Soft-Focus Lens Examples

[Tim Meisburger]

Dallmeyer 10" f/3.5 Portrait Anastigmat w/soft focus

Following up on Professional's suggestion. I've been sick and so spent a lot of time in my studio (bedroom) over the weekend, and shot some examples for this lens on 4x5 (FP4) developed in Rodinal at 100/1. Since my models are on strike, these are all self-portraits. And since my fake Packard shutter is acting up, they were all shot (except the last) with the flash technique (I set everything up, turned out the lights, pulled the darkslide, sat down and triggered the flash).

To engage soft focus with this lens you merely unscrew the front element. It has been compared to the Cooke Knuckler, and I think the look is very similar. The Cooke has five marks for levels of soft focus, while this lens has ten turns before the threads begin to appear, so I am assuming that two turns on the Dallmeyer are equivalent to one mark on the Cooke (which I think my tests suggest is more or less correct). Interestingly, you can turn the element a further ten turns before it comes out of the barrel, so it is possible to "over-clock" the soft focus feature, but I have not dome that except in the last example.

I'm really not very good with soft focus, but these tests did suggest to me a way forward, and I think I will try again with some daylight and backlighting (and more attractive model).

f/16 full sharp
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/fullsharpf-16_zps095033d6.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/fullsharpf-16_zps095033d6.jpg.html)

f/16 full soft - A f/16 the soft effect is not too noticeable, at least with no background.
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/fullsoftf-16_zps0daa15eb.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/fullsoftf-16_zps0daa15eb.jpg.html)

f/3.5 full soft - I forget to stop down after setting up this shot, so it was several stops overexposed, but it does give a sense of the extreme softness possible with this lens (especially consider there are nine more turns available!).
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/fullsoftf-35_zpsb3f6925c.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/fullsoftf-35_zpsb3f6925c.jpg.html)

[Tim Meisburger]

Here are some crops round the eyes:

f/16 full sharp
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/fullsharpf-16crop_zps190df21e.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/fullsharpf-16crop_zps190df21e.jpg.html)

f/16 full soft - Its still pretty sharp due to the small f-stop, but notice the fine wrinkles under my right eye are blurred. I need that.
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/lens%20test%20Dallmeyer%20portrait%20anastigmat/fullsoftf-16crop_zpsb3f9adaf.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/lens%20test%20Dallmeyer%20portrait%20anastigmat/fullsoftf-16crop_zpsb3f9adaf.jpg.html)

f/3.5 full soft - This is too soft for me. I think the sweet spot must be around f/5.6 or 8 (more testing needed!)
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/fullsoftf-35crop_zps7137e379.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/fullsoftf-35crop_zps7137e379.jpg.html)

[Tim Meisburger]

Here is one more, showing on one sheet of 4x5 diffusion at 0, 6 turns, 12 turns and 18 turns.
http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l496/Tim_Meisburger/img001s_zps7a6eb852.jpg (http://s1120.photobucket.com/user/Tim_Meisburger/media/img001s_zps7a6eb852.jpg.html)

[Professional]

I have a question, are you talking about a specific soft focus lens or any soft focus lens?

I wish if you can mention some lenses so i can see if i have one or go and buy one and then use it when i can and post here, I saw your examples, but i will try to shoot something nice and worthy to show here, so please if you can list those soft focus lenses rather than the one you mentioned above it may help me, as i have no idea much about those soft focus lenses and i thought it is just an effect you do with any lens.

[Tim Meisburger]

A soft focus lens is intentionally soft, and most have adjustments from sharp to soft. Many were made in the early 20th century. Just google "soft focus lens" and you will find a lot of examples.

[Steven Tribe]

Nothing wrong with model!

Nice to escape hideous tattoos and worse!

[jp]

I have a question, are you talking about a specific soft focus lens or any soft focus lens?

I wish if you can mention some lenses so i can see if i have one or go and buy one and then use it when i can and post here, I saw your examples, but i will try to shoot something nice and worthy to show here, so please if you can list those soft focus lenses rather than the one you mentioned above it may help me, as i have no idea much about those soft focus lenses and i thought it is just an effect you do with any lens.

It's a big complicated genre of LF photography.

Check out the galli style thread and the soft focus lens sales thread for more examples and information. Also Russ Young's thesis on pictorial lenses.

For the photography, check out "After the Photo Secession" and "TruthBeauty: Pictorialism and the Photograph as Art, 1845-1945"

[cowanw]

I too thought Professional's suggestion was a good one. And I like Tim's response.
Added to this is some inspiration I found in Raphael Goldchain's work "I am my Family" in which he recreates his lost family photos using himself as model. Truly one doesn't need to come from Europe in the middle of the 20th century to have very few examples of family photos from generations past.
Here then is my mother's father.
He was a life insurance salesman after his return from being gased in Belgium in The Great War. He was a great athlete before the war, playing Lacrosse on Ottawa area teams; afterwards he raised homing pigeons in the roof of his garage and often won ribbons at the Royal Winter Fair in Toronto.
Pinkham and Smith 16" at f5.6; Ilford FP4 plus113793

[Amedeus]

Very nice ... thanks for sharing ...



Pinkham and Smith 16" at f5.6; Ilford FP4 plus

113793

[Tim Meisburger]

Very nice Bill. Is this a lens that was commonly used in Hollywood? For some reason to me it evokes a distinctly Hollywood glow.

I had some fun recently doing a shoot-off between my new Chinese pictorial lens and my Universal Heliar. The Heliar won, of course (its my favorite lens), but it surprising what you can do on the outer fringes of soft-focus with a stopped down $2.00 magnifying glass.

[cowanw]

Very nice ... thanks for sharing ...

Thank you. this was my first picture post and it is nice to get a notice.

[cowanw]

Very nice Bill. Is this a lens that was commonly used in Hollywood? For some reason to me it evokes a distinctly Hollywood glow.

I had some fun recently doing a shoot-off between my new Chinese pictorial lens and my Universal Heliar. The Heliar won, of course (its my favorite lens), but it surprising what you can do on the outer fringes of soft-focus with a stopped down $2.00 magnifying glass.

I don't know about Hollywood, but I will take the compliment.
Oddly enough my Grandfather's brother had his photo done with a Universal Heliar.

[cowanw]

My Grandfather had a family of 8 siblings and not unexpectedly the men all went off to war as they came of age after 1914 (or almost of age).
One was sent to Egypt and participated (with a much more famous mate) in the Arab Uprising. He was lucky to have a portrait done with a Universal Heliar while visiting Luxor by Attaya Gaddis, who experimented with both hard and soft settings.115511115512

[djdister]

I have a Fujinon-W 180mm lens that is giving me some unexpected soft focus effects - here is a shot taken at f/8. Any ideas what happened to this lens?

115518

[Jim Noel]

If your front and rear standards were parallel and perpendicular to the earth, and extreme fall was not used, this should not happen. Check these settings.

[cowanw]

116087Great great grandfather was a twin. Both were born in Quebec. he was a fur trapper, later fur trader. Retiring with his wealth from furs he moved to New York.
Heliar 14 inch f11

His brother was a Mountie and later emigrated to Australia
116088
Heliar 14 inch f11

[Joe Smigiel]

...so please if you can list those soft focus lenses rather than the one you mentioned above it may help me, as i have no idea much about those soft focus lenses and i thought it is just an effect you do with any lens.

If you can track down a copy of Charles Abel's "Professional Portrait Lightings" from the 1940s, you will be able to compare many of the coveted soft-focus lenses. The book is a compilation of portraits made by many different photographers of the era and each photograph is accompanied by information about the equipment used including lenses. There are pictures made with Veritos, Heliars, Cookes, Vitaxes, etc. The book is a great visual reference to soft-focus and portrait lenses (and the price may reflect that fact).

[Dirk Rösler]

Bill, this is great, keep them coming...

[cowanw]

Thanks, its always encouraging to know someone is looking,

[cowanw]

I mentioned my great great grand uncle went to Australia, leaving the Mounties and joining the Western Australia Police Force. Later he started a Cattle station and his descendants are still there.
Here is his grandson116253
Veritar 14 inch at f6

[cowanw]

One of Granpa's brothers became a Anglican Minister in Montreal.
Here he is preparing for a sermon taken with a 12 inch Dallmeyer Adon telephoto not really a soft focus lens at a calculated f stop of 3.1
116567
but when the barrel is shortened to become a 15 inch lens of f4.5 the lens renders this image.
116568

[jesse]

Dallmeyer Serrac 24cm f4.5
A little bit scratches on lens surface, finally got a soft effect.
116620

[Scott Davis]

https://dcphotoartist.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/wanchukbw1.jpg

Hermagis Eidoscope #5 (14"-ish) f5. Ilford FP4+, shot at f5, using a Galli shutter. Roughly 1/30th sec.

[cowanw]

117449Granpa's brother, Arthur was a pilot in WW1 and also served in Palestine as a reconnaissance pilot with the Camel corps. his son also was a pilot in the Middle East later in WW2 in Egypt.
This is the son, my mother's cousin also called Arthur. He always wore a life vest as he couldn't swim and was afraid of ditching over water; despite flying in Egypt. I suppose the Mediterranean was a possibility
Heliar 14 inch at f5.6

[Tin Can]

Plastica is simply not as good as Tim for a model, but here are my poor experiments with a Cooke Portrait Series II 10-1/2" shot on 5x7 at f4.5

This is a knuckler, which has markings for sharp, and detents for SF 1, 2, 3. Obviously this is a set of all 4 settings.

118104118105118106118107

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Randy, I like #3 the best!

[Tin Can]

LOL! Really? I gotta do some more testing! I have some pressure on me as I am invited to shoot film at a digital shoot with the goal of recreating some 30's Hollywood glamour portraits.

We will have 4 lovely pro models, hair and makeup specialists and plan to shoot the same studio setups 3 times. First with DSLR, then Mamiya RB 150mm SF lens and finally with this lens on 5x7. The pro DSLR shooter will do lighting and set up and we will all shoot ISO 100, well FP4+ sheets and Acros 100 roll film. No X-Ray I am afraid.

It will be a madhouse shoot for this old man, trying to keep with the kids. We will also shoot Fujiroids with the RB. I have only done glamour a couple times 12 years ago...

