Any know a plugin/workflow for Photoshop to add LF feel to 35mm photos?

[marshallarts]

Blasphemy I know . I'm not a Photoshop guru but want to learn methods of selectively applying blur so the DoF is more like that of LF. I've read methods to imitate tilt-shift but how do you do it as if a normal portrait (radially?)?

Nothing beats true LF, I know, but if I need to try???

[Frank Petronio]

Blur everything and then using the History Brush, painting back to the previous sharp state selectively and gradually. This is where a Wacom tablet is useful. Use your vast experience as a photographer to mimic the performance of a classic lens. Use the Radial Blur filter to imitate an expensive 19th-Century lens. Lower the contrast and darken the image to look like mud and tell everyone it is alternative process and they'll believe you too.

The most proper non-destructive way to do this is with a duplicate layer with a layer mask you paint and erase through but the above gets the job done.

I don't think there are any plug-ins smart enough to understand what should be in focus, they aren't telepathic yet.

FWIW, all my work is done with a P&S digital and I love to fake people out by adding film frame lines and processing techniques such as this ;-)

[jp]

don't forget to wet the art paper and let it dry wrinkly/uneven before running it through the printer so it looks the part of an alt process wet print fresh out of the darkroom.


For portraits you could get it right in the camera to begin with like you were taught and use a tessar lens; I'm sure someone made one for common 35mm camera systems at some point in history.

[Brian Ellis]

don't forget to wet the art paper and let it dry wrinkly/uneven before running it through the printer so it looks the part of an alt process wet print fresh out of the darkroom. . . .

Good idea but he doesn't have to actually wet the paper. The Dektol Tool in Photoshop gives a very nice wet,wrinkled look to the paper.

[Donald Miller]

Select your subject, then inverse the selection and then apply gaussien blur followed by radial blur. The radial blur can be added as an effect over a gradient mask. You can get things as swirly as you want.

If you want bloom from your highlights, select the highlight tones by using select/color range and apply a gaussien blur to those.

[jb7]

Just copy and paste the frame outlines-
nothing more necessary at web sizes-

[Bruce Watson]

Blasphemy I know . I'm not a Photoshop guru but want to learn methods of selectively applying blur so the DoF is more like that of LF. I've read methods to imitate tilt-shift but how do you do it as if a normal portrait (radially?)?

Nothing beats true LF, I know, but if I need to try???

Why do you *need* to try? Really. I'm serious.

Why do I ask? Because there *isn't* a defined "LF look". Just take the example of some of the masters in the field. In particular, the old f/64 group. You'll see that the entire image is razor sharp -- from an 8x10 negative. No blur anywhere.

The most out of focus backgrounds I've shot in my life came from my 35mm days, shooting environmental portraits. To get the same long lens effects I would have to use 360mm lens on my 5x4, and focus fairly closely. And I don't have enough bellows for that even if I wanted to, which I don't. If I wanted that, I'd pull out the old 35mm camera. If I can find it, and it still works.

One of the reasons I got into LF was to have control of the plane of focus through movements so I could have both the big negatives and a large depth of focus if I wanted. And I mostly want everything in focus.

For my work, if you are looking for "blur so the DoF is more like that of LF" then you need to spend more time on sharpening than you do on blur. Just sayin'.

[Ben Syverson]

This question makes me depressed. Go out and buy some film.

[Ben Syverson]

Oh, and can someone move this thread to the lounge? It's in the way of real conversation.

[Shen45]

Well said Ben.