Macro Elmar 90 for portrait

[01af]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Don't get me wrong, guys, but for a moment I felt myself in Giordano Bruno's galoshes ...

Don't flatter yourself as being in a position similar to Giordano Bruno's. Instead, you are just a guy who fiercely refuses to understand the world around him.

 

 

For your information:

Angle of view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As has been stated before, Wikipedia is a wild mixture of truths, half-truths, and errors. So better don't exclusively rely on the 'information' derived from there.

 

 

Field of view is synonymous with angle of view.

No, it's not. These are two different things.

 

 

FoV (and consequently perspective) ...

Perspective is not a consequence of the field-of-view. These are two entirely different things.

 

 

... depends SOLELY on the lens' focal length and picture format (the frame's diagonal, to be precise), and is measured in angles.

As a matter of fact, field-of-view depends of the focal length, the image format, and the distance. It's measured in square inches or square feet or square centimeters or square meters or whatever but definitely not in degrees of angle. The distance affects perspective, but from the same distance (and position) you can have many different fields-of-view but just one perspective.

 

 

YOU CANNOT CHANGE THAT in your dark room by cropping an image.

Sure you can.

 

 

You all act like the DoP in Stanley Kubrick's first studio picture ...

Actually, it's you who does.

 

 

... who changed the lens from wide to normal for a dolly shot, saying he would see the same thing, only it's easier to light.

Better don't refer to that old story unless you fully understand it.

 

The problem was not the lens but the distance of the dolly's railway. The assistant tried to save himself from the hassle of relocating the railway and simply changed the lens instead. Mr. Kubrik however insisted on the railway's relocation because that is what determines perspective.

 

 

I know what you mean when you say "perspective is determined by the camera position only" but you're wrong, wrong, wrong. Perspective is determined by the focal length, full stop.

If being wrong makes you happy then it's your business ... but please stop teaching students.

[jaapv]

Focal length determines the size of the image only; it determines neither angle-of-view nor perspective.

 

All together now

 

 

WTF? Hold your horses!

 

Before I give you the weight of my tongue: I think we are talking about the same thing, but look at it from a slightly different perspective (no hint here). Over a glass of wine, I guess we could straighten our differences, but given your absolutely intolerable, superior and snobbish, albeit painfully ignorant tone of voice, let me give you the finger instead and return the barrage with a quick lesson in optical illusion.

 

Don't get me wrong, guys, but for a moment I felt myself in Giordano Bruno's galoshes (sorry, tons of snow over here).

 

Now let's make it square: I asked your kind opinion about a particular Leica lens. Some of you shared valuable thoughts, fanx a dozen for that.

 

Then, not so much between the lines, I got some paternal slagging off for wanting to shoot a humanoid's head up close and personal, thus making his/her nose appear to protrude more than it is desirable in a snapshot album. Fair enough, I take all the blame, but hey, I'll live with those pictures. Maybe I like it that way. Ever thought of that? Mind you, for big noses I'd stick on a 21mm.

 

Then comes the wild bunch and nails me down for having the guts to teach, the ignoramus as I am. Well, I'm just a stupid Hungarian, can't even tie my shoelaces, let alone spell, count or understand the magic art and craft of picture taking.

 

I'd love to put it more eloquently but there's no space for dilly-dallying, it's shorter this way:

You're talking barrels of bollockchops. Utter effing rubbish.

 

For your information:

Angle of view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

I know it's all scientific mambo jumbo so here's a few snippets:

 

Because different lenses generally require a different camera–subject distance to preserve the size of a subject, changing the angle of view can indirectly distort perspective, changing the apparent relative size of the subject and foreground.

Longer lenses magnify the subject more, apparently compressing distance and (when focused on the foreground) blurring the background because of their shallower depth of field. Wider lenses tend to magnify distance between objects while allowing greater depth of field.

 

Another result of using a wide angle lens is a greater apparent perspective distortion when the camera is not aligned perpendicularly to the subject: parallel lines converge at the same rate as with a normal lens, but converge more due to the wider total field. For example, buildings appear to be falling backwards much more severely when the camera is pointed upward from ground level than they would if photographed with a normal lens at the same distance from the subject, because more of the subject building is visible in the wide-angle shot.

 

Because different lenses generally require a different camera–subject distance to preserve the size of a subject, changing the angle of view can indirectly distort perspective, changing the apparent relative size of the subject and foreground.

 

 

And here's something you say that makes absolutely no sense at all (sorry, Giordano):

 

If you photograph the same scene from the same position with (say) a 15mm lens and a 75mm lens, and crop and enlarge the first picture to show the same field of view as the second, the perspective will be the same in each.

