Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Tessar: 4 elements in 3 groups
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessar
Dialyte: 4 air spaced elements
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialyte_lens
Fujinon-C 300mm: 4 elements in four groups
http://fujifilm.jp/personal/filmandc...t/compact.html
http://translate.google.com/translat...2Fcompact.html
In any case, I found the article very useful and an interesting read!
Cheers,
Andreas
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jay DeFehr
Had me....
Lost me. How can I take the article, or author seriously after this introduction?
It's not a textbook.
Really, are we to a point in this world where we can't show a bit of opinion about our craft?
Personally, to date, I have yet to see any print enlarged or electronic that can match a nicely done contact print at the same size.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Barendt
It's not a textbook.
Really, are we to a point in this world where we can't show a bit of opinion about our craft?
Personally, to date, I have yet to see any print enlarged or electronic that can match a nicely done contact print at the same size.
I agree with Mark.
It has become taboo to compare a silver gelatin print to one produced with a printer. Some get very defensive about their digital output while others sound apologetic about their 'traditional' work. We're all free to choose our workflow and to express our opinions about it. No need to get defensive or apologize for our artistic choices.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Barendt
It's not a textbook.
Really, are we to a point in this world where we can't show a bit of opinion about our craft?
Personally, to date, I have yet to see any print enlarged or electronic that can match a nicely done contact print at the same size.
It wasn't the author's opinion of his craft that bothered me, it was his slander of others' craft. Talk about defensive! You're entitled to your opinion, and the author to his, however narrow or ill-informed it might seem to me, but in a piece that wants to be taken seriously about technical aspects of craft, and which relies on judgement, the comment seemed to me out of place and set the wrong tone for what followed, but that's just my opinion. But then , I don't believe journalistic principles apply only to textbooks, either, so we're bound to disagree.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Renato Tonelli
I agree with Mark.
It has become taboo to compare a silver gelatin print to one produced with a printer. Some get very defensive about their digital output while others sound apologetic about their 'traditional' work. We're all free to choose our workflow and to express our opinions about it. No need to get defensive or apologize for our artistic choices.
Renato,
I don't think it's become taboo, at all. In fact, I'd say it's becoming necessary, and much more interesting, when the comparison is made by someone intimately familiar with both processes, and equally accomplished in both. The author made no such comparison, he simply degraded an entire craft in an offhanded way, and I see little in that to admire or respect. To be clear, I've never made an ink print of any kind, and I've not seen many that represent the state of that art, but the ones I have seen, and what I've learned from the people who make them instills in me a respect for what is a different, and potentially incredibly beautiful process, and for the people who dedicate themselves to advancing it.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
It does seem a bit odd to me that in the opening paragraph of an article about portrait lenses that the author would make such a comment about a very specific type of output. What do digital baryte prints have to do with "tests of lenses for 4x5” and 5x7” negatives, targeted towards their usefulness for portraits in the broadest sense"?
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Well, as photographers our choice of words are not likely to be as well crafted as our images.
Nate Potter, Austin TX.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Jay,
If I didn't listen to and learn from people with whom I disagree or who have quirks that bother me I'd miss out on lots of knowledge.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Barendt
Jay,
If I didn't listen to and learn from people with whom I disagree or who have quirks that bother me I'd miss out on lots of knowledge.
And that they have something useful to teach you places them beyond reproach? That's a strange attitude. The author wants his readers to have confidence in his judgement, as online images can't tell the whole story he intends to tell, but his judgement about subtle qualities is severely damaged (in my mind) by his careless and baseless comment about ink printing.
As I've said, I did find the article as a whole interesting and useful, but that doesn't mean the article or specific comments are beyond critique.
Re: New article: Large format lenses for portraits
Hmmm.. I have 150/2.8 Xenotar, which indeed was doubling contours.. Until i realized it was not mounted properly. Once i took it apart and recleaned and mounted right (rear element was not screwed in properly) - presto.. It suddenly became deadly sharp at 2.8 and no funky odd double-contours, but pretty darn nice bokeh..