I plan to eat Wheaties for breakfast. and it just occurs to me, I will be the only male.


Randy, I like #3 the best!

[Tim Meisburger]

Sounds like a tough assignment:rolleyes:

[Emil Schildt]

Plastica is simply not as good as Tim for a model, but here are my poor experiments with a Cooke Portrait Series II 10-1/2" shot on 5x7 at f4.5

This is a knuckler, which has markings for sharp, and detents for SF 1, 2, 3. Obviously this is a set of all 4 settings.

118104118105118106118107

Randy: a question:

When you turn for more soft, do you then re focus?

To me these soft ones doesn't look soft, but more unsharp.. and if you don't refocus that will happen..

[richardman]

Randy, I like #2 Best!

For your considerations, I have two samples:

A 7 inch TT&H Cooke:
http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20140701-Scanned-383-Edit.jpg

And a "Galli Special" single element ~150mm:
http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20140701-Scanned-381-Edit.jpg

I am hoping to get the 10.5" TT&H Cooke soon as well.

[Mark Sawyer]

Randy: a question:

When you turn for more soft, do you then re focus?

To me these soft ones doesn't look soft, but more unsharp.. and if you don't refocus that will happen..

My thoughts exactly! Every lens I've ever tried that had adjustable softness (Cookes, Velostigmats, Paragons, Vitaxes, Ilex Portrait Lenses...) needed refocusing after the sharp/soft setting was changed.

[Tin Can]

For these images, I did not refocus as when I tried that with observation on GG it just sharpened up. I think the old brochure says focus it in the sharp setting and then shift the lens to SF. I will try a #3 max SF position with refocus, but I doubt that's what I want.


Randy: a question:

When you turn for more soft, do you then re focus?

To me these soft ones doesn't look soft, but more unsharp.. and if you don't refocus that will happen..

[tgtaylor]

Wollensak says to focus the Veritar SFL on the nearest point of the subject at f8 and then stopping down to the taking aperture (everything behind the focus point is in focus and everything before that point is not). This is similar to Pentax's instructions for its 67 120mm SFL.

Thomas

[Mark Sawyer]

For these images, I did not refocus as when I tried that with observation on GG it just sharpened up. I think the old brochure says focus it in the sharp setting and then shift the lens to SF. I will try a #3 max SF position with refocus, but I doubt that's what I want.

Many lenses with the adjustable soft/sharp option have limited travel of that setting, so the softness is subtle, just enough to soften skin texture and blemishes a little. That's why some are "uncorked", ie, the setting restrictor removed. The softness of the Cooke's is understated, but effective for its purposes.


Wollensak says to focus the Veritar SFL on the nearest point of the subject at f8 and then stopping down to the taking aperture (everything behind the focus point is in focus and everything before that point is not). This is similar to Pentax's instructions for its 67 120mm SFL.

Thomas

Those lenses don't have a soft focus adjustment. All lenses that I've run across that have the soft/sharp adjustment change focal length slightly when that setting is changed, so they need to be re-focused.

[Tin Can]

Scroll down to Diffusion control and read how Cooke advertisements say to use these lenses.

inho

Here (http://www.antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html)

[Tin Can]

We need Jim Galli and Mr Gunks opinion. I have only shot meniscus portrait lenses before and I have the devil of the time focusing them. I was going to give up on SF until I read the Cooke advertisement on Diffusion Control (http://www.antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html).

I hope I do not need to refocus after setting the SF position.

Shooting more tests today, while ignoring the Futbol game which is huge in my neighborhood.

[Emil Schildt]

We need Jim Galli and Mr Gunks opinion. I have only shot meniscus portrait lenses before and I have the devil of the time focusing them. I was going to give up on SF until I read the Cooke advertisement on Diffusion Control (http://www.antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html).

I hope I do not need to refocus after setting the SF position.

Shooting more tests today, while ignoring the Futbol game which is huge in my neighborhood.

Ill bet you have to...

The change of softness is more subtle on the matt screen than in the final image...

(Football is almost over... voting for one of them.. :) )

[Tim Meisburger]

Hi Randy. You have to refocus the Cooke because adjusting softness changes focal length.

Best, Tim

[Louis Pacilla]

Many lenses with the adjustable soft/sharp option have limited travel of that setting, so the softness is subtle, just enough to soften skin texture and blemishes a little. That's why some are "uncorked", ie, the setting restrictor removed. The softness of the Cooke's is understated, but effective for its purposes.



Those lenses don't have a soft focus adjustment. All lenses that I've run across that have the soft/sharp adjustment change focal length slightly when that setting is changed, so they need to be re-focused.


Scroll down to Diffusion control and read how Cooke advertisements say to use these lenses.

inho

Here (http://www.antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html)


We need Jim Galli and Mr Gunks opinion. I have only shot meniscus portrait lenses before and I have the devil of the time focusing them. I was going to give up on SF until I read the Cooke advertisement on Diffusion Control (http://www.antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses2.html).

I hope I do not need to refocus after setting the SF position.

Shooting more tests today, while ignoring the Futbol game which is huge in my neighborhood.

Mark is 100% correct. You set to softness you wish and then focus and use your back movements so the plane of focus is in the right place then sqweeze the bulb.

The Cooke Portrait lens is much like Vitax & Dallmeyer and Velostigmat II (with out uncorking) only or mostly makes center portion of the image circle "less" sharp and that blends the super sharp center with the far less sharp outer parts of the image. doing away with some of the retouching. It does NOT produce diffusion and the atmosphere(not much anyhow) that lenses like the Struss,P&S I II II IV V,Verito, Gundlach Achromatic Portrait & Hyperion, Kodak Portrait, Imagon, Plastigmat Portrait, Kalostat, Bodine and so on which are Pictorial photographers tools of choice. They are different animals. Both types are/can be superb portrait lenses they just have different looks.

Set the amount of softness "less central sharpness" then focus and use your movements on the camera to place the plane of focus in the best position stop down a touch if needed & then sqweeze the bulb.

[Mark Sawyer]

Note that the 1911 Cooke advertisement (reproduced on Dan's site and linked to earlier here), states, "It is necessary merely to set the diffusion control at 'Sharp," focus in the ordinary way, and before exposing the plate, rotate the front portion of the lens-mount until the desired softness and roundness appear on the ground glass."

However, in the 1930's catalog on the Camera Eccentric site, under the Portric's description (page 12), Cooke states, "The portrait should always be re-focused after diffusion to insure obtaining the exact effect desired."

With manufacturers disagreeing with themselves over proper usage, I can see how confusion reigns. Wollensak published similar conflicting information on focusing with their Velostigmat. So, really, there's only one source you can trust:


Mark is 100% correct...

:rolleyes: ;) :p

[Tin Can]

Thanks Mark, I was just going to post the same thing AFTER I read both conflicting brochures 4 times. It may be the lenses are different from 1911 and earlier or by 1930 they changed their minds.

I'm a concrete thinker, head like a brick, and am a huge proponent of trying to read and understand our great grandfathers. That's how I learned engine testing, primarily from 1920's books. I actually read manuals for enjoyment...

I am drying 4 more test films where I try variations. I let negs dry overnight and I will post these new results Monday.

In addition it has now occurred to me, I need to shoot film 2 stops faster than my DSLR buddy to use the same aperture and lighting. Bellows and filter factor. duh! Good thing I have plenty of HP5.




Note that the 1911 Cooke advertisement (reproduced on Dan's site and linked to earlier here), states, "It is necessary merely to set the diffusion control at 'Sharp," focus in the ordinary way, and before exposing the plate, rotate the front portion of the lens-mount until the desired softness and roundness appear on the ground glass."

However, in the 1930's catalog on the Camera Eccentric site, under the Portric's description (page 12), Cooke states, "The portrait should always be re-focused after diffusion to insure obtaining the exact effect desired."

With manufacturers disagreeing with themselves over proper usage, I can see how confusion reigns. Wollensak published similar conflicting information on focusing with their Velostigmat. So, really, there's only one source you can trust:



:rolleyes: ;) :p

[goamules]

Fortunately with these lenses, and a few others, what you see is what you get. I play with the focus and the soft adjustment or iris of this type, until the ground glass looks like I want. Other lenses, such as Pinkhams and Struss, are more difficult to know what you'll get until you develop the film. For those, you better have a good plan, and take notes.

[Tin Can]

That is what I am observing, what I see is what I get.

They sure are well made.


Fortunately with these lenses, and a few others, what you see is what you get. I play with the focus and the soft adjustment or iris of this type, until the ground glass looks like I want. Other lenses, such as Pinkhams and Struss, are more difficult to know what you'll get until you develop the film. For those, you better have a good plan, and take notes.

[tgtaylor]

Now that I think about it, there's two ways to focus the Pentax 67 SF 120: The easiest way is to focus at f8 or f11 and then stop down to the desired softness since the focus obtained at that aperture closely approximated the offset. The second, and most accurate, is to focus at the taking aperture. I never could do the latter. Could it be that you should focus on the subjects nearest point as stated by Wollensak? Wollensak goes on to state that if you focused at f6 (the aperture where the Veritar turns soft, you should focus on a plane in front of that point.

Thomas

[Mark Sawyer]

Fortunately with these lenses, and a few others, what you see is what you get...


That is what I am observing, what I see is what I get...

We rely so much on the old literature, we forget they were using different materials. The old ortho films made things a bit less predictable, as you'd see in one set of wavelengths and photograph in another. Predicting the aberrations of a soft lens compounded the problem. But modern films have been matched to the visible spectrum for a long time. There are still some changes (like seeing in color but recording in monochrome), but it gets fairly predictable pretty fast.

And then there's wet plate...

[Emil Schildt]

That is what I am observing, what I see is what I get.

They sure are well made.

And I respectfully disagree... What you see it not what you get.. as you said earlier you thought they looked "too" sharp when re focusing, but in my experience the end result will be more soft than the matt screen can show you..

I don't know about Struss and P&S - never tried them...

[goamules]

Gandolfi,
I'm sure that affect happens, it's hard to really judge softness on a ground glass anyway. And I trust your experience and great shooting of these lenses.