 

Here's why: Field of view is synonymous with angle of view. It is an optical property applied at the time of shooting and not something you can fiddle with in the darkroom. FoV (and consequently perspective) depends SOLELY on the lens' focal length and picture format (the frame's diagonal, to be precise), and is measured in angles. Degree ALPHA, meaning twice the angle that you measure in the optical centre of the lens formed by the outermost ray theoretically projected from the edge of the bloody frame. ALPHA is your angle of view or field of view. YOU CANNOT CHANGE THAT in your dark room by cropping an image. It is determined for good by the lens you took the picture with, for god's sake.

 

And this, sorry man, but WTF are you on about?

Angle-of-view depends on the relation between image size and imager (i. e. film or sensor) size.

It makes no sense at all. What are image size and imager size anyway? Image size

 

You all act like the DoP in Stanley Kubrick's first studio picture who changed the lens from wide to normal for a dolly shot, saying he would see the same thing, only it's easier to light. You know what the great man said? "No, it would NOT be the same image. The PERSPECTIVE will be entirely different. Put that lens back or get off my set."

 

Try this:

Position your cute little son or a pumpkin in front of a rail fence or a brick wall. Shoot with all your lovely screw mount Leica lenses from the same position and see what happens. Count each and every brick and fence post you see, and count them good. I know what you mean when you say "perspective is determined by the camera position only" but you're wrong, wrong, wrong. Perspective is determined by the focal length, full stop. You, meaning "ALL TOGETHER NOW", notice this change in perspective blatantly and obviously only when you try to position the same object in the frame taken with different lenses so that is retains its relative size. You either move the camera closer or further or ask your model to move, doesn't bleeding matter. The perspective is the same with any given lens, however you contort yourself, the camera, the subject, anything, don't you get it?

 

Now, at the count of three, all of you: Take it easy! No sweat, bros, I'm sweet, don't shoot!

 

And thanks for your most valuable input.

 

Oh, BTW, I ordered the 90/4 and am about to shoot the hell out of it. In yer face, big fat noses with carbuncles and all.

 

P.S. Sorry about your education system. Here, we have great students and they just loooove the heresy I stuff their heads with. I teach them first thing, before they even get down to picture taking.

Gosh, I'm wasting my time here, I have a whole day workshop tomorrow.

Please consider this thread done and dusted. Thanks.

 

You came indeed to the wrong forum. Too many people with enough photographic knowledge to expose ignorance.Read Ola'f's post (and others in this thread) and be educated. To pretend that you are something you cannot be - and it is inconceivable that a teacher of photgraphy can spout such BS- it the signature of a troll.

[Guest Farkas]

Another woopsy I fear.... M8 users know better....

 

OMG, is there such a thing as technological racism? FYI, I shoot M9, M6, M2, Olympus, Bronica, Fuji and Canon, Holga and whatever comes my way and fits the bill. M8 is a fine camera with a few quirks, a perfect tool for creative imaging, as much as a Hasselblad, a Canonet 17 or a box Brownie.

 

OK, let's put an end to this:

 

jaapv I don't know what ails you man, but it's not healthy. Go see a shrink. And consider this: would you talk to me like this if we met in person? Probably not. You'd be a meek geezer, shit scared not to be smacked in the gob. Sad man. Read no further.

 

To those who may still care and are curious to know:

 

PERSPECTIVE (lat. 'look through') is a means to represent the spacial relations of a scene (3D) on a flat surface (2D) by graphic, photographic or other means. It's a massive abstraction that involves the human brain and eyes. Let's stick to the optical means, photography. You use a lens that collects visible or IR or UV and what not rays emitted form the objects in the scene, then projects that on a surface. Any visible point in your scene, wherever it is in space (3D) is rendered on the plane surface in 2D.

 

How that abstract rendering (space to plane, 3D to 2D) happens depends on the optical system. The perspective we are accustomed to is given by the optical system we know best -- a pair of good old human eyes. NORMAL perspective is how we see the world, it makes us able to judge distances. Other than that, we are screwed, our brain gets confused. You know, the little caption on the rear view mirror that says: "Attention, objects are closer than they appear!" Same thing. Change of perspective. Forget stereoscopic vision, let's stick to one eye and one lens. The image projected onto the flat surface and possibly recorded there has an innate characteristic: how the spacial relations of individual points, and clusters of points (motives, objects) are rendered on the flat surface. That is perspective. Geddit? The rendering of 3D into 2D. The APPARENT spacial relation of visible points in space, projected onto a plane. It is always apparent, abstract. Only the human eye interprets them as spacial relations, which they are not -- just dots and lines on a frigging piece of paper or screen. Hence the name, perspective, as the pioneers of perspective projections used contraptions with grids that they LOOKED THROUGH to copy what they see by that auxiliary grid onto a flat surface.

