Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > FSU Former Soviet Union RF

FSU Former Soviet Union RF This forum is for the Former Soviet Union rangefinder cameras, especially the many and various Fed, Zorki, and Kiev.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

I cut off my daughter's feet with my Fed2!
Old 01-14-2006   #1
matti
Registered User
 
matti's Avatar
 
matti is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 176
I cut off my daughter's feet with my Fed2!

I didn't think the parallax error would actually mean something in the real world. So, I have to give a bit more space when framing stuff with my Fed 2. I haven't really tested the parallax but I suppose I can blame it for this? Do you try to compensate for this?
The picture is taken with an Industar 61/ld, by the way. I like the contrast with this lens.

/matti
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2006   #2
ch1
 
Posts: n/a
Look at it from the bright side: You didn't cut off her head!

Besides, who says you need toes? They are so far away down at the end of us and always prone to getting "stubbed"!

BTW: nice shot - what film?
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2006   #3
ed1k
Registered User
 
ed1k is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lorne Park, ON
Posts: 353
Parallax error does mean something in the real word. That's why Fed isn't Leica I do try to compensate for this error with my Kiev 4, but not always successfully. Though for portrait orientation my parallax error has different sign, probably I hold camera other way around.
Nice photo. I hope you enjoy your Fed.
Eduard.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #4
matti
Registered User
 
matti's Avatar
 
matti is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by copake_ham
Look at it from the bright side: You didn't cut off her head!

Besides, who says you need toes? They are so far away down at the end of us and always prone to getting "stubbed"!

BTW: nice shot - what film?


It was plain Tri-x at 400, developed by a lab, probably in t-max developer.
/matti
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #5
matti
Registered User
 
matti's Avatar
 
matti is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed1k
Parallax error does mean something in the real word. That's why Fed isn't Leica I do try to compensate for this error with my Kiev 4, but not always successfully. Though for portrait orientation my parallax error has different sign, probably I hold camera other way around.
Nice photo. I hope you enjoy your Fed.
Eduard.
I allso thought it was backwards, and that the parallax error would be in the other end of the picture. I probably sqated down and rested my elbow on my knee and turned the camera.
Actually the shutter doesn't do well on the Fed2, especially in the cold. I will probably post another tread with scanned pictures of the problem later to see if anyone have an idea. So I'll have to resort to my M6 for now

/matti
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #6
eric
[was]: emaquiling
 
eric's Avatar
 
eric is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: in my house
Age: 53
Posts: 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by matti
I didn't think the parallax error would actually mean something in the real world. So, I have to give a bit more space when framing stuff with my Fed 2. I haven't really tested the parallax but I suppose I can blame it for this? Do you try to compensate for this?
The picture is taken with an Industar 61/ld, by the way. I like the contrast with this lens.

/matti
How does it look on the negative? Is this the print from the lab? Lab prints are usually about 90% of the image.
__________________
Eric
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #7
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,984
Nice tones, great pic, Matti.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eric
Lab prints are usually about 90% of the image.
Good point. Some lab prints/lab operators could care less about full-frame printing. Check your negative, chances are that the feet are intact.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).


My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #8
Oldprof
Registered User
 
Oldprof's Avatar
 
Oldprof is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by copake_ham
Look at it from the bright side: You didn't cut off her head!
You beat me to it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #9
matti
Registered User
 
matti's Avatar
 
matti is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric
How does it look on the negative? Is this the print from the lab? Lab prints are usually about 90% of the image.
No, the lab actually only developed the film. I scanned the negative in my Canon flatbed scanner. So either it is a parallax-bug or some other problem with the viewfinder. It is actually quite hard to get a reliable edge in the Fed2 viewfinder, as there are no framelines. I sometimes feel it is possible to to see more in it if you press your eye to it a bit more.

/Matti
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #10
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 62
Posts: 19,391
It is actually quite hard to get a reliable edge in the Fed2 viewfinder, as there are no framelines. I sometimes feel it is possible to to see more in it if you press your eye to it a bit more.