Most post 1920 soft lenses were achromats. Plastigmats for example advertised that what you saw as you focused would be exactly what the film would record. This was "new" and different from earlier lenses, like semi achromat meniscus' which operated on chromatic aberration. Also, like Mark says, the films of the day were mostly working on just part of the spectrum. So you really had to think about how you were focusing. By 1925, most soft focus lenses were operating by spherical aberration, not chromatic, and the films were panachromatic. So you could focus a Verito, and capture what you were seeing. I believe the Cooke triplets would be this way too. And their softness is pretty weak anyway.

Other lenses remained semi-achromat up until the 1950s, like the Kodak 305 and 405 portrait. If you read Kodak's focusing instruction for those, it's pretty complicated. I suspect because it still was working somewhat on chromatic aberration.

On a different comment, someone above said Cookes were "sharp in the middle, and more soft towards the edges..." or such. I don't believe that's true, they are diffuse all across the frame, like a Portrait Unar, Heliar, or Diffused Velostigmat. But I don't shoot Cookes much. Mark?

[Mark Sawyer]

On a different comment, someone above said Cookes were "sharp in the middle, and more soft towards the edges..." or such. I don't believe that's true, they are diffuse all across the frame, like a Portrait Unar, Heliar, or Diffused Velostigmat. But I don't shoot Cookes much. Mark?

I just looked at some old portraits made with my Cookes to be sure. The Cookes do stay sharp into the corners, even in the soft setting wide open, but they do have a softened appearance to textures. One thing that may cause people to think they're soft is that wide open (where you'd have to use a Cooke to get any appreciable softness), the corners are usually out of focus anyways.

One thing that may be happening is that the focal plane is curving more when the spacing changes to the soft configuration, but depending on the three-dimensional subject, that could make the corners more or less out-of-focus. The soft adjustment on Petzval soft-focus lenses does this, but I'm not sure about other configurations...

[Tin Can]

Set B, file labeled with settings. All F4.5 Cooke Series II 10-1/2" light yellow filter. Ilford FP4+ cropped to 4x5.

When focused, attempted to use left eye model light highlight.

118212118213118214118215

[Tin Can]

Image 3 and 4 are both SF setting #2. To me the diffusion or softness looks similar. #3 image is refocused and #4 image is shifted with the knuckler to SF 2 position and not refocused.

Perhaps some are looking for something else, however I am looking for this lens to shoot sharp for men and then easily shift to a slightly diffused look for young women.

[Tim Meisburger]

Hi Randy. The second one is simply out of focus. The softness on the Cooke is not strong, and hard to see on a model with perfect (plastic) skin! Try shooting two images of a wrinkly person--one full sharp and one full soft--both sharply focused, and you will see the softness in the second image. But its subtle. This is a portrait lens, not pictorial, so what it is going to give you is really nice portraits that don't look soft. I guess this is the effect sought after with photoshop (improvement that is not obvious).

Good luck!

[Louis Pacilla]

The Cooke Portrait lens is much like Vitax & Dallmeyer and Velostigmat II (without uncorking) only or mostly makes center portion of the image circle "less" sharp and that blends the super sharp center with the far less sharp outer parts of the image. doing away with some of the retouching. It does NOT produce diffusion and the atmosphere(not much anyhow) that lenses like the Struss,P&S I II II IV V,Verito, Gundlach Achromatic Portrait & Hyperion, Kodak Portrait, Imagon, Plastigmat Portrait, Kalostat, Bodine and so on which are Pictorial photographers tools of choice. They are different animals. Both types are/can be superb portrait lenses they just have different looks.

Set the amount of softness "less central sharpness" then focus and use your movements on the camera to place the plane of focus in the best position stop down a touch if needed & then sqweeze the bulb.


Hi Randy. The second one is simply out of focus. The softness on the Cooke is not strong, and hard to see on a model with perfect (plastic) skin! Try shooting two images of a wrinkly person--one full sharp and one full soft--both sharply focused, and you will see the softness in the second image. But its subtle. This is a portrait lens, not pictorial, so what it is going to give you is really nice portraits that don't look soft. I guess this is the effect sought after with photoshop (improvement that is not obvious).

Good luck!

[Emil Schildt]

Hi Randy. The second one is simply out of focus. The softness on the Cooke is not strong, and hard to see on a model with perfect (plastic) skin! Try shooting two images of a wrinkly person--one full sharp and one full soft--both sharply focused, and you will see the softness in the second image. But its subtle. This is a portrait lens, not pictorial, so what it is going to give you is really nice portraits that don't look soft. I guess this is the effect sought after with photoshop (improvement that is not obvious).

Good luck!

I agree with the first - not really on the second...

these images are all Cooke with soft setting - refocused an' all....

[Tin Can]

Thanks Tim,

Shooting a 45 year old man in an hour as suggested. First full sharp and then SF 3 refocused.


Hi Randy. The second one is simply out of focus. The softness on the Cooke is not strong, and hard to see on a model with perfect (plastic) skin! Try shooting two images of a wrinkly person--one full sharp and one full soft--both sharply focused, and you will see the softness in the second image. But its subtle. This is a portrait lens, not pictorial, so what it is going to give you is really nice portraits that don't look soft. I guess this is the effect sought after with photoshop (improvement that is not obvious).

Good luck!

[cowanw]

118361This is the elder Authur serving with the Palestine Brigade RAF, which achieved air superiority over the Turko-German Air Force, aiding Allenby's deception plans at the Battle of Megiddo (1918)

Pinkham and Smith 12 inch at f6

[Colin D]

I agree with the first - not really on the second...

these images are all Cooke with soft setting - refocused an' all....

Very nice execution.

[alanbutler57]

As per Monty Python, "and now, for something completely different."

Mamiya Sekor 150SF (RB67 lens) with f5.6 disc on Linhof 4x5, HP5+, D11, "AdMagic" Fresnel fixture over strobe:



https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7414/8731078057_e568597d8f_b.jpg

[Tin Can]

Gandolfi,

Nice images with refocusing. My last test of my Cooke SF position 2, both focused and not refocused was inconclusive to me. Too close to tell. I also shot the craggy guy with RB SF 150mm Fujiroid and he loved that image.

Thanks for your visual input!



I agree with the first - not really on the second...

these images are all Cooke with soft setting - refocused an' all....

[Tin Can]

Looking good. I need to make a LF RB lens mount out of a parts RB. I bought one for parts, but the darn thing works!


As per Monty Python, "and now, for something completely different."

Mamiya Sekor 150SF (RB67 lens) with f5.6 disc on Linhof 4x5, HP5+, D11, "AdMagic" Fresnel fixture over strobe:



https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7414/8731078057_e568597d8f_b.jpg

[Emil Schildt]

Gandolfi,

Nice images with refocusing. My last test of my Cooke SF position 2, both focused and not refocused was inconclusive to me. Too close to tell. I also shot the craggy guy with RB SF 150mm Fujiroid and he loved that image.

Thanks for your visual input!

Randy: try to set a little back lightning - that usually give more "clear" result...

[Tin Can]

Thanks I will, I was down to one light.

Shooting my 14-1/2" Cooke Series II in a few minutes. I won't bore people with more Plastica images, but she never blinks.

Today I will end up all white backdrop. It's not adjustable and I cannot move it very much at all. More adjustable lights soon!

But first my models want a printing session with their 6x9 images.


Randy: try to set a little back lightning - that usually give more "clear" result...

[cowanw]

My mother's brother was too young for the Second World War, but joined in time for Korea.
Here he is as seen through a 15 Inch Gundlach Portrait No.5 Series A at F5.6
119228

[Tin Can]

Cooke Series II 10-1/2" WO SF setting 3 refocused light yellow filter. 4x5 HP5 Rodinal 1/50 12 minutes tray shuffle.

119229

[jcoldslabs]

Cooke Series II 10-1/2" WO SF setting 3 refocused light yellow filter. 4x5 HP5 Rodinal 1/50 12 minutes tray shuffle.

Nice one, Randy!

Jonathan

[jp]

Excellent mix of shapes and tones Randy, and the glow in the eye makes it even nicer.

Bill, the lighting is real nice on the guy's face. I'm not in love with how the out of focus foreground rendered in that for some reason.

[Tin Can]

Thanks guys, I am happy with this image as is.

[Tim Meisburger]

Hi Randy. That is the characteristic soft focus of the Cooke, and it is really, really lovely!

[Tin Can]

Thanks Tim, I just don't know as I am new to SF, I have shot RB 150SF medium format and Kodak Portrait 305, but I have trouble focusing those. I consider this my first successful SF image, but I think most people here prefer Petzval...

Each to their own and I always ride into the wind.

[jp]

Randy, if you don't mind some more commentary on it... What makes it successful rather than eye candy is an aspect of what is needed to make any soft or sharp photo successful; the composition and selection of tones is really pleasing. Multi-tone notan Arthur Wesley Dow would have said while teaching the famous photographers of a hundred years ago. When we use sharp lenses we as photographers or views get distracted away from this and hone in on details, etc... rather than the basics like this.

On the kodak 305, focus on the nose tip rather than eye. The focusing is tricky.

[Tim Meisburger]

Well, I've never heard of it, but there should be some descriptors for different types of soft focus. I would call this portrait Sf as opposed to pictorialist, which is almost misty, with heavy diffusion. Like shooting in fog. When I first got my cooke and heliar I was confused because I expected a lot more diffusion, but you will quickly come to love the roundness and tones of this lens for portraits. For the pictorialist stuff try a wolloston meniscus, (or tape a magnifying glass on to a shutter).

[Tin Can]

Thanks for the comments and a codification of terminology may be due, considering the reemergence of SF. I certainly do not know enough to even begin to notate idiosyncrasies.

My image needs a good cropping, but I was happy to show it as shot.

[jp]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/048646007X/ref=wms_ohs_product?ie=UTF8&psc=1

is the book covering those composition terms I'd consider relevant to photographers and artists at the start of the 20th century. He taught with Clarence H White and was well known among the east coast crowd, but was Japanese inspired which would also be popular elsewhere. I'm not trying to go over the deep end with nerdy books; already have with glass some would say... I just want to learn the concepts and have the same educational background pictorialists had 100 years ago when they employed soft focus lenses.

