is there anything in particular you gain from the inverted image that is not necassarily visual in the final print but is affected by things you saw?

Steve

I think the way GG works visually is a plus though I use the same techniques with my DSLR and that is: composition via shape, tone, movement, texture, form, relationships between objects, luminence, contrast, target visualizations, etc.

[Dave Brown]

I'm generally neutral about such things, but for me, the ground glass is if anything, a hindrance. I do the bulk of my composition before crawling under the dark cloth, although obviously focus, final framing, and any movements require looking through the glass. In particular, I find that viewing the image upside down on the ground glass makes it difficult to place the horizon where I want it when doing landscapes (fortunately, the squarish aspect ratio of 4x5 & 8x10 leaves a lot of room for error).