 

Now, here's the trick: how real spacial relations are translated into a much simpler 2D planar relation depends on the actual perspective, a matrix facilitated in photography by the lens itself. Angle of view (cf. ALPHA in an earlier post), a.k.a. field of view refers to that virtual pyramid theoretically projected from the entrance pupil of the lens into infinity. Whatever is within that pyramid, is within your field of view and will appear in the picture (unless obstructed by another object). Field of view is a misnomer, because in actual fact is is a slice or rather wedge of SPACE we are talking about, not a field. It is infinite. The only plane we can talk about here is the plane of focus -- that theoretical plane perpendicular to the lens and the projection/recording surface behind the lens where circle of confusion... blabla, where the image is totally sharp. But that doesn't bother perspective.

 

So, the SCENE is whatever you have within that cone or pyramid. What and how appears then on the flat surface (ground glass, sensor, emulsion) where the lens projects the image depends on the shape of that pyramid -- how wide or narrow it is. Because whatever is in there, in that SPACE will be crammed onto the very same 24x36, 56x56, 4x5, 8x10 etc. SURFACE. Always. The result? Real spatial relations are distorted, they lose one dimension and end up as a simple A to B distance between two points. Space therefore is accentuated or flattened or appear pretty much as we know it.

 

Wherever you stand, wherever you put your camera or subject, the perspective is the same with that lens, because it is determined by the optical system, the lens, the angle and field of view ====== the focal length. And nothing else.

 

Of course you have that notion that spacial relations in the foreground, closer to the camera, are more expressed. The further you are, the less apparent the distortion of spacial relations. It has something to do with Euclid's geometry but that doesn't change the actual perspective: i.e. the matrix that renders space onto a plane.

 

I have spoken. You don't have to believe me, nor wikipedia. Just think.

 

P.S. I sent this thread over to a friend of mine, a CGI expert who works with perspective on a daily basis in 3D imaging, VFX compositing, matte painting and what not. He sends his regards and recommends looking up from the viewfinder and just stare into open space every now and then.

[pop]

To those who may still care and are curious to know:.... a CGI expert who works with perspective on a daily basis in 3D imaging, VFX compositing, matte painting and what not. He sends his regards and recommends looking up from the viewfinder and just stare into open space every now and then.

 

Your matte painting CGI expert is right. Do look into open space from time to time. And perceive.

 

You are mistaken. It could be a simple linguistic problem.

 

Perspective is how the world looks from one particular point. Change the point where you stand and perspective will change with you.

 

The angle of view simply states how much of your environment you see at the same time, a small cone or a wide one. It does not change the relation of the things with respect to each other. The only difference is that you see more or less of your environment.

 

Focal length will determine the scale of the image. A longer focal length makes larger images. A smaller one makes smaller images. When used from the same point, they will depict the same perspective, only at different sizes.

[jaapv]

I don't think it is linguistic. He doesn't know what determines perspective, he doesn't know the difference between angle of view and field of view, I doubt he even knows what focal length is etc. He is extremely rude and juvenile, in short, a nasty troll.

[jc_braconi]

PERSPECTIVE (lat. 'look through') is a means to represent the spacial relations of a scene (3D) on a flat surface (2D) by graphic, photographic or other means.

 

Not only sir....,

it is also what you see with your eyes, and what you are able to concept.

 

I used/loved to walk in Manhattan, New York City, and also to stay on top of one of the late twin towers.

I garanty you that what I saw from the street have nothing to compare with what I saw from the top of the tower.

Just remember that the verticals stay verticals, all the horizontals convay to the point of escape.

My teachers detected my notion of spatial geometry when I was 10 years old, may be you know what I mean,

and it is a not surprising that my life was based on this notion.

Best wishes

[giordano]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's all a matter of viewpoint:

 

Paolo Uccello, Perspective Study of a Chalice.

[Rick]

Farkas, in order to change your perspective on this, perhaps you should change your point of view; consider a craniorectalectomy.

[jamesk8752]

Farkas, in order to change your perspective on this, perhaps you should change your point of view; consider a craniorectalectomy.

 

...but then how would he see where he was going?