hks3sgte
Established
How do you guys frame your images? Not having any brightlines or parallax correction (like my Canonet) have made a lot of my photos come out with crappy framing. Any tips for an FSU newb? Thanks!
Florian1234
it's just hide and seek
I have the same problem. Makes you wonder... 
Any tips would be appreciated!
Any tips would be appreciated!
nzeeman
Well-known
if subject is close i frame it and then slightly move camera up and left. but be careful it is just small move - if you remember how much your framelines move on canonet move it about that much.
Spider67
Well-known
I used the turret VF with a Zorki 4 and had good results even at short distance.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The answer is the same as the old joke:
Q: "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?"
A: "Practice."
Cheers,
R. (Using a IIIa since 1970...)
Q: "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?"
A: "Practice."
Cheers,
R. (Using a IIIa since 1970...)
hks3sgte
Established
nzeeman
Well-known
and what camera do you use hks3sgte ?
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Unless you're into close ups parallax is not an issue.
If your camera doesn't have brightlines then I'd assume that what you seen in the viewfinder is what you get on the negative.
That just leaves using the four sides of the viewfinder to check your verticals and horizons are straight - but they'll often be a bit off so you'll need to correct later. Like we all do.
If your camera doesn't have brightlines then I'd assume that what you seen in the viewfinder is what you get on the negative.
That just leaves using the four sides of the viewfinder to check your verticals and horizons are straight - but they'll often be a bit off so you'll need to correct later. Like we all do.
hks3sgte
Established
I have a Fed-2 and a Zorki 3-C
Correct later? How? Maybe those are the tips I'm looking for?
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
In a traditional darkroom crop slightly and turn the paper slightly left or right, as required.
On a screen do the same with mouse clicks and menus.
Most times we just want to take off a few millimetres from one side, and make the horizon straight.
Last edited:
Spider67
Well-known
Hmmmm
Hmmmm
...On the other hand doesn't adapting to the equipment go a bit to far
Hmmmm
...On the other hand doesn't adapting to the equipment go a bit to far
hks3sgte
Established
ok... i'll stick to the "practice" method. I'm not too into post-alterations. Thanks, though!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
...On the other hand doesn't adapting to the equipment go a bit to far
Not really. I've adapted to focus shift, inaccurate frame lines, slow (and fast) shutters....
Unless you adapt, you're asking for less-than-optimum quality.
Cheers,
R.
dll927
Well-known
The one about Carnegie Hall used to be that a tourist asked a native NYCer how to get there. However, the answer was the same as above.
mh2000
Well-known
FED, Zorki, Leica, Retina etc. etc. all show more in the VF than will appear on the negative, especially at closer distances. Just have to leave lots of extra space for the top and sides (thanks to parralax the bottom is reasonably accurate).
hks3sgte
Established
I thought the viewfinder was for a 50mm lens? SO what you are saying is that the viewfinder is more like a 45mm view?
Nh3
Well-known
Winogrand, "I frame in terms of what I want to include in the picture."
Try it, it works.
Try it, it works.
hks3sgte
Established
mh2000
Well-known
the fixed VF can only be accurate for one distance. in older cameras they were designed to mostly be accurate at infinity so at closer distances they show much more than you will get on the negative. When I got into old RF's it took me a while to figure out why I was suddenly cutting off heads etc. Most modern VF cameras have parallax marks that make up a smaller frameline, you have to figure out what these would be for your camera. I've meant to make a target and shoot some film at 1 and 2 meters... but haven't gotten around to it yet... so I just add space at the top and sides and accept that I will have to do some minor cropping in the end when using a RF. In one of Ansel Adams books I remember he characterized rangefinders as being too inaccurate for precise framing...
mh2000
Well-known
rather smug response seeing that what you see in the VF isn't what will be on the negative. From my last roll through my Leica IIIc I had a frame where the camera cut off more than I thought it would... and guess what? I followed your useless advice completely!
>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nh3
Winogrand, "I frame in terms of what I want to include in the picture."
Try it, it works.
>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nh3
Winogrand, "I frame in terms of what I want to include in the picture."
Try it, it works.