Golden Age of Hollywood Photography

[Bruce Wehman]

Larry,

Keep plugging, you are off to a great start.

One thing that is apparent in studying the work of Hurell is his use of back light. The back lights are often his key lights, with the front lights just there for detail . The whole idea is to create the feel of stage lighting which, as you know, has "kickers" all over the place......This also requires a somewhat large studio.

This is also what makes the effects of a soft focus lens really come to life. Without those little specular higlights, that back lighting creates, there would be little more than fuzz on fuzz.

And don't be too concerned about the Orthochromatic film thing, just stay away from film/dev. combinations that produce a long toe and you will have those deep shadows without brittle flesh tones.

Hope this is of some value, Bruce

[Jason_1622]

It was mentioned above that he should learn html. Well, I must admit that his page isn't full of bells and whistles, but it seems clean enough and loads easily. What more do you want? I will admit that the quality of the images isn't great though. And I mean the scans, not the originals. I don't know though. Maybe the scans are poor because the images are, but I think you just used a cheap scanner. They are muddy and soft, but not soft from the lens, soft from a cheap scanner type of soft...

[Joshua L. Slocum]

Ellis, I'm surprised to hear you call Photoshop a "better" tool - and surprised to hear you ask who would hand etch a negative! You're usually less of a cheerleader for modernity The answer? I would. Why? Photoshop is not "better" or "worse," it's different. I've just begun trying to immerse myself in the old studio techniques, and I fully plan to retouch my negatives by hand. Why? Because it's not as satisfying to do it on the computer. It's cold, it's electronic. It feels commercial. Plus, for goodness' sake, I'm not going to compromise the quality of my print by making it all digital when I'm shooting 4x5 to begin with. And please, don't anyone engage me in an argument about the merits of silver halide BW printing vs. inkjet - that's just silly. Another point - most old Hollywood shots from the 40s (Karsch, Hurrell, Horst, Von Stroheim) are NOT in soft focus. Let me repeat that: they are NOT in soft focus. The images are often razor sharp - the smoothness of the skin is due to extensive retouching, not a filter over the lens. In today's world, most people try to approximate this look by shooting in soft focus - and it looks like a a knock off. This is due to a complete misunderstanding of the techniques of the time. The appeal of a Joan Crawford portrait done by Hurrell is the contrast - the frisson, if you will - between the razor sharp detail rendered by the lens on large film and the softened cheeks burnished by retouching. This is what sets apart the true masters from those who seek to emulate them lazily. Having said that, I wish Sawka the best of luck. . .it's a great period to explore. If anyone can give me pointers on retouching black and white negs by hand, I'll buy you a beer!!!

[Amie Lynn]

The vintage style can be replicated by medium format, but in my opinion it is just as caviar to fish sticks. Anyway, I fell in love with the large format portrait the day I looked at my grandmothers pre bridal portrait. The detail in the satin gloves, her skin how smooth, the detail of every mascara-ed eye lash, the lace, every rhinestone sparkled to the furthest degree. That day I have studied the large format artform and refuse to shoot any less than an 8x10 negative. I WANTED MY PORTRAIT DONE THAT WAY--- which is what I offer to my clients. No one else could do it, knew how to do it or knew what I was talking about (local studio owners that is). Hats off to you Sir---Keep up the GREAT work!!!!

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've never been that enthusiastic about the Hollywood style, based on what I had seen in books and such, but today I saw an original Hurell print in the window of a Madison Avenue gallery, and it was absolutely stunning. The light on the face had a shimmering quality like evening sunlight reflected from rippling water, and the separation of tones was outstanding--not really achievable in a smaller format. I doubt any form of reproduction (except an excellent copy from another large format negative) could reproduce it successfully.