Does anybody know

journeyman · Jul 30, 2006

The link didn't work for me so i'm not quite sure what your asking. What i think your saying is it went from where your perspective was looking up at the vase to looking straight at it.

From my knowledge this is from adjusting the back. If it is at an angle that is parrallel with the subject it will give you the impression it is striaght on.

This can be used for when photographing tall buildings. The back stays parrallel and the front adjusts to capture the area of the building you want. If you shot it with just a 35mm or medium format then it would give you that look as if the building is falling over on you.

And if your gonna give up on the view camera there is always someone willing to take up the job. hin hint. cough give it to me cough.

mysteryscribe · Jul 30, 2006

the one i built does not have a lens that rotates from the center axis. It rotates from a pin in the top of the lens board so as it rotates it also changes its relation ship high and low to the film back. I think that is what is happening

ksmattfish · Jul 31, 2006

mysteryscribe said:
the one i built does not have a lens that rotates from the center axis. It rotates from a pin in the top of the lens board so as it rotates it also changes its relation ship high and low to the film back. I think that is what is happening

You have combined the front tilt with a bit of rise. The more you tilt, the more rise you'll have. Also as you tilt/rise on an arc you would be changing the focus, and bellows extension. I would think that if you are regularly using the movements that this would become problematic.

mysteryscribe · Jul 31, 2006

yeah what you all said....

Still it is a fun experiment if I don't go nuts in frustration. It does okay outside. but in the studio it looks sharp on the glass but isn't sharp on the paper negative.

So I going to check the glass depth against the distance from the film to the edge of the holder. With the fact that the lens is hyper extended past the way 'closer than the normal focus point', and the aperture set at 5.6, and my lousy vision, and the fact that it is on a paper negative, is all conspiring to make me a babling idiot. Well an even worse one. It's probably a combination of all of them. First is to check the glass distance from the camera frame to the negative material distance of the holder. If they are about the same I'm going to try shooting with a small aperture and see what that does. I have rebuilt the camera to get rid of camera shake so I'm pretty sure that isnt it, but I might just take it outside and shoot it close up in the daylight to see.

Hey, it keeps me from spending real money.

okay I checked the glass = okay
I shot it again using a longer depth of field after I refocused it. This is the result. I'm satisfied.

Ps paper negative