Now that you are aware of this issue, you can compensate for it while photographing with this camera by backing off a bit to get everything in.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #11
Krasnaya_Zvezda
Fotoapparat Kollektor
 
Krasnaya_Zvezda's Avatar
 
Krasnaya_Zvezda is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: This Island Earth
Posts: 525
I wouldn't worry about it. Somehow, as amateurs, we are convinced it's a capital offense to "cut off the feet." But I see professionals do this all the time. I was just reading the February Pop Photo, and there is an article "Robin Bowman Tracks Amish Teens with a Modernized Polaroid Press Camera". 5 shots in the article, 4 of them have the feet cut from the subjects. It's just one of those "rules" that we're told is sacrosanct, and as we all know, nothing is sacrosanct.
__________________
Водка н тоник, пожалуйста.

"Don't think, even--- the brain is a bit dangerous..."
--- Henri Cartier-Bresson

KZ
_______________________

My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #12
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 62
Posts: 19,391
I have read this guideline about where to cut off limbs if you are not going to include all of them: It looks better not to cut off limbs at the joints, but between joints. eg. between the knee and ankle, rather than at the knee or ankle.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #13
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,297
Exactly, there are times to worry about accurate framing, but snaps of the kids are usually not 1 of them (unless the feet are an important part of the shot)!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Krasnaya_Zvezda
I wouldn't worry about it. Somehow, as amateurs, we are convinced it's a capital offense to "cut off the feet." But I see professionals do this all the time. I was just reading the February Pop Photo, and there is an article "Robin Bowman Tracks Amish Teens with a Modernized Polaroid Press Camera". 5 shots in the article, 4 of them have the feet cut from the subjects. It's just one of those "rules" that we're told is sacrosanct, and as we all know, nothing is sacrosanct.
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #14
reagan
hey, they're only Zorkis
 
reagan's Avatar
 
reagan is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Америка
Posts: 2,111
Since you're looking for how to fix or compensate... my 2 cents is that like your FED, Zorki VFs just aren't defined perfectly either. And as Frank said, I just tried to nail down how much I needed to back off or allow to make sure I get all of what I want framed.

Very nice tones and detail in the photo, but I gotta tell ya, that is one adorable shot. Feet or no feet, that should go in a frame.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #15
ch1
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krasnaya_Zvezda
I wouldn't worry about it. Somehow, as amateurs, we are convinced it's a capital offense to "cut off the feet." But I see professionals do this all the time. I was just reading the February Pop Photo, and there is an article "Robin Bowman Tracks Amish Teens with a Modernized Polaroid Press Camera". 5 shots in the article, 4 of them have the feet cut from the subjects. It's just one of those "rules" that we're told is sacrosanct, and as we all know, nothing is sacrosanct.
I saw that article too.

Hey here's a thought, why not send it into Debbie Grossman, the PS guru at Pop Photo and she if she can "clone in" some feet? In the Feb. '06 issue she cloned in some arm muscles!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #16
Frank Granovski
 
Posts: n/a
Cutting off the legs or a head (or having too much space) is the rangefinder style of photography it seems---until you get very familar with your rangefinder---but even then---.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2006   #17
aad
Not so new now.
 
aad is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,231
I was going to say something cleer about how sharp the camera must be to do such damage-

That isn't parallax error. That would put her at the top of the frame.
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=3426'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

The same problem to me
Old 01-22-2006   #18
weoul
Registered User
 
weoul is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 17
The same problem to me

I cannt see where the edge of frame at Zorky 4 Its too big if I put my eye too close to the viewfinder.But in manual it is said "put your eye to set the yellow spot in the middle" so Im trying
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1522'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FED2 - DIY VF/RF Service (long w/images) Laika FSU Former Soviet Union RF 93 05-22-2018 02:29
Trimming negatives for FED2 captainslack FSU Former Soviet Union RF 8 05-23-2005 15:33
FED2 vs KIEV4 - my opinion Carburo FSU Former Soviet Union RF 14 09-28-2004 07:27



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:37.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.