The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

In search of the perfect level

Don Libby

Well-known member
I seen an never ending search of the "perfect level" both on this site and others. I've seen people bemoan the fact that the level attached to their tripod is perfect; likewise the level on their head. This is being posted in "Medium Format Systems..." as this is the place where I see this quest the most. I've kept quiet until now....

As many may know I am primarily a landscape and nature photographer with a limited amount of wildlife thrown in to shake things up. My primary capture method is medium format using a combination of a tech cam as well as a Phase One DF; using a Phase One IQ160 back. I have a sturdy tripod and head which I use to attach my gear to and all told if I count each and every level system I have at least 2 to 3 depending which one I'm using.

I've tried to have my tripod perfectly level. I then attempted (and failed) to have the head perfectly level after leveling the tripod. I then attempted (and failed again) to have my camera body perfectly leveled once I had the tripod and head near level. I spent nearly an hour one time as an experiment seeing if I could ever get the "perfect level". And failed.

I learned quickly on that I need to trust one leveling system and choose the levels on my tech cam. I figured that the ground I was standing on wasn't level and what I needed was to have the tripod as sturdy as possible and just level the camera. Using this method I've captured multiple images where I stitched them together with near 99% success rate. Then Phase One came out with the IQ back that had yet another leveling device and I tried using that and failed. The failure wasn't so much the fault of the back than it was mine; it took too much time that resulted in the same end result. I've returned to using the levels on my tech cam.

My holly grail isn't so much of getting the perfect level. What I'm attempting to achieve is being able to shoot multiple captures which when stitched together achieve 100% pixel coverage. So far I've gotten as close as 98-99%.

Even getting as close as I have gotten there are times when I look at the image file knowing I was level (where I was standing) and see that the horizon looked "off". It happens and then what you need is good software to correct the problem of perception.

In the end I've learned that in shooting in the outdoors there simply isn't a level place and you need to learn to deal with it. Or, go nuts looking for the perfect level. My recommendation is to pick a level and stick with it.
 

Pemihan

Well-known member
+1
I too stick with the levels on my tech cam (Cambo WRS 1250) and am getting pretty good at it.
But yes even though you KNOW that everything was level, sometimes it just looks wrong and you have to correct a bit.

This image I know was perfectly level, but to get it to look right I had to rotate it just a bit clockwise.

 

jlm

Workshop Member
a bit of extra detail:

the level needs to be done both ways, L/R (a true sea horizon is a good indicator) and front.back. all the bubble levels can do this for you, subject to their own inaccuracies.

you also may need the rotation axis to be plumb, and it will be only if the rotation device is properly machined. way to tell: level both ways, then rotate the camera 180 degrees and it should stay level. My cube was off; and i corrected it by machining and re-setting the levels accordingly and I used more sensitive bubble vials
 

stephengilbert

Active member
Everything was good when there were fewer levels. Now, you've got a level on your tripod leveling base, on the panning clamp, and on the camera. If two out of three agree, you're lucky.

The answer is to take your Phase back to the RRS tour and adjust the level to Graham Welland standards.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
Everything was good when there were fewer levels. Now, you've got a level on your tripod leveling base, on the panning clamp, and on the camera. If two out of three agree, you're lucky.

The answer is to take your Phase back to the RRS tour and adjust the level to Graham Welland standards.
Feb 21, 2014 is the start of CI in CA(rmel) at San Luis Obispo with the RRS tour. Do we really want to talk "levels" with RRS? It was hard enough with Don Libby walking around the facilities last year. I was hoping to get invited back again... :ROTFL:

Graham Welland RRS Level standards: I like it.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
RRS has alread told me I'll have my own "guide" for the tour. That's okay but why do I need the special uniform?
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Find the center of gravity of your camera, place that above the center of gravity of a tray, and float the tray in a container of water. Done.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
i'd agree with steve about picking the one set of levels and i'd use the ones on the cambo, except for the rotation axis requirement. since i rotate for panos using the top rotation plane on the cube, that is the primary plane i want level, best set by the levels on the cube (if they are calibrated). then i want to make sure the cambo image plane is truly plumb, from to back and side to side and that the cambo levels agree with that.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I don't rotate my panos when using the tech cam preferring instead to use a flat stitch. There are however times when using the 645 that I'll rotate and if I don't have a hotshoe bubble then I'll use the levels on the cube. Easy to double check. Enforce capture, just rotate the camera making certain the level remains throughout the arc of the rotation.

