Dan wrote:
>This note is interesting to me. I was in NY during the New Years holidays
>and there were lots of opportunities to take pictures of tall buildings
>(Trump Tower, St. Patrick's Cathedral, Empire State Bldg, etc.) and I wish
>I had a shift lens to use.
>
>But I am most curious about Jan's last sentence: "straight lines that
>aren't parallel to the film plane". What does this mean? When I think
>of architecture photo, all the lines are parallel to the film plane --
>either horizontal or most likely vertical. But when Jan said that the
>shift lens "does wonders for ... lines that aren't parallel to the film
>plane", I think of lines that are perpendicular to (i.e., going away from)
>the photographer. So how does a shift lens help in this case? Or am I
>just not seeing it? If there are enough interesting uses for a shift
>lens, I may buy one to experiment with someday.
The lines are parallel if you hold the camera parallel to the buildings.
But then you often can't see the top of the buildings (or trees etc.). So
you have to hold the camera not parallel in an angle to see the top. With a
shift lens you can make use of the greater circle of the picture plane. You
keep the camera parallel and move quasi the film area in this circle to
photograph the top of buildings without the necessity to change the angle.
Matthias
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|