Re: [photo-3d] Re: Level for twin rig?

[Linda Nygren <lnygren@xxxxxxx>]

I personally do *not* have a very good eye for this. I think I generally
tilt my head a bit and am used to lookig at the world at this angle, so
unless I am paying very close attention I tend to get in trouble with
tilting horizons. It mainly ends up being noticable with lake and ocean
type shots, where a tilted horizon is much more obvious.

Anyway, I should probably get levels for my Realists. I own a Kodak and
a Revere that I have used in the past and I had to force myself to
*believe* the levels at times because of my somewhat tilted perception
of the world. I seem to recall that the Revere level was very slow to
equilibrate so was a bit annoying.

I *do* use a nice little hot-shoe mounted bubble level with my twin
Olympus OM-1 rig (tripod mounted). For handheld shots such as would be
more practical with my twin Olympus 35-RC rangefinders it would be nice
to have a viewfinder level. Could one of those little tubular levels be
somehow placed so as to be visible in the viewfinder of one of the
rangefinder cameras, similar to the Realist aftermarket level? I would
guess that it might be more difficult to do this with an SLR? 

I would agree that you should only need to level one camera if they are
properly mounted and aligned. -Linda

Michael Galazin wrote:

> >It seems to all revolve around whether one has a good eye for any "out of
> >level" or "off horizontal" factor in the scene.
> - - - -
> 
> I have mixed feelings about levels.  I think they can be an asset to have on
> the camera or rig, for those times when you *think* to use it.

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/