[Tim Meisburger]

That book is also available for free from Gutenberg (although electronic and not such a nice edition). Just Google the author.

[drew.saunders]

I just picked up a complete Imagon 250 from 1972 based on the s/n. And by complete, I mean it: Lens, lensboard, all 3 "strainers," ND filter, hood, box, little plastic bag that the shutter came in, original instruction booklet for the lens, and original instruction booklet for the Copal shutter! I didn't know they supplied booklets with shutters! Anyway, I tested it at the Arizona Cactus Garden on the Stanford University campus on Sunday, shooting 3 scenes, each with the same diffusion disk, but one at each of the two settings.

First, with the 7.7/9.5 disk at 7.7 (with the 4x ND filter, shutter at 1/125 which I measured to be 1/100):
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3915/14645811549_8e9ae718f8_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ojcBwe)08-03-14-1 (https://flic.kr/p/ojcBwe) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr
and at 9.5 (also with the 4x ND, and set the shutter to 1/60, which I measured to be be 1/45):
https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2919/14645929977_b690684199_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ojddJ6)08-03-14-2 (https://flic.kr/p/ojddJ6) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr

[drew.saunders]

These two are the same setup, 7.7-9.5 disk, first at 7.7 and 1/100 and the next at 9.5 and 1/45, again with the ND filter. I also was able to catch a little bee in the flower each time, but I seem to have gotten some or my or the dark slide's shadow in the lower right corner on the 2nd shot:

7.7:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5570/14809472796_24a1f7299b_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oyEqiS)08-03-14-3 (https://flic.kr/p/oyEqiS) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr

and at H. 9.5:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5582/14645748730_d1ba0a2d14_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ojchR9)08-03-14-4 (https://flic.kr/p/ojchR9) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr

And, finally, I tried the 9.5-11.5 disk to see if I liked it. I think I'll mostly use the 7.7-9.5 disk. For these, I use 1/60 (really 1/45) and 1/30 (1/3 stop slow, not that big of a deal):

H. 9.5:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3917/14645748700_c707009e29_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/ojchQC)08-03-14-5 (https://flic.kr/p/ojchQC) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr

H. 11.5:
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5565/14852326873_88a0579c0d_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/oCs4kg)08-03-14-6 (https://flic.kr/p/oCs4kg) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/people//), on Flickr

[Bill Christian]

119551

It is hard to focus up close when people can't stay still. This is my second time to use the lens. It doesn't feel all the soft.

Cropped from original image to remove white space on top.
Toned and sharped in Alien Skin Exposure 6.
Photo Taken: August 4, 2014 Santa Clara, CA, USA
Camera: LargeSense LS911 Pre Production Camera
f/5.6 1/125 sec
Fujinon SF lens 1:5.6 / 250 mm
Lighting: Two Fresnel Tungsten lights feathered
Copyright LargeSense LLC All rights reserved

119550

[goamules]

Drew, nice cacti shots. I keep shooting those, but haven't tried soft focus on them.

[cowanw]

119579While serving in Korea, my mother's brother spent time in Japan on leave. There he was introduced to the Nicca 35mm with Nikkor 50mm. Here he is taken with a Imagon 16.5 inch f5.6

[AtlantaTerry]

Wollensak says to focus the Veritar SFL on the nearest point of the subject at f8 and then stopping down to the taking aperture (everything behind the focus point is in focus and everything before that point is not). This is similar to Pentax's instructions for its 67 120mm SFL.
Thomas

Did someone rewrite the laws of physics? :confused:

[jcoldslabs]

This thread has a good discussion of the challenge of focusing SF lenses:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?69809-Focusing-Soft-Focus-Lenses

Jonathan

[Tin Can]

Very informative thread.

I got a lot out of that.

Thanks!



This thread has a good discussion of the challenge of focusing SF lenses:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?69809-Focusing-Soft-Focus-Lenses

Jonathan

[cowanw]

Did someone rewrite the laws of physics? :confused:

No, but the nature of the distortion caused by the aberrations of the lens are seen differently in front of and behind the focus point. Usually one is more pleasant then the other.
Of course those who eschew rules will now be "edgy" and do the opposite

[AtlantaTerry]

No, but the nature of the distortion caused by the aberrations of the lens are seen differently in front of and behind the focus point. Usually one is more pleasant then the other.
Of course those who eschew rules will now be "edgy" and do the opposite

My point was that he wrote, "everything behind the focus point is in focus". That is impossible. Everything can not be in focus, there is only one point of focus.

[Colin D]

Cooke Series II 10-1/2" WO SF setting 3 refocused light yellow filter. 4x5 HP5 Rodinal 1/50 12 minutes tray shuffle.

119229

The softness is beautifully subtle in this, which I read is a unique trait of the Cooke Portrait lens.

[jp]

there is only one point of focus.

Not in soft focus. It's a layering of focus. If it helps, think of the outer half of the glass (which is used when things are wide open) has a different plane of focus than the center half of the lens (which would be what you have slightly stopped down). Wide open you get a blend of planes of focus between the two different planes, and this blend need not be linear or have any symmetry! thus depending on the aperture, an object can be in focus and out of focus at the same time, while another object a different distance away can be both out of focus and slightly in focus as well.

[goamules]

119579While serving in Korea, my mother's brother spent time in Japan on leave. There he was introduced to the Nicca 35mm with Nikkor 50mm. Here he is taken with a Imagon 16.5 inch f5.6

Nice shot, great story. Tell him I was too young for that conflict, but I learned much later to love the Nicca too, and shoot a Nikkor 50/1.4 on it! About the best set up ever made, in my opinion, much better than the Leicas.

[alanbutler57]

An experiment yesterday, model kept fidgeting, but none of the Model Mayhem ladies responded on short notice. Single 10" Fresnel light (strobe on all but the Ektar 127 that was model light only). Focus point on all is pommel of sword, developed in Microphen stock 5 1/2 min., HP5+ "rated" at 200.

Lenses: Gundlach Series A Petzval (7" I think) wide open ~ f4-4.5, Reinhold Schable's 190 Menisucus f4, Mamiya Sekor 150SF f5.6 no disk, Ektar 127 f4.7 w. front element unscrewed 5 turns (no sync cord so this one was a 1sec exposure with the modeling light.

Nothing spectacular, but each is a little different. My least favorite is the Mamiya. I couldn't see any difference on the glass when unscrewing the front element on the Ektar Tessar.

[alanbutler57]

LOL, thanks to digital I just found another option! Here is the Petzval image with the Mensicus image overlayed at 50% fill:

[cowanw]

Great great grandfather became quite wealthy in the fur trade and like many moved to New York to retire. There his son lived a rather spoiled life as a new York dandy and went through the family fortune in his lifetime.
120447
Vinco 12 inch F8
not marketed as a soft focus lens, and so not really in the vein of the thread; but, not really sharp like modern lenses and many of these older lenses have newly appreciated faults..

[Tin Can]

I recently bought and read a very complete 1938 Elwood enlarger manual. In the the back they propose shooting with sharp lenses and enlarging with soft lens as a better method. I was unfamiliar with this concept.

What say you?

[jp]

I don't have experience with SF on the enlarger, but prefer a white glow (diffused at shooting time) over a dark glow around my subjects when I overdo the diffusion as is normal for me. Could be done tastefully with some subjects though.

[Tin Can]

I thought it odd, and they showed examples, which were so poorly reproduced that nothing was 'clear'.

They only sold sharp lenses, so they had no financial motive to promote SF enlarging. I may try it.

[Mark Sawyer]

I don't have experience with SF on the enlarger, but prefer a white glow (diffused at shooting time) over a dark glow around my subjects when I overdo the diffusion as is normal for me. Could be done tastefully with some subjects though.

That pretty much nailed it. "Soft focus" (and other sorts of diffusion) spread the highlights. In negative form, (where you're working at the enlarging lens stage), the highlights are the shadows. A soft lens on the camera creates a glow; on the enlarger, it creates a gloom. Either can be perfect...

[cowanw]

Since great grandfather wasted the family fortune, his children had to work. I mentioned My grandfather was an insurance salesman; one of his brothers moved to Montreal to work as an accountant for an ethnic importing company. He kept 2 sets of books. A plain old fashioned type he always wore Banker's grey suits and was nicked named Mr. Grey
120645
12 inch Voltas at f8

[jp]

Puppy and girls at the beach. 7.25" verito wide open. fp4+, speed graphic. handheld as I didn't want my tiltall in salty mud/clay.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3887/15104612655_0e658f9781_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p1K678)
img380 (https://flic.kr/p/p1K678) by philbrookjason (https://www.flickr.com/people/13759696@N02/), on Flickr

[cowanw]

Mr. Grey was quite a bit more sinister looking in his earlier years.
121659
Pinkham and Smith 14 inch f8

[leighmarrin]

Private railroad crossing in Goleta, California, as seen through a twice-backwards petzval. I used a 5" magic lantern lens with the rear element turned backwards AND the lens itself mounted backwards. 4x5 Pacemaker on expired TMAX-100.

http://i.imgur.com/kwLrvsV.jpg

[jcoldslabs]

Leigh--good to see you posting again.

J.

[leighmarrin]

Leigh--good to see you posting again.

J.

Thanks, Jonathan. Your recent work has been great--especially liked the close-up with the glass. I first thought that line at the bottom was a negative flaw, but then realized it was a narrow band of in-focus table-top. A fascinating photo.

[cowanw]

My mother's mother's family was from Bournemouth, England. This cousin, several times removed, was a fishing boat skipper who went back and forth to Dunkirk, during the end of May and beginning of June, 1940
122408
Kodak Portrait lens 16 inch f5.6

[SergeiR]

8x10, 360mm Imagon with 5.6 disk and green filter

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2943/15385083172_e015701aae_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/prwzdG)Scan-140928-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/prwzdG) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

A drunken Rose'.

I still have not mounted my 360 Imagon.

You have inspired me again!


8x10, 360mm Imagon with 5.6 disk and green filter

https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2943/15385083172_e015701aae_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/prwzdG)Scan-140928-0003www (https://flic.kr/p/prwzdG) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[SergeiR]

A drunken Rose'.

I still have not mounted my 360 Imagon.

You have inspired me again!