Again, pick the one that works best for you and forget about the others. Finding the "perfect level" is very much like finding the perfect camera.
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
I disregard all level readings from tripod , Arca D4 , Cube and camera and use a
EBISU Diamond Crystal Level ED-10CLS . It is a pocket size precision level which I already mentioned in an earlier thread .
I measure horizontal and in the direction I shoot (before shift) . I use that spirit level with my ALPA where I always can find a good surface to put the Spirit Level .
That at least works perfect for architecture photography .
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Which assumes that the level in the robot is calibrated and correct of course!

As mentioned, select one level and stick with it. I had camera and IQ back tested at RRS on their leveling tables and ultimately was very pleased to find that at least the Alpa body levels were accurate and so I was able to sync the IQ body level to it. (I guess I shouldn't be surprised given the anal nature of Alpa about these things).

The level on the cube and everything else I've tried has always been slightly off from either of those two references.

Having seen the level of perfection that John Milich goes to with engineering his Cube to be correct on all axis, I'd use that to calibrate my gear in the future when I see him ;)
 

jlm

Workshop Member
we old machinists get a lot of practice with level and squareness. (the moment of the first plane strike, day of 9/11/2001, i was leveling a LeBlonde lathe)

that new machine i just got (graham saw it) weighs 21,000 lbs! and has a 4' x 18' footprint. we will level that to .002" over the entire bed, level and flatness both, and then dial in the shaping head to the same tolerance over 12'. i rough it in with a bubble level or a laser, then use an optical transit, then finally a very precise machinist's level, .0005" per foot/divison line on the bubble, tweaking the multiple feet to take out sag and twist.

the cube was easy
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
I am confused on the concern about being level, when you are shifting a digital back. I fully understand the issues that the various tools for determining level, (on the camera, on the tripod, etc.) don't always agree with each other.

If you are stitching with a tech camera, i.e shifting the back, not lens, why do you worry about being level? With digital back shifting, there are no issues with parallax and the shots shifted will come together fine fine, no issues etc.

If you are panning via a nodal pan, then it's all about being as level as you can. It's just like the days I used a Zork adapter on a Canon 35mm, with the Zork modified so the camera shifted not the lens. 100's of compositions taken over then years, all 3 part shifting.

One of the main reasons I use a tech camera is to have the ability to stitch, 3 way, 15mm L C 15mm R. I can frame the shot the way I like it and not worry about being limited by being level, as you have to do with a nodal pan. I pretty much always try to stitch most scenes so that I can have the option to create a short pan later on in post.

If I want to max resolution, then I will take 3 rows 15mm L C 15mm R which creates a more square image but does provide a huge file. Setting these up I never worry about if I am level or not.

Not needing to be level makes things much easier. Just one less thing to have to worry about when setting up a tech camera on location.

These 3 or 9 shot combinations are simple to construct in just CS6, no need for tools like autopano or ptgui. The time in working them is all the LCCs.

Architecture work I can see a reason to be level as perspective issues can come into play or working in a nodal pan setup.

Paul Caldwell
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Paul

The issue is if the tech camera isn't level, even when doing shifts, you'll end up cropping the image in post. Now obviously the solution there is just to shoot a little looser but you know how finicky people get about these things :)
 

jotloob

Subscriber Member
we old machinists get a lot of practice with level and squareness. (the moment of the first plane strike, day of 9/11/2001, i was leveling a LeBlonde lathe)

that new machine i just got (graham saw it) weighs 21,000 lbs! and has a 4' x 18' footprint. we will level that to .002" over the entire bed, level and flatness both, and then dial in the shaping head to the same tolerance over 12'. i rough it in with a bubble level or a laser, then use an optical transit, then finally a very precise machinist's level, .0005" per foot/divison line on the bubble, tweaking the multiple feet to take out sag and twist.

the cube was easy
Very interesting John
I would very much like to see , how this is done .
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Graham,

Thanks, still can't get my hands around it.

I setup literally hundreds of shots on mine, and I just never worry about if I am level, instead I just frame the shot the way I want it to look and stitch. These type of stitches, almost never require any cropping, max sometimes 1/8 of an inch on the top of one of the stitches but it's nothing like when you get a nodal pan that is not level and have to use something like a cylindrical assembly where you have huge amounts of detail lost due to the assembly method.

This is stitching with a 28mm, 35mm, 40mm 43mm and 60mm on the Arca platform. All outdoor landscape scenes.

Paul
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
Here is an example from this fall. This was a 3 part shifted stitch from the 40mm Rod, on the IQ260. 3 horizontal shots combined in CS6. You can barely see a white line about 2 pixels wide around the bottom and part of the top. Yes, this might have to be cropped, but it's just as easy to blend with Content aware. I don't consider this too much to crop, not to have to worry about exacting perfect level. Neither camera or tripod were level as I was leaning out into space a bit to get around the railing, of which you can still see the left support in the lower part of the frame.

Paul
 
Top