Pete: I used to take many photo's looking through a mirror professionally for many years. Stay cool and run steam......
Bob: Jeanne, in her stained glass days, had mirror glass all over the workshop. Now there's not a piece to be had in the house. I think I need a piece of front-surfaced mirror for best results.
And scratch-built buildings. Jeanne really gets into this scenery stuff. All I can say is: WHHHOOOOOEEEE! She is inventing her own scenicking techniques. She may publish before I do.
Mike, I think your first picture is a little over-exposed. Second one looks great. Pete, awesome shots! Regarding the mirror, yes you need a "First-surface" or "Front-surface" mirror. I got mine out of an old projector. You might get ok results with a regular mirror, but the double reflection caused by the glass can give you some weird results at times. The good thing about using the mirror is you can angle it to get right down on the layout, at scale eye level. Here's a shot taken using a mirror: There's no other way I could get a camera angle this low unless I cut a hole in the layout. Simply backing off to the edge of the layout and using the zoom is not the equivalent, as perspective will flatten out and not give the impression the viewer is standing right there, in the scene. -Rich
I have been reading the threads on Helicon and as a semi-literate newstuff guy, can someone explain how it works and its purpose? I have gathered that you take a series of photos, like the old fashioned panorama view and this software patches them together. Is that the case? thanks.
Not quite, Jim. Basically, the camera remains stationary. You take a series of photos with the lens focus at different distances--say from 1 foot to 10 feet. Each photo is a slice: some areas are in focus while other areas are not. You may need 24 or so slices. Helicon takes the slices, finds the in-focus areas in each, and combines them into one sharp image. It permits images with great depth of field--far beyond what most lenses can achieve. [ January 19, 2006, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: Pete Nolan ]
Rich is correct about aperture. I took two series of the same scene today with a 24mm lens: one at f/22 and one at f/8. The f/8 series was visually sharper, because the lens (Nikkor 24-85 ED G) is sharper at that aperture. I shot f/22 at 0.5 second; and f/8 at 1/15 second. The f/22 setting did eliminate any fuzzy border around the image; the f/8 setting had a small fuzzy border at each vertical edge, but it was probably less than 1% of the width. I started a new topic with this image that was not Helicon-related, but rather addressed some of my layout building ideas. If you want to see this image, it's at: http://www.trainboard.com/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/9/t/007537/p/1.html#000000
Thanks for the explanation Pete. Would it work for outside scenery, or just short focal length shots such as your layout?
Fitz: There's no problem with outdoor shots. Use an high f stop. The problem occurs with short focal lengths on a layout. There DOF becomes a problem using a Digital camera. With a 35mm camera and an high f stop you can get sufficient DOF on a layout. Most point and shoot digital camera's have f stops that max out at f8. Stay cool and run steam....
It will work outside just fine. Say you have a flower that you want to be in focus with a mountain far behind. Take a few shots, and let Helicon do the rest. Usually, outdoor shots can be accommodated without Helicon, because things are farther away. As objects get closer, the depth of field gets shorter (or narrower). In N scale, we are shooting at close distances, so depth of field becomes a problem. Outside, we are not usually shooting at such clsoe distances, so depth of field is not as much a problem. BUT--I've had some shots where depth of field was a problem outside.
