Another New Picture Thread

[Pat Hilander]

Testing lenses.
The dwarf was shot with the front element from a Buhl projection lens.
8x10 contact print.
Night scene was shot with the rear elements from a Dallmeyer projection lens.
4x5 contact print

These are cool! What the heck are those "orbs" in the 2nd shot?

[Scott --]

Testing the fixed focus 4x5 I made last week. Larger version here. Angulon 90/6.8, Neretta mk. II.

[Brian Bullen]

Jane and Pat, thanks for the kind words.
The photo of the dwarf is for a friend of mine who had a bad experience at Disney Land with one of the seven dwarves. She said he was very creepy and didn't want to let go after she had her photo taken with him. The whole story was quite humurous and we had a great laugh.
Digging through some old family christmas ornaments I found a couple of dwarves from the set of seven and realized I needed to make a print for my "traumatized" friend.
Pat, those orbs are the aliens landing! Actually those are street lights that are distorted from using only half a lens.
If you two want something really scary this doll creeps me out. It was my wife's childhood toy.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I've been looking at this thread and I guess I should contribute also.The first two shots were taken inside an old milking barn at Point Reyes National seashore in California. The barn was built in 1860 and the brass lens I was using was made in the 1860's also. The last shot is of a Redwood sapling at Muir Woods early in the morning. I used my 11x14 Hawkeye Portrait lens wide open for this. 8x10 Azo contact prints, Seneca Improved 8x10 Old T-max 400 in Pyrocat HD minimal agitation in tanks.

Jim

[gbogatko]

Here's a version with a more vintage-looking "lens" - the focus degrades quickly from the center of the image.

Apropos "oldizing" a picture; the latest ViewCamera has work by Peter Liepke that causes admirers of pictorialism (like me) to take heart. He transforms a 4x5 modern-emulsion negative into a larger paper negative by infusing an ink-jet inter negative with wax, and then uses that to make plat/gum contact prints. (NOTE: I just shortened a whole bunch of specific paragraphs into one sentence -- read the original).

Being a lazy geezer, I had the thought "why not scan a 4x5 negative with some wax paper in the mix?" Well... It doesn't come out the same, but it does come out different. Here are 3 scans of the same neg (with an epson 4990). 1) no waxpaper 2) the waxpaper is between the light source and the negative, and 3) the waxpaper is between the negative and the sensor. I happen to like the result (not for everything, of course).

This does NOT work on dense negatives -- they have to be somewhat thin for this to work. Also, I personally don't like it if the waxpaper has a crinkle in it -- then it just looks like something you found in the garbage.

BTW this was taken with a Wolly Focus 5.

gb

[Jim Fitzgerald]

gb, I like all three!!

Jim

[janepaints]

This does NOT work on dense negatives -- they have to be somewhat thin for this to work. Also, I personally don't like it if the waxpaper has a crinkle in it -- then it just looks like something you found in the garbage.

BTW this was taken with a Wolly Focus 5.

gb

Your middle image tickles me the most, rides that balance beam between Illusion Of Real and Dreamlike.

Not having seen the VC mag article and with only your summation to go by, some memories floated up. In art school days a pal was fascinated by image-transfers made by saturating photos from newspapers or magazines with solvents (gas, kerosene, naptha) and then, using a roller-brayer for pressure, transferring them to drawing paper.

Has anyone been fooling around with anything remotely similar but using inkjet-prints as the source material? (BTW I doubt if kerosene or gas--not to mention the inks which the source-photos were printed with--resulted in images with any kind of longevity, permanence or chemical integrity.)

Anybody fooling with any form of mechanical and/or chemical (or pressure'd or any combination thereof) transfer of digital photographics unto other support materials, an update similar to my pal's messy process?

[Ken Lee]

This is a very clever idea.

You could also scan the wax paper alone, and then in Photoshop, use it as a layer. Then, you could choose among a large variety of layer options: Darken, Lighten, Overlay, etc.

These options correspond to your placing the paper above/below/in between, etc. and then go a few steps further.

By adding a color cast, you can tone the background, the image, or both, accordingly.

Of course, you could scan (or photograph) any number of surfaces, including a stone wall, a slab of marble, or even a sheet of aluminum or copper....Just teasing the purists

[PaulRicciardi]

I've seen this technique done before actually, I've heard it called "creative scanning" here's a link, browse through some of the articles and you'll find some references to it and ideas about it.
http://www.nonphotography.com/blog/i...?showimage=267

[Miguel Coquis]

Tea for two
Apo Ronar 300 mm
5x7 TXP-TMax dev. 1/9 9min 20°c
4990 epson scan and PSH
and what else ... ?
The week is almost finish here and is cold out side !
Cheers,
Miguel