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!

Professor Grayson ad-libs an explanation of tilt and shift

JeffK

Well-known member
only 20 sec's in and I'm already impressed. Lovely portraits in the background and good chemistry on screen!
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
only 20 sec's in and I'm already impressed. Lovely portraits in the background and good chemistry on screen!
Mark is a great guy. Genuinely interested in people and what they have to say. How he can do that while holding a camera in front of his face will never cease to amaze.
 

Abstraction

Active member
I was recently a guest on Complicated Things. If you want to see WHY tilt works without resorting to math, you might find it amusing. If you want to roast me for the inaccuracies (there are many), feel free. Pretending you didn't see this post is probably best.

M
That was a terrific explanation! What most people forget to mention when they talk about tilt and shift is that the image is upside down, and that affects how the controls work - everything is reversed. Great job explaining it. BTW, that's a quintessential mathematician's shirt. :p
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Two great blokes adding some value in a sea of noise- well done Matt.
Peter, that is precisely my goal as a teacher and as a mathematician. Thank you much! (And Mark Mann is pretty good, too) :cool:

That was a terrific explanation! What most people forget to mention when they talk about tilt and shift is that the image is upside down, and that affects how the controls work - everything is reversed. Great job explaining it. BTW, that's a quintessential mathematician's shirt. :p
Now try explaining to people why the dust on their sensor is reversed up/down from the test image, but NOT left/right.

Funny about the shirt. When I consult for Hedge Funds and meet (or Zoom) with their clients, they request that I dress that way. I guess no one trusts a mathematician in a jacket and tie. And yes, I was teaching in plaid flannel shirts 40 years ago, too. :ROFLMAO:

--Matt
 

Abstraction

Active member
Peter, that is precisely my goal as a teacher and as a mathematician. Thank you much! (And Mark Mann is pretty good, too) :cool:



Now try explaining to people why the dust on their sensor is reversed up/down from the test image, but NOT left/right.

Funny about the shirt. When I consult for Hedge Funds and meet (or Zoom) with their clients, they request that I dress that way. I guess no one trusts a mathematician in a jacket and tie. And yes, I was teaching in plaid flannel shirts 40 years ago, too. :ROFLMAO:

--Matt
Your fashion sense is timeless. The good news is that it's easy to shop for clothes. They have the big and tall shops, I wonder if they have the math teacher shops. I bet that would be a hit! :D
 

huyu

Active member
Very interesting & entertaining to watch. Good to know Mark is your brother in law. I watched his leicavideo and already love his photography.
And yes, subcribed & hit the bell. Hope to see more stuff from you guys 🍻
 

anyone

Well-known member
I was recently a guest on Complicated Things. If you want to see WHY tilt works without resorting to math, you might find it amusing. If you want to roast me for the inaccuracies (there are many), feel free. Pretending you didn't see this post is probably best.

M
Nicely explained! Your tilt explanation was the most comprehensible I’ve seen so far. It’s a skill to make fairly complex things understandable, well done!
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Nicely explained! Your tilt explanation was the most comprehensible I’ve seen so far. It’s a skill to make fairly complex things understandable, well done!
Many thanks. That is my passion. I want to shine light on things so that they can be seen and not just known.
 
Last edited:

rdeloe

Well-known member
I enjoyed your video Matt. Your explanation is definitely simpler than Leslie Stroebel's. ;)

People learn in so many different ways. I find I prefer functional models, whether physical or computer-based. Years ago Tim Parkin put up a simple model to illustrate tilt. I come back to it again and again. Most recently I used it to understand better how longer focal lengths behave when tilting.

In case anyone else finds this kind of thing useful, I'll park a link here to complement Matt's video. http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

Someone who had the programming skills could update this thing in a couple ways that would make it a lot more useful. Alas, that's not me.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
I enjoyed your video Matt. Your explanation is definitely simpler than Leslie Stroebel's. ;)

People learn in so many different ways. I find I prefer functional models, whether physical or computer-based. Years ago Tim Parkin put up a simple model to illustrate tilt. I come back to it again and again. Most recently I used it to understand better how longer focal lengths behave when tilting.

In case anyone else finds this kind of thing useful, I'll park a link here to complement Matt's video. http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

Someone who had the programming skills could update this thing in a couple ways that would make it a lot more useful. Alas, that's not me.
I agree completely on the value of "hands on" tools for understanding. Thank you for the link.
 

rdeloe

Well-known member
I agree completely on the value of "hands on" tools for understanding. Thank you for the link.
The diagrams you drew in your video are another example of what works well Matt. In fact, the whole package worked well because of how you combined narrative, drawings, and physical demonstrations.

I've been using tilt and shift for over three decades, but I still learned something! My "Captain Obvious" moment was your point about how buildings look when we use rise to straighten the verticals. Of course we're going to see the underside of the window sills. That's one of those things that I "knew", in the back of my mind, but now I understand "up front". It's obvious in hindsight... but that's the thing about hindsight.

I offer this not as a criticism, but as a follow-on: in explaining tilt, and in striving to keep things understandable -- a "chewable chunk" of knowledge -- it makes sense to go with the classic landscape scenes, as you did. That's a good choice because many (if not most) people who use tilt use it for that. (I'm not counting people who use it for that icky tilt effect that throws most of the scene out of focus.) The landscape example also is a case where tilt can be replaced with focus stacking. As you know I'm sure, there are lots of scenarios where we can use tilt in ways that cannot be replaced with focus stacking. For instance, I frequently am using it to change where the plane of focus is, but not with the intention of maximizing what is in focus in the scene. Unfortunately, in a short video that people will actually watch all the way to the end, it's not easy to get into those uses too.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
The diagrams you drew in your video are another example of what works well Matt. In fact, the whole package worked well because of how you combined narrative, drawings, and physical demonstrations.

I've been using tilt and shift for over three decades, but I still learned something! My "Captain Obvious" moment was your point about how buildings look when we use rise to straighten the verticals. Of course we're going to see the underside of the window sills. That's one of those things that I "knew", in the back of my mind, but now I understand "up front". It's obvious in hindsight... but that's the thing about hindsight.

I offer this not as a criticism, but as a follow-on: in explaining tilt, and in striving to keep things understandable -- a "chewable chunk" of knowledge -- it makes sense to go with the classic landscape scenes, as you did. That's a good choice because many (if not most) people who use tilt use it for that. (I'm not counting people who use it for that icky tilt effect that throws most of the scene out of focus.) The landscape example also is a case where tilt can be replaced with focus stacking. As you know I'm sure, there are lots of scenarios where we can use tilt in ways that cannot be replaced with focus stacking. For instance, I frequently am using it to change where the plane of focus is, but not with the intention of maximizing what is in focus in the scene. Unfortunately, in a short video that people will actually watch all the way to the end, it's not easy to get into those uses too.
Good lord, yes. I could have gone into the stitching advantage of shift, or eliminating the photographer's reflection be shooting a bit from the side, or swing, or ANY artistic application of changing geometry and focus. But yes, the goal was to use the simplest cases where the tools would seem necessary.

I welcome any suggestions for important applications. I'll be doing other episodes, starting with "What is a camera and why is there a piece of curved glass at one end of it?".
 
Top