:) Glad to be of assistance, Randy :) Do share your results :)

[SergeiR]

8x10 xray, Imagon 360mm @5.6, no green filter

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3879/15387375555_5cb014a8d5_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/prJjEx)Scan-140928-0012www (https://flic.kr/p/prJjEx) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[cowanw]

Two of my grandfather's brothers went to Alberta after the Great War. This is Ray Asa on the Cattle ranch in his late 30's

This is from a Graf Variable 14-16 inch at the sharpest setting.
127623

And this is on the softest setting; both about f5.6
127626

[Jim Galli]

Two of my grandfather's brothers went to Alberta after the Great War. This is Ray Asa on the Cattle ranch in his late 30's

This is from a Graf Variable 14-16 inch at the sharpest setting.
127623

And this is on the softest setting; both about f5.6
127626

When were these done? Beautiful.

[cowanw]

Very kind of you. Not a few of the lenses in the series are from you.
These and the next two to come were done beginning of December.
If you went to the beginning, You will see I am recreating my mom's family, with some poetic license. If I find a suitable wig, I may shave and try a female role.
and I have a way to go.
My great grandparents Isaac Henry RICE and wife Irene SURTEES migrated from Ontario to First Nation Mills and Cheneville Quebec.
They had 10 children:
Karl Isaac (1888-1942)
Walter James (1889-1973)
Arthur George (1891 - 1918)
Irena May (1892 - 1988)
Hazel Cynthia (1895 - 1998)
Gordon Thomas (1897 - 1977)
Ray Asa (1899 - 1978)
Muriel Jessie (1902 - 1976)
Marion Emma (1905 - 1997)
Kenneth William (1908 - 1978)
Kindest Regards

[Tin Can]

Very kind of you. Not a few of the lenses in the series are from you.
These and the next two to come were done beginning of December.
If you went to the beginning, You will see I am recreating my mom's family, with some poetic license. If I find a suitable wig, I may shave and try a female role.
and I have a way to go.
My great grandparents Isaac Henry RICE and wife Irene SURTEES migrated from Ontario to First Nation Mills and Cheneville Quebec.
They had 10 children:
Karl Isaac (1888-1942)
Walter James (1889-1973)
Arthur George (1891 - 1918)
Irena May (1892 - 1988)
Hazel Cynthia (1895 - 1998)
Gordon Thomas (1897 - 1977)
Ray Asa (1899 - 1978)
Muriel Jessie (1902 - 1976)
Marion Emma (1905 - 1997)
Kenneth William (1908 - 1978)
Kindest Regards

John Malkovich is in a new images series of him as woman, man child. Very interesting historical recreations. Not LF, but it is a link.

Here. (https://www.google.com/search?q=john+malkovich&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS549US549&espv=2&biw=2133&bih=1052&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=hG-sVLaaEIufyQTPj4DACA&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=0.9#safe=off&tbm=isch&q=john+malkovich+posing+as+2+women&imgdii=_&imgrc=jOXRXtV4WkbThM%253A%3BwAmYlVa7uE63aM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fstatic.boredpanda.com%252Fblog%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2014%252F09%252Fjohn-malkovich-iconic-portraits-recreations-sandro-miller-1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.boredpanda.com%252Fportrait-remakes-malkovich-homage-to-photographic-masters-sandro-miller%252F%3B880%3B570)

[cowanw]

Raphael Goldchain's Family are LF
Not sure where in the world this will work but it is an interesting video on TVO
http://tvo.org/video/189643/beautifully-broken-life-and-work-rafael-goldchain

[Jim Galli]

119551

It is hard to focus up close when people can't stay still. This is my second time to use the lens. It doesn't feel all the soft.

Cropped from original image to remove white space on top.
Toned and sharped in Alien Skin Exposure 6.
Photo Taken: August 4, 2014 Santa Clara, CA, USA
Camera: LargeSense LS911 Pre Production Camera
f/5.6 1/125 sec
Fujinon SF lens 1:5.6 / 250 mm
Lighting: Two Fresnel Tungsten lights feathered
Copyright LargeSense LLC All rights reserved

119550

Just going through this thread again. Bill, I think this shot is wonderful. Perfect amount of definition and softness here.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Two of my grandfather's brothers went to Alberta after the Great War. This is Ray Asa on the Cattle ranch in his late 30's

This is from a Graf Variable 14-16 inch at the sharpest setting.
127623

And this is on the softest setting; both about f5.6
127626

Gotta love the Graff. Beautiful! I have the 16-18" and I will be buried with it!

[cowanw]

Gotta love the Graff. Beautiful! I have the 16-18" and I will be buried with it!
Shhh! don't tell; they are underrated and underpriced. Heavy though.:)

[Tin Can]

Raphael Goldchain's Family are LF
Not sure where in the world this will work but it is an interesting video on TVO
http://tvo.org/video/189643/beautifully-broken-life-and-work-rafael-goldchain

I meant my link is to 'who knows what size format'.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Shhh! don't tell; they are underrated and underpriced. Heavy though.:)

:);)

[Dan Dozer]

Gotta love the Graff. Beautiful! I have the 16-18" and I will be buried with it!



Jim - how will there be any room left for you in the coffin with all of your "I'll be buried with it" lenses in there?

[Jim Galli]

Jim - how will there be any room left for you in the coffin with all of your "I'll be buried with it" lenses in there?

Lenses, heck that's easy. Try it with 2 Model A's and a '38 Coupe. other jim.

[Scott Davis]

https://dcphotoartist.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/scotthermagis2.jpg

Hermagis Eidoscope 11-inch f5, 1/15th-ish (Jim Galli Shutter) @ f5, Ilford FP4+ in Pyrocat HD, 1:1:100. This is just a neg scan and is not from a final print. I'll be printing tomorrow.

[cowanw]

Nicely done.

[8x10 user]

Gundlach Achromatic Portrait lens at F/8 on 5x7 Fp4

127997

It seems that much of the softness in this aperture is due to lateral chromatic aberration. I like the way the effect works on this image. The inside where the couple face each other is sharp and the outside has a glow.

And a crop to show a little more detail...
127998

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Jim - how will there be any room left for you in the coffin with all of your "I'll be buried with it" lenses in there?

Dan, I'll use the Porsche twin turbo as a coffin, put the cameras I built in there ( I'll have to take them apart to fit) and then all of my to die with lenses in somewhere......... oh, I think I"ll have to use a second car as well! Not enough room! :-)

[SergeiR]

8x10, 360mm Imagon with green filter on and 7.7 center hole disk (not one that is with radial open ones, if i remember right). Some extra downward tilting

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8676/15476408874_02fd68ca79_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pzADaL)Touch (https://flic.kr/p/pzADaL) by Sergei Rodionov (https://www.flickr.com/people/24930737@N05/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

Yes!

I also like the compact mirror one, a very steady pose.

[SergeiR]

Yes!

I also like the compact mirror one, a very steady pose.

Thanks, Randy. Compact mirror is Vitax, which i wouldn't call truly soft focus. All softness in it comes from offsetting focal length, so if you refocus its damn sharp again :) Imagon, on other hand - is pretty much it. Specially while you balancing below f8.

[cowanw]

Karl Isaac also went to Alberta at the same time as Ray,
These are done with the Cooke 13 inch portrait at f 5.6.
sharp setting
128259
and soft
128260

[tgtaylor]

Here’s an example of a print of a negative taken with a 250mm Imagon on a Toyo 45cf camera:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7509/16126126210_a34a1172d5.jpg

A couple of years back I participated in an employee “gift exchange” and I drew an Asian employee’s name and, instead of buying some non-descript gift I decided to give a mounted but not framed print instead. This negative seemed appropriate and I made two prints of it: one on Ilford 300 Art and a second, the one above, on Bergger warm tone. Both were toned in Nelson’s Gold toner but only the Bergger took the tone well. After the prints were dry I set them up side by side for a couple of days in the kitchen to decide which one was the best. Because of the coloration of the of the Bergger print I decided that the Ilford print was the better so I mounted and gave that print.

In the aftermath the Bergger print lay covered with other items that I keep on the enlarging table with other items that I am reluctant to throw away. Then one day this print caught my attention and it suddenly looked much better than I remembered. So I placed it in the kitchen and after a couple of days became quite impressed with it. How could I have possibly have chosen the Ilford print over this one?

This print now hangs on the kitchen wall framed using anti-glare acrylic which I don’t like and now use clear museum grade OP3-AR acrylic. The snap is take from the side to avoid the glare.

Thomas

[cowanw]

I am sure your fellow worker was pleased; it's very nice.

[gbogatko]

SergeIR -- envy.. envy..

[cowanw]

This photograph was one that I acquired as an example of a platinum portrait.
It came with the following inscription
"This photograph won the Prize for Photography at "Chicago World's Fair, 1893, of Henry Farny By "Benjamin" A Cincinnati, O. Photographer" Probably Isaac Benjamin of Cincinnati
Turns out Henry François Farny (15 July 1847 Ribeauvillé - 23 December 1916) was a French-born United States painter and illustrator, notably of North American Natives.
128417
This is my interpretation of this photograph
With a 15 inch Unar first on sharp
128418
And then on soft; both at f5.6
128419

[SergeiR]

This is my interpretation of this photograph
With a 15 inch Unar first on sharp
And then on soft; both at f5.6
:) Your light source was either too far or too small (harsher shadow line) to match shadow line in original. Otherwise its a very cool take , very cool indeed.

[SergeiR]

SergeIR -- envy.. envy..

;) I been stalking imagon auctions for like 2 years to get that one for decent price.

[chrism]

Sergei,
If I am very lucky, I might make a photo a tenth as good as any of yours one day! Please keep inspiring us!

Chris

[cowanw]

:) Your light source was either too far or too small (harsher shadow line) to match shadow line in original. Otherwise its a very cool take , very cool indeed.

Thank you; I expect the original was studio window light, although there was an Isaac Benjamin who did theatrical portraits in Cincinnati at that time and may very well be the same person. So theatrical lighting is possible.
Mine was flash; closer because the hat was dark.

[SergeiR]

Sergei,
If I am very lucky, I might make a photo a tenth as good as any of yours one day! Please keep inspiring us!

