The subject of contrast and flare has gotten my attention recently. Is the utili zation of lens hoods so common with 35mm and medium format worth considering in large format? Anyone out there with experience on this subject? My initial incli nation is that the positive benefits of a lens hoods for large format photograph y is not considerable or the manufacturers would be pushing these acccessories. I use screw in filters and wondered if the two are compatible? Thanks in advance .
I always use a shade or shade the lens with my hand when I use any camera, especially large format since the lens I have are only single coated. Flare greatly reduces contrast and I do my best to avoid it.
I've never seen hoods for large format lenses. I know they sell lense shades that resemble a bellows that fits on the front standard of a view camera. These can be adjusted in or out to fit the coverage of your lense. I usually use black cards on stands or a "magic arm" to flag direct light from hitting the lense (gobo). It is well worth the effort to "flag" off your large format lense, just as you would a 35mm. I've had several ruined shots from unnoticed flare from point light sources.
try a compendium shade with a mask and see the difference for yourself. toyo has been giving away compendiums with new 45aII's. most, if not all, manufacturers sell some kind of lens shade, even if they don't promote them.
Michael, I favour the black card option. It is cheap, easily carried in a outer pocket on my pack and most importantly it works! I used to religiously use lens hoods on MF as I had a few shots ruined by flare. Quite often they were expensive accessories (that should be supplied WITH the lens in my view!). When entering the world of LF the problem of flare was a thought when it came to choosing lenses. But I didn't want the fuss or expense of a bellows shade and as the lens manufacturers don't (to my knowledge) offer hoods I made a few cards from matt black mounting board about 8 inches square. I use double thickness and tape the edges for longevity! They are also useful as I have stuck filter factors/exposure info on one side. They may be worth trying before paying out for an expensive accessory. Regards Paul
I use the dark slide from the film holder. All you want to do is keep sunlight off of the lens and it doesn't add any extra weight or gear to accomplish the mission. Just be careful with wide angles not to include it in the frame. It can never be forgotten, lost or misplaced and it gives you something to do with the slide while you expose the negative.
Several of the above respondents have implied that you only need to worry about blocking light from a point source (like the sun). But every test I've ever seen shows that image quality is degraded due to light spill from ALL directions, not just from the direct sun, and those who say "Pshaw! Don't waste money on a lens hood when your hat will do just fine" (aka "the Ansel alibi") usually don't realize how much contrast they're losing by not putting a 360-degree hood around the lens.
Fwiw, I use the Lee compendium shade/filter system, with 4x4 and 4x6 filters and with different-sized front-lens-thread adaptors for various lenses. These have been amply discussed in Older Messages in this forum.
.,.
There are two factors in large format photography that determine whether you can blissfully ignore lens hoods, will absolutely require a compendium hood, or experience something in between. First, the design of your camera. Does it have an oversized, square (vs. tapered) bellows? If so, stray light will have a greatly reduced chance of bouncing around inside and adding flare exposure to your film. Second, the image circles of your lenses. Are they substantially larger than the film? If so, more stray light will have an opportunity to bounce around inside when a properly adjusted lenshood is not used. Note that, despite his legendary hat trick, St. Ansel wrote about all this and did say that a correcly used compendium is appropriate for optimum flare protection, whether a point source is present in the scene or not.
Many thanks to all that took the time to respond. The free sharing of experience is very valued on many subjects and that is what makes this post work so well. I found all of the responses adding something on the subject that I will take to the field and try out.
The post on a complete 360 degree shade particularly made sense. As a result, I found a generic rubber wide angle and standard shade ($8 - $15) that will allow me to screw the shade over my filter (or go directly on to the threads on the lens)and reduce the sharp angles of light into the edges of the lens surface that could wreck an image without warning. I will have to be very carefull with the wide angles. Many times I get so damn caught up into the composition, exposure and the large format process that I forget to think about that nasty word. Again, my sincere appreciation.
Yes, Sal, you're right about Ansel endorsing the need for true shades. I probably had St. Edward in mind more than St. Ansel (the latter of whom obviously could make do with a hat on occasion but knew better).
.,.,., .,.,
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks