Orthoscopic distance

Note:

It is highly advised to also consult the following articles:

* Diaphragm

* Performances of the eye

* Iris and diaphragm

* orthoscopic Distance

* Fuzzy, clearness and contrast

* Depth of hearth

* Depth of field

which forms a coherent unit and is necessary to the comprehension of this last article.

Note: This article is initially resulting from that entitled Depth of field which was the subject of a cutting to form or supplement the articles mentioned above.

----

So that a photograph is as realistic as possible, it should theoretically be looked under an angle identical to that under which the apparatus “saw” the subject. The distance from observation which makes it possible to restore this angle of vision calls orthoscopic distance . It is not often respected, even roughly, however it is it which must be taken for base of any serious calculation of the depth of field…

But initially, some elementary recalls of prospect:

The photographs has and B were taken same place while varying the focal Distance zoom in a report/ratio from approximately 3,5. By increasing the central zone of photo has in the same one report/ratio, one would obtain a notably degraded image but exactly superposable with the photo B. the photo a.c. taken of a point more brought closer than the photographs has and B and increased so that the height of the house (signed Le Corbusier) is preserved. The prospect changed, one sees on photo C of the details of the building which did not appear on has and B. In same time, the proportions of the objects are deeply modified. If something had to be sold, it would be without any doubt the house on photo B and the car on photo C.

the prospect depends only on the point of view.

On your screen, the three images are located in the same plan and it is highly probable that you do not observe any at the good distance at present of it! You probably a little are too far from the photo B, which was catch in position teleobjective, and too much far from the photographs has and C, which were catches in wide-angle position.

It is clear that to suitably appreciate the clearness of an image, it should be looked with good distance. Too much far, the defects disappears, too near, one finds some which are not.

Let us profit to twist the neck with another generally accepted idea. Except if they are affected of a monstrous distortion which translates the straight lines of the subject by curved lines on the image, the teleobjectives and the wide-angle lenses do not deform the images. The apparent deformations which are wrongfully charged to them produce only when the images are not examined since the good distance… (See the article Deformation of prospect related to the focal distance)

Let us call D the orthoscopic distance. How it calculated is?

Let us take an element of the subject, for example a tree height has located, at the time of the catch of sight, a distance X of the objective O .

On photography, the image of this tree will have a height has ; the report/ratio G=a/A is called growth . To respect the angle of vision, it is necessary whereas: $G= \ frac {has} {has} = \ frac {D} {X}$ , in other words $D= \ frac {has} {has} X=GX$

Let us take the case of the photo b: the building has a height of approximately 10 m (three levels plus one terrace) and the photo one was taken since a distance of about 50 Mr. On a screen of 19 inches parameterized in 1024x768 pixels, the image of the building measures 7 cm, therefore, while converting all distances in cm:

$D= \ frac {7} {1000} 5000=35 cm$

Taking into account the variation of focal distance carried out between has and B (3,5), it follows that the photo one has should be seen since a distance of approximately 10 cm. For photo C, it would be rather to 6 to 7 cm. Naturally, if your screen is smaller, these distances must be decreased in proportion. Finally, only photo B will correspond to a too not deformed vision…

Note:

the growth G is actually the product of two successive growths, G

who corresponds to the relationship between dimensions of the image formed on film or the sensor and those of the subject, then g' which corresponds in the passing of the image recorded on film or in the chart-memory with that which is finally observed on a pulling paper or a screen of projection. G = g.g'

most of the time, the final image is much smaller than the subject, the growth is actually a reduction, one finds G<1, with g<<1 and g'>1 .

in the case of the macrophoto itself, the image recorded by the apparatus is more

large that the subject, one finds G>1 then, with g>1 and g'>1 .

it can arrive that the final image is larger than the subject; it is always the case in

macrophotography, but not only: the naked Grands of Helmut Newton are pullings photographic larger than the models.

See too

wikilivre of photography - chapter 14: Clearness of the photographic images