Chris

Thank you, thats very kind of you.
Its more of subject in a lot of cases. I just happen to be married to woman who doesn't mind posing for me, or browsing with me through piles of old books and shout "yeah! lets try something like that!" :) Then all thats left is to decipher light and figure out how to do minuscule bits :) Like getting lenses right and such. Which is time consuming and stuff. But soft lenses will always hold very special place for their romantic allure.

[Peter De Smidt]

8x10, 360mm Imagon with green filter on and 7.7 center hole disk (not one that is with radial open ones, if i remember right). Some extra downward tilting



Reminds me of a Hurrell photo of Joan Crawford. Terrific!

[gbogatko]

128452
"It's Time"

Kodak 305, f5.6, Efke 100.

[SergeiR]

Reminds me of a Hurrell photo of Joan Crawford. Terrific!


Thank you. That is what it was inspired by :)

[goamules]

Here are two Verito examples, on 5x7:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5214/5473939340_c9a6b4557a_o.png

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4114/4760758353_f06827c63c_z.jpg

[Peter De Smidt]

What aperture, Garrett?

[SergeiR]

Garett - first one is very very pictorial-ish :) awesome.

[goamules]

Thanks, both were about one stop down. I don't really take notes, but I can tell by the look. Both with a 7 1/4" if I recall.

[Peter De Smidt]

Thanks, Garrett. They're good examples.

[Ari]

This photograph was one that I acquired as an example of a platinum portrait.
It came with the following inscription
"This photograph won the Prize for Photography at "Chicago World's Fair, 1893, of Henry Farny By "Benjamin" A Cincinnati, O. Photographer" Probably Isaac Benjamin of Cincinnati
Turns out Henry François Farny (15 July 1847 Ribeauvillé - 23 December 1916) was a French-born United States painter and illustrator, notably of North American Natives.
128417
This is my interpretation of this photograph
With a 15 inch Unar first on sharp
128418
And then on soft; both at f5.6
128419

Love this.

[cowanw]

Thanks and Kindest Regards

[Maris Rusis]

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7517/16275966422_a24640f857_c.jpg
Past Imperfect #4

Gelatin-silver photograph on Ultrafine Silver Eagle VC FB photographic paper, image size 21.3cm X 16.4cm, from a 4x5 Tri-X Pan Professional negative exposed in a Tachihara 45GF double extension field view camera fitted with a 150mm f4 Wollaston Meniscus soft-focus lens and a #25 red filter.

My photographer friend Sparky died after a long long illness and some of his equipment passed into my hands. There were many film holders that he had loaded with Tri-X fifteen years previously but could not expose. The film had corroded through the passage of years but I took it to those places we had walked with our cameras in times long gone. This Past Imperfect exposure is of a style he'd appreciate.

[Peter Lewin]

I will apologize in advance for this question, but what is the difference between a soft-focus image "in focus" and a slightly out-of-focus image taken with a "normal" lens? Soft-focus seems to accentuate some flare in the highlights, but is there more?

[jp]

I will apologize in advance for this question, but what is the difference between a soft-focus image "in focus" and a slightly out-of-focus image taken with a "normal" lens? Soft-focus seems to accentuate some flare in the highlights, but is there more?

It's a blend of in-focus and out of focus. Lets say your image looked good sharp and had pleasing out of focus look at 1/2" more focus. If, rather than make a 1s exposure, you made 100 1/100 sec exposures, each time incrementing the focus 1/500 of an inch, you'd have an approximation of the blend made by a soft focus lens... Center rays focus one spot, axial rays focus another distance, all in the same exposure. Stopping down reduces the amount of axial rays coming in meaning comparatively more sharpness.

[cowanw]

Also if something is simply out of focus then quite likely something in the photograph is in focus, perhaps the shirt pocket in front, and just looks off.
With purpose built "soft focus" there is a sharp sparkle in the centre of the glow. Maris's example is a great example of the sense of both glow and focus.

[cowanw]

In fairness, however, the type of soft focus that is a result of screwing out the front lens, like a Velostigmat, can be largely refocused.

[SergeiR]

I will apologize in advance for this question, but what is the difference between a soft-focus image "in focus" and a slightly out-of-focus image taken with a "normal" lens? Soft-focus seems to accentuate some flare in the highlights, but is there more?

- glow of highlights is most pronounced thing you can notice
- there are two different "softing" ways - defocusing and working with aberrations (as above).


main thing about soft focus and just missing focus is that there is focal plane slice still there, once you miss focus. Most of soft focus lenses are not easy to focus ;)
There used to be whole huge disputes back in pictorial photography days , i remember articles in Camera Works about "mush" and such :)

But then i am not most technical person. I just enjoy taking pictures ;)

[cowanw]

Prinz Albert Wilhelm Heinrich von Preußen or Prince Henry was the brother of Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany. He was a naval officer who loved yachting and automobiles.
One of the unresolved problems of the economic dispute between Germany and Greece regarding the present economic difficulties of the European common market is the claim by Greece for 18 billion Euros in penalties and royalties from Germany for copying the Greek fisherman`s hat which dates from 1886.

Germany`s position is that the style of hat known throughout Europe as the Prinz Heinrich Hat was invented by the Kaiser`s brother from the Imperial Yacht Club hat. And,in any case, if there is liability, the Treaty of Versailles addressed all outstanding financial difficulties of Wilhelmine Germany and, if that is not accepted by the courts, the principle was certainly addressed in the Locarno treaties and the Young Plan and the 1960 final payment.
Here Prince Henry is shown about to get into his Prinz Heinrich Benz, on his way to the Kiel Yacht club
155863
Velostigmat II Variable focus on crisp setting at f 4.5
155863
Velostigmat II Variable focus on soft setting at f 4.5 refocussed

[Terry276]

I'm finally beginning to get the hang of soft-focus, I think. Shot with my Fuji 250 SF lens, this has a very small DoF but I love the bokeh I get when I shoot close up like this.

http://cdn.ipernity.com/200/23/40/43132340.0bedade5.640.jpg (http://www.ipernity.com/doc/434637/43132340)
white flower 2 (http://www.ipernity.com/doc/434637/43132340) par Terry B (http://www.ipernity.com/home/434637), on ipernity

[Maris Rusis]

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7573/16089436050_b850a4b094_c.jpg
Past Imperfect #3

Gelatin-silver photograph on Ultrafine Silver Eagle VC FB photographic paper, image size 21.3cm X 16.4cm, from a 4x5 Tri-X Pan Professional negative exposed in a Tachihara 45GF double extension field view camera fitted with a 150mm f4 Wollaston Meniscus soft-focus lens and a #25 red filter.

[cowanw]

The original member of my father's family, in Canada was my great great Grandfather, one Robert Cowan, who emmigrated to Canada from Ireland in the later 19th Century.
A business man, Robert had occasion to go to Rochester, from time to time, on the Toronto To Rochester ferry, and found himself doing so in late 1921. Strollin on the east side of Broadway, between third and Zumbro, Robert remembered that he had had a likeness done here in 1878 and decided to go into the Easton's Photo Gallery for another. James and Lucy Easton and the coterie of amateur photographers that used the studio as a meeting place, were in a heated discussion about a rash of stolen lenses.
For those who follow current photographic events in Abel's Photographic Weekly you will recall that about Christmas time, Jan 11,1911, a Celor No. 6 lens, No. 225960, without flange was stolen from the studio of F. Goldensky of 1705 Chestnut St. Boston.
On July 3, 1915, a Cooke portrait lens Ser. 6 No. 39750 No. 35. lens was stolen in case along with a purple plush background with racks from B. Blaxzing 1230 16th St. Denver, Colo.
Other lenses were stolen from William Hudlett, of 3061 West 25th street, Cleveland, Ohio, on July 4th.
A Wollensak Vitax Portrait lens number 3776 was stolen from the Riverside Studio, 795 Oakland Ave., Milwaukee, Wis., on the night of January 15th.1917. This lens was taken with lens board and Packard shutter, en- tire. In addition a Turner-Reich anastig- mat No. 2, with shutter, was taken from the enlarging camera.
An I-C 5x8 Tessar Lens No. 27773819. Stolen the afternoon of January the 21 st. 1919, from The Photo Shop, Madrid.
More Stolen Lenses ON Saturday night, May twenty-first,1920, from the studio of Wm. J. Lenny, Rockford, Ill- who was burglarized and a number of lenses stolen. Watch out for any of these, if lenses are offered to you: Wollensak Verito 8x10, No. 5935. …
AND FINALLY
Nov 19 1921
At last we have a case of a lens thief being caught, The studio of A. Schutz 613 Fourteenth St. N. Washington D.C. was jimmied and a considerable amount of lenses were taken. The following day a Charles Moore of Gary, Indiana was arrested in possession of several of the lenses. Moore travels under the names of Mays and McGuire. Mr. Shultz will be glad to hear from any photographers who have had lenses stolen in the last few years, particularly if finger prints were found. Mr. Shultz had five lenses stolen in Feb., 1920.
This last theft was the item of interest to the Rochester crew. It seems that the thief, Charles Moore was at first thought to be a child as he was very slight of build with long arms and legs and was almost hairless with a large head and large eyes. He was thought to be ill as well as he had a sallow green tinge to his skin.
James Easton noted that the story reminded him of the last time Robert had visited in 1878, and that the strange lens that day had gone missing the very next day, with a note in its place "this aint for you---It was signed Floyd.

This was that day's likeness done on a 16.5 inch Versar
156016

[cowanw]

It was in 1878 that my Great Great Grandfather, Robert Cowan traveled to Rochester and found himself going into the Easton Photo studio, on the east side of Broadway between third and Zumbro, to have a likeness done.
The studio was run by James H Easton, a mulatto shoemaker by trade and his wife Lucy J.B. Easton, a daguerreotypist by trade, with their, then 19 year old, son Hamlet.
The studio was something of a hangout for amateur photographers of the area and they were excitedly discussing the robery of the studio the night before. a Petzval and two Rapid Rectalinears were taken; one of the later being the extra fast model for children's portrats.
Strangely in their place another lens was left a 14 inch Kodak Commercial Ektar.
It was a very strange squat small lens but did prove to be 14 inches when mounted.
There was much discussion of what Kodak Ektar meant; the commercial label was easily explained.
One Georgie Eastman opined, with his classical education that it was obvious that the KOD was a derivation of Cauda or end or tail in Latin. the Dak was Greek for Dactulos or fingers.
the Ek was also from the Latin for Over or beyond and the Tar referred to a boundary.
Therefor, Georgie said, Kodak Ektar must refer to the fact that the lens performed beyond the boundaries of ordinary lenses and the benefits were at your finger tips (at the ends of your fingers).
Georgie Eastman was one smart cookie.

