Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,941   Posts: 1,557,551   Online: 1178
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    19
    Lots of great info so far guys!

    The movements DECREASE depth of field. They change the location of the plane, but a tilted plane winds up with less depth front to back than the plane parallel to the film.
    Ok this confuses me, I was under the impression that using movements you could basically bring everything from the near limit to infinity into focus with the caveat that you are losing focus area in the foreground above the focal plane (and I suppose also below it depending on whether or not the extended plane of focus intersects with the ground). In other words, compared to a system that isn't utilizing a tilt, you end up with much less front-to-back depth near the camera but an enormous amount more at great distances from the camera. Is my thinking still wonky here?

    No matter what you do, if you are using a LF camera for street work, the heisenberg uncertainty principle (and hence Schrodinger's cat) apply. You cannot take a picture without your subject knowing that you have a camera. Get used to that idea.
    Ha! I like the analogy. I tend to shift between modes of discreet shooting and very overt shooting, I've gotten called every name in the book by now so in general I don't have a problem being noticed by the subject and will adopt whatever shooting style the camera allows for. I guess I should have specified this from the beginning; I'm interested in shooting from a tripod with a studio camera as I do all my hand held with my mamiya MF. My general strategy will be to choose a location, compose, and wait for something or someone(s) interesting to happen. I tend to think though, that while the view camera will have a much more noticeable presence than an SLR, the act of shooting will be much less overt and that subjects, overall, will be less aware that they are being photographed.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by gongman5000 View Post
    Ok this confuses me, I was under the impression that using movements you could basically bring everything from the near limit to infinity into focus with the caveat that you are losing focus area in the foreground above the focal plane (and I suppose also below it depending on whether or not the extended plane of focus intersects with the ground). In other words, compared to a system that isn't utilizing a tilt, you end up with much less front-to-back depth near the camera but an enormous amount more at great distances from the camera. Is my thinking still wonky here?
    What you can do is change the plane of focus, to the point where you might even be able to get everything you want into focus. Assuming you can find a plane that everything is on, and can adjust all of the tilts and swings to get that plane in focus.

    The comment about decreasing DOF applies to distance from the camera, because the depth is a spread around the plane which is acceptably in focus and that focal plane is no longer parallel to the film plane, you effectively make it shallower.

    I actually think that you understand this, but I figured I'd confirm your thoughts.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    If you plan on shooting at '400 at f/11, you had better save your shots for sunny days only, and avoid shaded areas of your composition if you want any detail there.

    4x5 will give more depth of field than 8x10 at a given angle of view and f stop.

    Tilts and swings will do the same things on both formats.

    Modern films are extremely good. You may be able to get the enlargements you want from 4x5 film. It would only be about a 10x linear enlargement. That is up to you, though. I'd try blowing up a piece of 4x5 to see how it looks at your intended print size and viewing distance. If it just isn't sharp enough for you, then I would use 8x10.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 01-20-2011 at 05:31 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,556
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Guillaume Zuili View Post
    It It all depends on what you want to achieve with 2 options that will influence the way you shoot : handheld or tripod.
    Tripod you can use any format and camera but you loose the instant snapshot you may want.

    Handheld options are various.
    Box cameras with lens on hyperfocal. You are limited by the need of light to close down the aperture or you use flash (a strong one...)
    I used to shoot in Paris with a Hobo style 8x10 and had an assistant holding a Norman flash...
    Not really discret. A real pain in fact !

    The best option is the good old Graflex SLR. I got one recently and it's a joy to use handheld.

    Whatever you choose, you need to make it yours and make it work. Camera becomes your hand and you forget about it to concentrate on the subject,
    Easier in 4x5 than 8x10 for street photography. In the end you will have to compromise as for DOF, speed, etc...
    And for enlargement as John said there is no issue at all.


    G.

    yeah graflex slrs are perfect in this situation !

    john

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    19
    ok so it sounds like I should probably go with 4x5 since DOF and shutter speed are going to be critical factors. Also, hadn't thought about the increased vibration issue with 8x10, especially since I'll be shooting around moving vehicle, etc.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,021
    Images
    4
    IMHO, 4x5 is the way to go for this. As I mentioned earlier, it is not all that extreme of an enlargement with today's films. Blowing 4.5 inches up to 60 or 72 inches will be a 13x or 16x enlargement, respectively. It's a lot of enlargement, but not unheard of. The 72 inch print will be roughly equivalent in quality to filling a piece of 16x20 paper from a 35mm negative. It starts to fall apart, but IMHO it looks good. It will be important to compose in camera such that you do not crop much when printing, however.

    I'd take a look at T-Max 400 for this project. It's an outstanding film that will help you to minimize grain.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,341
    Buses make a heck of a vibration when they go by. I used to work in a building on a bus route. The whole place shook.

    T-Max 400 can be enlarged quite a way, and doubt too many people will have their noses in the print looking at grain. Grain and any minor softness will be unobtrusive at viewing distance. If you've never handled an 8x10, I'll tell you that while the rewards are great, the hassles are many. Good luck on your project!

    Peter Gomena

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    540
    If you visit www.shorpy.com you can see exactly what to expect from an 8x10 for street photography, lots of examples. Look for 'Detroit publishing' photos, most were 8x10 glass plates, doubt they reached 100 speed. Have fun and good luck with it.

  9. #19
    jbbooks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by phfitz View Post
    If you visit www.shorpy.com you can see exactly what to expect from an 8x10 for street photography, lots of examples. Look for 'Detroit publishing' photos, most were 8x10 glass plates, doubt they reached 100 speed. Have fun and good luck with it.
    Excuse me, but how are you defining "street photography"? I would agree that what you showed as examples are what you could expect with an 8x10 (without comment as to the bulk and weight of the equipment required), but it is not an example of what I would think of as "street photography". Fact is, I think the term "8x10 street photography" is the quintessential example of an oxymoron.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    540
    "Excuse me, but how are you defining "street photography"?"

    It really does not matter how I define 'street photography', it's the OP's question. The link does provide several real examples of what to expect from 8x10 daytime photos. DOF trade-off for shutter speed = people movement. Modern 400 speed film may provide 3 - 5 stop real speed difference over the glass plates, modern coated lenses another 2 - 3 stops.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin