The Work of Jim Galli

[IanBarber]

Be aware that not all old uncoated lenses are low contrast

Is there any easy way to identify a low contrast lens by simply looking at a picture of it

[Randy]

A modern'ish alternative is a Wollaston meniscus lens from Reinhold Schable On 4X5 I love the 190mm lens. Very affordable and well made. The only problem is figuring out how to mount in shutter. I use mine on my Graflex Series D, that has a built-in focal-plane shutter.

[jnantz]

Is there any easy way to identify a low contrast lens by simply looking at a picture of it

hi ian

what lens do you currently have ? have you exposed your film with the lens wide open,
and focused infront of the subject a couple of feet ? have you tried shooting through a plastic bag, or
white or black pantyhose, with a cigarette hole burned in the middle ? or a filter
( plastic or glass ) that you exhaled ( or a smoker friend ) smoke on and poked a clear hole in the middle with
your finger? there are a lot of easy ways to make low contrast images ( including shooting on overcast / low contrast days )
you can play with as you look for your lens. you might consider an old 1920s tessar, or rapid rectilinear, they offer a really nice smooth
out of focus area and sometimes are very fast lenses.

good luck finding what you can use+afford !

john

ps. i agree with randy, reinhold's meniscus lenses are great !
he also sells a shutter that mounts on the front of the lens if you can't find one ( or don't have a graflex or TP, or a jim galli shutter ( 2 darkslides )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Baa8Bwnn9Sk

[chassis]

Agree with the idea of shooting wide open with an otherwise normal lens. Very pleasing in many cases. There is a thread on this: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...highlight=wide

[jp]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICLG3HCDlhk

Here's Jim Galli with his Galli shutter doing some fast speeds.
He sell some lenses in shutter from time to time, so get in contact with him.
I use a speed graphic mostly
Shooting after sundown is valid too if you want slow shutter speeds with fast film outdoors.
Reinhold makes good stuff too, I have used his 190mm extensively with my speed graphic.

[IanG]

Is there any easy way to identify a low contrast lens by simply looking at a picture of it

Not really, but knowing how many elements and how they are configured helps enormously, so a Dagor or Protar and equivalent has 4 elements in two cemented pairs so two internal air/glass surfaces, the commonest Brass lenses are RR's (Rapid Rectilinear) again two pairs of cemented cells.

A triplet has 3 separate elements so 4 internal air/glass surfaces as do Tessar and type lenses which are cemented pair and two other elements, Petzval lenses are similar a pair and two other elements.

Lowest in contrast of the common lens types are the Dialytes 4 separate elements so 6 internal air/glass surfaces, there's plenty about in early Dial set Compur shutters - Dogmars, Celors, Eurynars, the 170mm f7.7 and 203mm f7.7 Kodak Anastigmats, etc.

However it's not just contrast, people are usually looking at the character of older lenses particularly wide open and a Triplet will look quite different to a Dialyte which is a much sharper lens design overall, with a Tessar somewhere in between.

Petzvals have a look of their own.

Ian

[Ken Lee]

At the risk of splitting hairs...

As IanG points out, old un-coated lenses with many air-glass surfaces suffer from internal flare. Light bounces around inside the lens. It's a form of noise.

At first glance, flare conveys an overall impression of lower contrast, but on closer inspection it's actually fog. It reduces resolution and lowers effective film speed.

Lenses designed for portraiture have uncorrected aberrations, something a little different. A coated Heliar or a modern Cooke PS945 do not suffer from light bouncing around the insides. They are not low contrast lenses and they are not low resolution lenses - but at wide apertures they render highlights and out-of-focus areas with a special glow.

[IanBarber]

At the risk of splitting hairs...

As IanG points out, old un-coated lenses with many air-glass surfaces suffer from internal flare. Light bounces around inside the lens. It's a form of noise.

At first glance, flare conveys an overall impression of lower contrast, but on closer inspection it's actually fog. It reduces resolution and lowers effective film speed.

Lenses designed for portraiture have uncorrected aberrations, something a little different. A coated Heliar or a modern Cooke PS945 do not suffer from light bouncing around the insides. They are not low contrast lenses and they are not low resolution lenses - but at wide apertures they render highlights and out-of-focus areas with a special glow.

A beautiful set Ken, this is the look I am looking for

[Bill Burk]

I get a kick out of Jim Galli's dark slide shutter... IanBarber, you can always err on the side of overexposure. What's the worst that can happen? Halation? Loss of critical sharpness? Haaa that's what you're going for in the first place...

[pjd]

Hmm...by low contrast, do you mean soft focus? IanG has made some good points about uncoated lenses above, to which I'd add that some of the theoretically lower contrast lenses (uncoated Plasmats, Dogmar etc) are pretty sharp even wide open - and therefore not very Galli-ish. I'm sure Jim would have some advice for you if you contact him, and maybe an interesting lens to buy - it feels redundant to write this here, but he's a good person to buy from.

If you are looking for reasonably priced soft focus lenses on eBay, good luck with that On the other hand Jim Galli made some appealing images with less expensive optics (think Versar, for example). Maybe you are on the wrong side of the Atlantic to pick up that sort of glass at attractive prices though. There's probably something suitable on ebay.co.uk though. I recently almost had a great deal...I recently bought a box of junky looking stuff with a Lancaster meniscus barrel in there...sadly when it turned up there was no glass in the barrel!

I don't know anything about Chamonix cameras, would it be able to bear the shame of a Chinese pictorial lens? The Chinese pictorials might be a good place to start!