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!

Advise on Tilt

torger

Active member
Ahhh... you're right I was not thinking straight :). As it's an ultra-wide it can have a significant effect.
Wait a minute, I was thinking straight I think :). If the lens is flat field it's the horizontal distance that counts, right? So raising the tripod and shifting down won't help.

You will indeed get longer distance from camera to foreground diagonally, but if you don't move your tripod back the dof near limit plane will cut through the same position in the scene.

It would be easy to show with a diagram, but I am unfortunately too lazy to draw one :)
 

torger

Active member
2. Could play with tripod hight and use back rise to get similar framing with longer subject distance
I've attached some fantastic artwork showing why I think this won't work.

I've assumed that the camera is kept level, the tripod is at the same position but at different height.

You do get a longer diagonal distance to your nearest foreground as seen in the diagram, but the horizontal distance, which defines where the DoF near limit will be, stays the same.
 

danlindberg

Well-known member
Funny that! It works fine when I'm out in the field. Instead of 6 focus stacks I need 3 with the method I use. But then I'm not into diagrams - I'm a photographer.
 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
I really enjoy reading threads like this one as it prepares me for the complex photographs I hope to encounter in the future.
I can also identify with Jagsiva shooting in a difficult environment with expensive gear as I live near the ocean and often photograph standing on uneven rocky ledges with very windy conditions.
Based on the work that Dan Lindberg posts, I would tend to follow his advice.
Because of the availability of tilt on the rm3di that I use, in many instances I employ moderate tilt and focus stacking at the same time
Stanley
 

torger

Active member
Funny that! It works fine when I'm out in the field. Instead of 6 focus stacks I need 3 with the method I use. But then I'm not into diagrams - I'm a photographer.
Actually you can be both into diagrams and be a photographer at the same time ;-)

I think I need to conduct a real-life test on this with my SK35 and see what happens, it's surely a technique that could be useful to me too if it works with my lens. Field curvature could have some effect, but if I think that would actually make it worse as the near limit would be further away closer to the image circle edge... or maybe I'm getting it the other way around. I need to test.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't moving the camera here result in a very different composition?
 

jagsiva

Active member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't moving the camera here result in a very different composition?
Dan's suggestion was not really to move the camera wrt to subject distance, but rather to put it higher on the tripod and use back rise (lens fall) to get a similar composition.

Net result would be a longer working distance to the closest part of the subject. The question raised above is whether or not this will work given that only the vertical distance is changed, and not the horizontal distance to the nearest part of the subject. Will need to shoot a test and see the result.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
If you're willing to change the composition, then I can see it. Raising the camera and shifting will preserve the foreground, but it will change the position of the horizontal bands on the walls, and the proportions of the foreground to distance. If that is less important than DoF, then sure. I thought you wanted that particular low camera angle.

Nice shot, BTW!

--Matt
 

Shashin

Well-known member
try to compare an 80MP back at f/9 or f11 against f16 or f/22. You may think differently.

Take a look at the post at f22 where the poster was losing resolution. Also, this was with a 60MP back, it only gets works with an 80. The original images have been taken down, but you can get the conclusion from he comments.

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-...s/47332-my-thoughts-after-48-hours-iq260.html

Torger mentioned expensive gear and getting the most out of it with optimal f-stops, I would add to this, the effort of getting to a location. Specifically, I wanted to get the best I could given the trouble I had taken to get there. Had this not been the case, I would have taken my A7R or D800E. I didn't have to lug an MFDB kit and heavy tripod with CUBE. So while all the advise on resolution not being the be-all and end-all is great, it is a little motherhood and apple pie without context. Surely, we are all beyond a first year college course in photography. We all realize that we would still rather have the shot.

My question was how to maximize DoF in as few shots as possible given the subject.

In any case, we are way off topic. To wrap up the recommendations here:

1. Focus stack is likely still the best option
2. Could play with tripod hight and use back rise to get similar framing with longer subject distance
3. Play with multiple swing planes (vertical focus planes on the sides) and stack in post.
Actually, I would still not agree. You are still getting a better image than a a7r and D800 at small apertures. You are still not putting the image scale into perspective.

Yes, focus stacking is an option. I think I said that. How it works with flowing water, I am not sure--do you? Stopping down is still an option--which means you can do both. You can maximize DoF in one shot with your aperture.

So this is my question. You lug all this equipment into a remote area to get this shot, yet trying some images at smaller apertures is not possible? Not enough card space? What exactly do you lose by making a few more frames at different apertures and then deciding the "best" outcome from everything you have when you have time to look at all the results and process them?

Shoot how you want to shoot. You asked for advice. We have taken the time to give you what we think is good advice. And advice that comes from a lot of time and experience. I really don't understand how these basic technical issues become such a battle.
 

danlindberg

Well-known member
Dan's suggestion was not really to move the camera wrt to subject distance, but rather to put it higher on the tripod and use back rise (lens fall) to get a similar composition.
Yes, key is 'similar' composition. My workaround is not going to give the exact same image, but close enough in most cases as not to alter the main 'vision' in the shot.
I'm also not talking about huge differences in height of the cam, if original position is as low as possible, lets say: 10cm from the ground and you have the first rock 30cm in front of you, by raising the cam to maybe 50cm height and introduce a fall on the lens, then it is not only the actual distance that has increased slightly to that first stone, but also quite often it allows you to focus beyond that first stone slighty.
And starting a focus stack @30cm or @1 metre means less exposures.
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Regarding the discussion of using rise/fall and changing the camera height, I guess I just don’t see how moving the camera up a few inches or even a foot and then using shifts to get a similar cropping would add enough difference in regards to focus and depth of field. This would only change the distance to the foreground a minimal amount, maybe an inch or two. And while the overall crop would be similar, the perspective effective of the canyon floor would be different.

I use rise/fall in cases like this too, but usually just trying to keep the camera closer to level, and camera height is based on the foreground to infinity perspective I think looks good.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Im with Wayne on this. I don't understand what a couple inches would accomplish especially with a lens that can only move a few mm. If we had a view camera with all the movements in place, maybe so. But only one tech cam can do swing and tilt at the same time thats Cambo and even than in this situation you could get one side only than have to take the other side with swing and tilt and blend it anyway. If it was me it would definitely be a 3 or 4 frame focus stack.
 

jagsiva

Active member
Guy, I think focus stack is the most practical option while still preserving near-optimal file quality. When I get a chance, I will test what Dan suggested and post here, I am curious now.
 
Top