So it was that Robert had a likeness done in 1878 by a 14 inch Kodak Commercial Ektar.
156028


As was previously mentioned, the lens dissapeared the next day with the mysterious note left behind.
It is also recorded that Lucy was a self styled spiritualist physician and clairvoyent healer. She allegedly used her clairvoyent powers to predict the results of horse races to her son, so that he could make winning bets. She always said "Floyd felt bad taking our lenses, but he worked for a man named James, who would let them out of the Lock up if they did what he wanted. To make up, Floyd often told her (in her dreams) who would win at the races."

[Tin Can]

How did this get into the computer?

Nobody is complaining about strange art?

In 2016 we have perfected our visions.

[D. Bryant]

Strangely in their place another lens was left a 14 inch Kodak Commercial Ektar.


So it was that Robert had a likeness done in 1878 by a 14 inch Kodak Commercial Ektar.



Are you pulling our legs with this post? Kodak Commercial Ektars were not introduced until the 1930s.

[SergeiR]

Not to mention it is hardly a soft focus

[Andrew O'Neill]

Very cool image, Maris.

[tonyowen]

go to Rochester, from time to time, on the Toronto To Rochester 156016

Are you sure about this? The majority of 19th & early 20th century cross-Lake-Ontario ferries operated to the west of Toronto (Niagara on the Lake) or to the east of Toronto (Port Hope or Cobourg). To start from (or return to) Toronto required an extra non-lake-crossing journey by ferry or train etc.
Incidentally a direct high speed catamaran Toronto-Rochester ferry was started in 2004 and failed in 2006.

Of course none of this is relevant to the direct subject of this forum, but is of interest to me as I lived in the great free wheeling Torono (sic) in the 1970s
regards
Tony

[Maris Rusis]

Thanks Andrew O'Neill. Here's another softie:


https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1472/25056956865_38f7d1dd4c_b.jpg
Sunny Couch, Soft Focus Portrait

Gelatin-silver photograph on Ilford VC FB photographic paper, image size 19.6cm X24.4cm, from a 8x10 Fomapan 200 negative exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a Wollaston Meniscus 450mm f9 lens. Signed, stamped, and annotated verso.

[Jim Galli]

The original member of my father's family, in Canada was my great great Grandfather, one Robert Cowan, who emmigrated to Canada from Ireland in the later 19th Century.
A business man, Robert had occasion to go to Rochester, from time to time, on the Toronto To Rochester ferry, and found himself doing so in late 1921. Strollin on the east side of Broadway, between third and Zumbro, Robert remembered that he had had a likeness done here in 1878 and decided to go into the Easton's Photo Gallery for another. James and Lucy Easton and the coterie of amateur photographers that used the studio as a meeting place, were in a heated discussion about a rash of stolen lenses.
For those who follow current photographic events in Abel's Photographic Weekly you will recall that about Christmas time, Jan 11,1911, a Celor No. 6 lens, No. 225960, without flange was stolen from the studio of F. Goldensky of 1705 Chestnut St. Boston.
On July 3, 1915, a Cooke portrait lens Ser. 6 No. 39750 No. 35. lens was stolen in case along with a purple plush background with racks from B. Blaxzing 1230 16th St. Denver, Colo.
Other lenses were stolen from William Hudlett, of 3061 West 25th street, Cleveland, Ohio, on July 4th.
A Wollensak Vitax Portrait lens number 3776 was stolen from the Riverside Studio, 795 Oakland Ave., Milwaukee, Wis., on the night of January 15th.1917. This lens was taken with lens board and Packard shutter, en- tire. In addition a Turner-Reich anastig- mat No. 2, with shutter, was taken from the enlarging camera.
An I-C 5x8 Tessar Lens No. 27773819. Stolen the afternoon of January the 21 st. 1919, from The Photo Shop, Madrid.
More Stolen Lenses ON Saturday night, May twenty-first,1920, from the studio of Wm. J. Lenny, Rockford, Ill- who was burglarized and a number of lenses stolen. Watch out for any of these, if lenses are offered to you: Wollensak Verito 8x10, No. 5935. …
AND FINALLY
Nov 19 1921
At last we have a case of a lens thief being caught, The studio of A. Schutz 613 Fourteenth St. N. Washington D.C. was jimmied and a considerable amount of lenses were taken. The following day a Charles Moore of Gary, Indiana was arrested in possession of several of the lenses. Moore travels under the names of Mays and McGuire. Mr. Shultz will be glad to hear from any photographers who have had lenses stolen in the last few years, particularly if finger prints were found. Mr. Shultz had five lenses stolen in Feb., 1920.
This last theft was the item of interest to the Rochester crew. It seems that the thief, Charles Moore was at first thought to be a child as he was very slight of build with long arms and legs and was almost hairless with a large head and large eyes. He was thought to be ill as well as he had a sallow green tinge to his skin.
James Easton noted that the story reminded him of the last time Robert had visited in 1878, and that the strange lens that day had gone missing the very next day, with a note in its place "this aint for you---It was signed Floyd.

This was that day's likeness done on a 16.5 inch Versar
156016

The little green men strike again. Floyd complained about the weight and mass of the "Cooke" but I insisted it come through the time warp back to Tonopah. That was about 2008 I think.

[cowanw]

Are you pulling our legs with this post? Kodak Commercial Ektars were not introduced until the 1930s.
Yes and No
the people are all real. Although I have to believe Jim Galli about Floyd. Check out the Nevada lens mine and Roswell regarding that.As explained near the beginning I am portraying members of my family with lenses that I can get my hands on. The Rochester photo salon is real as are James and Lucy Easton, except they were in Rochester Minn.
James was a black man and Lucy was a white woman who married and partnered a Daguerreotype salon and then wet plate fro more than 20 years. Lucy really did get mysterious racing tips.
I moved them to Rochester New York so that I could bring in Georgie Eastman to explain the origin of the words Kodak and Ektar (NOT)
Abels photographic weekly is available on the web and is fascinating reading. Up here in Canada we had a Chas Abel also. They did photo finishing and I had them confused for a while until I realized there were two Chas Abels.
Please, it's all in fun and a way to get a series of comparison lenses with a similar subject. I dress up and dye my hair and grow hair and shape it. Just go with the flow.

[cowanw]

Not to mention it is hardly a soft focus
Not soft; just fun

[cowanw]

"Are you sure about this? The majority of 19th & early 20th century cross-Lake-Ontario ferries operated to the west of Toronto (Niagara on the Lake) or to the east of Toronto (Port Hope or Cobourg). To start from (or return to) Toronto required an extra non-lake-crossing journey by ferry or train etc.
Incidentally a direct high speed catamaran Toronto-Rochester ferry was started in 2004 and failed in 2006.

Of course none of this is relevant to the direct subject of this forum, but is of interest to me as I lived in the great free wheeling Torono (sic) in the 1970s
regards
Tony "
You are of course quite right. These stories of mine are not to be confused with fact.
I live in Hamilton on the other side of Toronto and I guess I think of Toronto as the shore of Lake Ontario all the way to Brighton. Interestingly, when I worked for the government on Lake Ontario, in the 1970's, I stayed at the harbour front hotel in Cobourg for a while. It's gone now but was the original stay over for the 1905 travellers. In 1970 it was in poor shape. I never realized what the significance of the building was. It is now razed and replace by condos.


http://www.cobourghistory.ca/histories/cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history/70-cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history-part-1
http://www.cobourghistory.ca/histories/cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history/71-cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history-part-2
http://www.cobourghistory.ca/histories/cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history/72-cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history-part-3
http://www.cobourghistory.ca/histories/cobourg-s-rail-car-ferry-history/12-ontario-car-ferry-company

[cowanw]

One of the founding doctors of Johns Hopkins was Sir William Osler. He lived from age 8-18 in Dundas, now part of the city where I live.
Here he is in the back garden on a return visit to his old home.
His friend had a handy 8x10 with a 16 inch Voltas at f/8
156695

[cowanw]

These photographs were taken on the May 24th weekend at Lambaréné, French Equatorial Africa in 1924. The Canadian mission next door had set off fireworks to celebrate Queen Victoria Day, the celebration of the King's birthday in Canada. Unfortunately the roofs of the Canadian mission caught fire from sparks and the photographs show Albert Schweitzer, caught just before his morning shave, directed the water bucket line. It was a smouldering fire and there was plenty of time for the visiting photographer to take multiple exposures.

The first generation 360 mm Heliar was first taken at f4.5
156739
But the photographer was worried about getting the focus correct and with the fire burning brighter was able to shoot at f 8
156740

[Jim Galli]

These photographs were taken on the May 24th weekend at Lambaréné, French Equatorial Africa in 1924. The Canadian mission next door had set off fireworks to celebrate Queen Victoria Day, the celebration of the King's birthday in Canada. Unfortunately the roofs of the Canadian mission caught fire from sparks and the photographs show Albert Schweitzer, caught just before his morning shave, directed the water bucket line. It was a smouldering fire and there was plenty of time for the visiting photographer to take multiple exposures.

The first generation 360 mm Heliar was first taken at f4.5

But the photographer was worried about getting the focus correct and with the fire burning brighter was able to shoot at f 8


Dagor 77, move over.

[cowanw]

Dagor 77, move over.

Well, the big difference between Dagor 77 and me (and You) is that his stories are fiction, eh.

[Jim Galli]

Well, the big difference between Dagor 77 and me (and You) is that his stories are fiction, eh.

Indeed.

