Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/08/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I believe it is learned knowledge not innate. just as the alleged photographically uninitiated could not recognize the world on a two dimensional piece of photographic paper; they would not perceive narrowing dof tilt effects as miniatures. Regards, George Lottermoser george at imagist.com http://www.imagist.com http://www.imagist.com/blog http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist On Aug 10, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Ric Carter wrote: > so, does it require the past experience of lowered depth of field > depending on focal distance? > > is that an innate knowledge? > > i recognize the effect from taking pictures on my train layout as a kid, > but what about normal folk? > > ric > > > On Aug 10, 2010, at 4:52 PM, Tim Gray wrote: > >> On Aug 10, 2010 at 02:55 PM -0400, Tina Manley wrote: >>> What is it about a tilt shift lens that gives the visual impression of >>> miniaturization? >> >> Depth of field (DOF) is very small at close focus distances. To get a >> big picture of miniatures, you traditionally have to be close in. >> Tilt-shift lenses obviously let you futz with the DOF in non-traditional >> ways, shrinking it to a small layer if you desire. So it looks like a >> photo of a miniature. >> >> Isn't that all there is too it? Or to word it another way: Does >> tilt-shift give the impression of looking at miniatures, or does it give >> the impression of looking at a picture of miniatures? >> >> (Though the eye does have DOF.) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information