RE: [Rollei] Re: Rollei panorama head, and "nodal points"

[Carlos Manuel Freaza <cmfreaza]

OK again Siu. My point is that in the Rollei-Gallery,
linked to RUG, I wished show a Rollei Panorama head
use example as it is used originally. Then, I scanned
each print enlarged 20x 20 cm, joined them and put
them in the Gallery. The reason  was I noticed that
the rollei panorama head is used not much.. I like use
the Rolleiflex TLR and its accesories as they were
designed by the manufacturer, I wrote this and I write
this. I use my Pentax 35 mm and the Olympus Camedia
for photography with software or digital image. 
BTW, the ?bug? is a depth of field matter. You can see
in my photograph first plane, medium plane and last
plane. The railing is the subject closer to the
camera, and it is slightly out of focus. If you look
paying attention, also the first metal bar?s railing
and its square are slightly out of focus, but itsn?t
so evident.. I always take the panoramic views with
the Rolleiflex at f/22, but in this case I used f/16
to obtain more details in the last plane where the
downtown is. The Xenotar 2.8 has its best performance
at f/16. If I used f/22 the ?bug? don?t exist, you can
be sure, but if you look the image 80 cm x 20cm from
the suitable distance, this railing slightly out of
focus isn?t evident and also you can see the downtown,
the river and the International bridge with details. 
Best regards
Carlos. 

 --- Siu Fai <siufai   escribió: > > You must
consider that I
> > scanned THE PRINTS, each print on paper, not the
> > negatives. You see my  panoram photo as is on the
> > paper, I DON'T USE ANY SOFTWARE FOR CORRECT
> > DISTORTIONS, I only use a software to disimulate
> union
> > lines. You imagine this panorama photo in size 80
> cm x
> > 20 cm on paper. I don't like use software for
> correct
> > the photograph, sometimes only for cut it. Then,
> that
> > the distortion is only in the fence or  railing,
> IS A
> > GREAT MERIT OF ROLLEI PANORAM HEAD DESIGN AND THE
> > CAMERA, I repeat, I scanned each print  (made with
> an
> > enlargement) not the negatives. Also this is the
> > reason that I insist on the panorama head.-
> 
> Carlos,
> 
> I don't see your point of being against pano
> software.  Since you already
> have the photo scanned perhaps you should give it a
> try. You still have to
> use your pano-head, make prints and scan them. But
> instead of cutting and
> stitching the files yourself, the software is now
> doing this for you. Epson
> Photo inkjet papers are available in 15cm and 30cm
> roll formats and I have
> made 15x50cm prints of my panos.
> 
> Personally, I don't buy the part of "IS A GREAT
> MERIT OF ROLLEI PANORAM HEAD
> DESIGN AND THE CAMERA". It sounds to me like: "It's
> a feature, not a bug."
> MY OBJECTIVE is to make a photograph that represents
> the panoramic view of a
> scene. Since the kinks are not there, why not let a
> computer software remove
> them?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Siu Fai
>  

- ------------
Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión
4004-1010 desde Buenos Aires. Usuario: yahoo; contraseña: yahoo
Más ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar

------------------------------