[MF3D.FORUM:19] Re: New list member; View camera question

[Brian Reynolds <reynolds@xxxxxxxxx>]

Bill Glickman wrote:
> For MAXIMUM 3D EFFECT, I heard from a 3d pro, to shoot the following
> way with a view camera.  Lets say you were shooting a statue of a
> person 12 feet from the camera...  So you take your first shot with
> the persons nose, dead center in the ground glass (gg), next shot
> you move the film standard over 65mm.......then move the front
> standard over far enough to view the persons nose dead center in the
> gg again... so it would be less than 65mm.  How much less is a
> factor of how close the subject is.  This supposedly will create a
> non keystoning "toe in" effect.  Is this desirable?  Has anyone
> experienced any more WOW factor by doing this?  Any comments would
> be most appreciated...
> 
> I oversimplified a bit.. the other missing ingredient was to
> determine the total travel range of the front standard, divide by
> two, then move the front that much from center on each shot... so
> you split the difference, instead of putting it all in 2nd shot.
> 

This sounds like a pragmatic (empirical?) method of arriving at the
results of John B's formulas.

I find that the biggest problem with 4x5 stereo is that the flatbed
cameras I have access to (I own a Speed Graphic and have rented a
Wisner) tend not to have rear shift, and sometimes don't have (enough)
front shift.

The Bogen sliding plate can over come the lack of rear shift.  If the
camera has front shift for the first exposure you slide the plate to
the right and shift the lens slightly (1/2 the difference between the
image spacing and the lens spacing (1/2 delta as per John B's
examples)) to the left.  For the second exposure you slide the plate
to the left and the lens to the right (the full delta since the lens
is currently to the left of the center position).

I've tried some 4x5 stereo but a problem with light leaks ruined the
film.  Since then I've forgotten to try again.  Unlike many large
format photographers, I don't normally take two exposures of the same
scene.  I also haven't done much 4x5 since getting my Sputnik.

> My other question ..... is there any benefit to doing 4x5 stereo
> photography over med. format... I see the increase WOW factor from
> 35mm...  but my guess would be that med. format is big enough,
> anything bigger would not create additional benefits due to the
> minimal magnification involved.  I realize the 4x5 viewer would be a
> major issue involving prisms and / or mirrors... and bulky due to
> the size of the chromes, but disregarding that, assuming there was
> readily available 4x5 3d viewers what is the opinion of some of you
> 3d enthusiast out there who have compared this already?  Thanks
> again for your input...
> 

There is a big increase in quality with 4x5.  I go up to Old Rhinebeck
Aerodrome a lot and take pictures of the airplanes.  My (flat) 4x5's
show much more detail than the MF images.  In one particular shot of
their Fokker Dr.1 triplane I can easily see the rib stitching on the
4x5 chrome.  My MF shots of the same plane at about the same distance
(not taken on the same day) do not have that level of detail.

When I do get my act together I'm planning on viewing 4x5 stereo on an
8x10 lightbox with a View Magic over and under viewer.

-- 
Brian Reynolds                  | "Dee Dee!  Don't touch that button!"
reynolds@xxxxxxxxx              | "Oooh!"
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds  |    -- Dexter and Dee Dee
NAR# 54438                      |       "Dexter's Laboratory"