[Chris7521]

Dallmeyer 2b Patent
Delta @200
One of the first few shots with my new lens. I think this will be a fun lens to play with! Hopefully some portraits to come.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5596/30817854536_92346f1b0e_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/NXgytA)img581a (https://flic.kr/p/NXgytA) by Chris Badessa (https://www.flickr.com/photos/-chris_b/), on Flickr

[Emil Schildt]

[QUOTE=Chris7521;1361078]Dallmeyer 2b Patent
Delta @200
One of the first few shots with my new lens. I think this will be a fun lens to play with! Hopefully some portraits to come.

Now that looks cool - so nice soft and wild.. like nature it self..

[Chris7521]

[QUOTE=Chris7521;1361078]Dallmeyer 2b Patent
Delta @200
One of the first few shots with my new lens. I think this will be a fun lens to play with! Hopefully some portraits to come.

Now that looks cool - so nice soft and wild.. like nature it self..Thanks, I thought the curving branches would flow right into the swirly background. Got to be careful with the backgrounds for my liking. I don't like the swirly's to dominate...especially with a portrait!

[drew.saunders]

Needing more practice with the 250 Imagon, I went to a local garden on "Black Friday" (the camera is mostly black, the film is black and white, so I guess I was "in the spirit").

This one is my favorite of the day:
https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5593/31283718195_5b8ecfc872_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/PErevD)
11-25-16-006 (https://flic.kr/p/PErevD) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/), on Flickr

This one is my girlfriend's favorite. I was first attracted to the petals on the pavers, but felt that adding the live flowers added more context:
https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5553/30461883444_241ecc9eae_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/NpP7EY)
11-25-16-005 (https://flic.kr/p/NpP7EY) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/), on Flickr

And I like how this one turned out:
https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5472/30461884294_dc7434520f_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/NpP7VC)
11-25-16-001 (https://flic.kr/p/NpP7VC) by Drew Saunders (https://www.flickr.com/photos/drew_saunders/), on Flickr

All with the 7.7/9.5 disk at the 7.7 setting, all Ilford Delta 100 film, most at the 1/100 (my 1/125 setting is 1/3 stop slow) a few at 1/45 (my 1/60 is 1/2 stop slow).

[.nomadia.]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161128/c52f3dd4a8cdd82f748b808e75893ca8.jpg

https://flic.kr/p/PAveoa

9 1/2 Wollensak Verito (rear element only) @F4
Fuji FP100c

[Jim Galli]

Needing more practice with the 250 Imagon, I went to a local garden on "Black Friday" (the camera is mostly black, the film is black and white, so I guess I was "in the spirit").



These are lovely. More subtle than most of my stuff. I like the mostly sharp but still very much soft focus look you've got here.

[cowanw]

Yes, the sharp core within the glow is key, I think

[drew.saunders]

These are lovely. More subtle than most of my stuff. I like the mostly sharp but still very much soft focus look you've got here.

You make it sound like I know what I'm doing! Thanks!

[Maris Rusis]

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1545/25363264091_0b1139e446_c.jpg
Old Weyba Bridge and Bird, Soft Focus

Gelatin-silver photograph on Agfa Classic MCC 111 VC FB photographic paper, image size 16.3cm X 21.4cm, from a 4x5 Kodak Tmax 100 negative exposed in a Tachihara 45GF double extension field view camera fitted with a 250mm single meniscus lens

[cowanw]

A fine photograph!

[gimenosaiz]

Needing more practice with the 250 Imagon, I went to a local garden on "Black Friday" (the camera is mostly black, the film is black and white, so I guess I was "in the spirit").


All with the 7.7/9.5 disk at the 7.7 setting, all Ilford Delta 100 film, most at the 1/100 (my 1/125 setting is 1/3 stop slow) a few at 1/45 (my 1/60 is 1/2 stop slow).

Hi!
Those are really beautiful!
My favourite is the last one ;-)

Cheers
Antonio

[Emil Schildt]

I just LOVE my Cooke series II 3.5 lens

here used for 4x5 FO5 Orthochromatic film...

[Maris Rusis]

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1477/25510338945_db4f675a1c_b.jpg
Backlit Weeds, Soft Focus


Gelatin-silver photograph on Fomabrom Variant III VC FB photographic paper, image size 19.3cm X 24.6cm, from a 8x10 Fomapan 200 negative exposed in a Tachihara 810HD triple extension field view camera fitted with a 300mm f7.5 Wollaston style meniscus lens mounted behind a Copal #3 shutter. Taking this photograph caused camera damage. The sun is just out of frame with the consequence that the sun's image fell on one of the bellows pleats and burned a neat, round, 3 mm hole in the bellows. The camera is beginning to fill with smoke at the moment of exposure.

[cowanw]

That's a special kind of flare!

[barnacle]

Smokin'!

(sorry.)

Neil

[pasiasty]

158715
Chamonix 045F-1
Rodenstock Imagon 250mm, no diffusion disk
Fomapan 100, negative scanned

158716
Chamonix 045F-1
Rodenstock Imagon 250mm, H7.7
Fomapan 100, negative scanned

[cowanw]

W. H. Jackson was a American photographer best known for his pictures of the American West, including views of Yellowstone Park about 1870. Vigorous and healthy into old age he was a technical advisor to the movie "Gone With the Wind" in 1939 at age 96, dying a few years later at age 99.
In 1898, he became president of the Detroit Publishing Company.
Apparently he travelled to Toronto to look at an association with The new University of Toronto publishing company after it was established in 1901.
Here is Jackson at age 58 taken with a 9 1/2 inch Darlot meniscus in a sewer pipe fitted on a Betax shutter; apparently another lens left behind by Floyd in another extraterrestrial lens theft.


159385

On 8x10 negative.

[john wood]

One of the founding doctors of Johns Hopkins was Sir William Osler. He lived from age 8-18 in Dundas, now part of the city where I live.
Here he is in the back garden on a return visit to his old home.
His friend had a handy 8x10 with a 16 inch Voltas at f/8
156695



This is beautiful. Love the OOF signature even at f8

[cowanw]

Yes, that lens certainly has the signature of a Petzval. I was surprised.

[cowanw]

Captain Englehorn of the SS Venture was the captain of the ship that brought back the giant ape King Kong. although the poor animal was killed, Captain Englehorn toured the vaudeville theaters and fairs with a Slide show presentation. He headed the bill at the Tivoli in Hamilton for 2 weeks! And stopped for a portrait at A. M. Cunningham's old place just down the street at 3 James Street N.

159451

They used a Vitax at f6 on 8x10 for this.

[cowanw]

Edmund Rice (c. 1594 – 3 May 1663) landed in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in summer or fall of 1638 leaving Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire. I am one of 2.7 million descendants. Amazingly, of all the millions, I am the most like him in facial features. A Velostigmat ll 14inch with diffusion feature at f8.

200932

[Bob Salomon]

Edmund Rice (c. 1594 – 3 May 1663) landed in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in summer or fall of 1638 leaving Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire. I am one of 2.7 million descendants. Amazingly, of all the millions, I am the most like him in facial features. A Velostigmat ll 14inch with diffusion feature at f8.

200932

So, how and when did you end up in Canada?

[Jim Galli]

Edmund Rice (c. 1594 – 3 May 1663) landed in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in summer or fall of 1638 leaving Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire. I am one of 2.7 million descendants. Amazingly, of all the millions, I am the most like him in facial features. A Velostigmat ll 14inch with diffusion feature at f8.

Wow! You are a dead ringer for old Edmund. I thought it was his ghost. That velo did a fine job. A fine job indeed.

[cowanw]

Kind of you to say.
Thanks

[cowanw]

To see the family similarities, this is one of the 10th generation of North Americans descending from Deacon Edmund Rice who arrived from England in 1638. I say North Americans because for some unknown reason on about 1817, there was a move to Canada from Vermont by Asa Noble Rice.
This is taken with a Wollensak Series two Velostigmat 16 inch with diffusion at F6.
201338

[Jody_S]

...on about 1817, there was a move to Canada from Vermont by Asa Noble Rice.

201338

Can't imagine why. While most Americans see our culture as remarkably similar with but a few historical divergences. the reality is that our cultures are remarkably similar with very few divergences.

[cowanw]

Russia's Tsar Nicholas and Great Britain's George V were almost identical twins in appearance and often mistaken one for another. Closely related, and both monarchs of their countries their lives took very different turns in World War One. Oddly though, rumour has it that they were both killed by their own governments. Nicholas's death is well known but George was possibly given extra morphine in order to time things so that the announcement of his death was first announced in the Times rather than the daily tabloids of the time. Through the magic of Jim Galli's little green men the first image is done with an early (serial number under 100) 20 inch 500 mm F7 Ilex Caltar and the second image with a late serial number 20 inch 500 mm F7 Ilex Caltar. Lynn Jones, who was involved at the time these lens were made for and sold by Calumet, briefly mentions them in an article in the Jan/Feb 1996 View Camera magazine. He is quoted as saying "The early offerings were variable in quality but by 1967 they were uniformly excellent." That being the case I guess the first lens is of poorer quality and qualifies as softer.
King George V attending the site of the disaster at Cadeby Colliery in July 1912

202608

Nicholas and his family was incarcerated at Tsarskoe Selo in the spring of 1917. Apparently Nicholas rather enjoyed chopping wood to pass the time.

202613

It takes a better photographer than this royal photographer to tell the difference between early and late 20" Caltars

[Mael]

Plastic magnifier duct-taped on a Speed Graphic Anniversary lensboard, calculated focal length and aperture approx 200mm at f/8, Fortepan 400

https://i.ibb.co/Jc44nzd/Melissa2.jpg

[Andrew Plume]

Sir, that's brilliant - I can detect that although this is your first post on here, you're very well versed in portraits, terrific indeed

regards

Andrew

[Mael]

Thanks ! :)

Another one from my archives, Verito 9 inch at full aperture, Speed Graphic Anniversary, TXP.

https://i.ibb.co/584Wq9P/RRoseweb.jpg

[Mael]

Crappy M42 Polaris 135mm f/1.8 mounted in reverse position on Speed Graphic

https://i.ibb.co/X5p4Ptz/arbre.jpg

[jp]

Plastic magnifier duct-taped on a Speed Graphic Anniversary lensboard, calculated focal length and aperture approx 200mm at f/8, Fortepan 400

https://i.ibb.co/Jc44nzd/Melissa2.jpg

awesome!

[Patrick B]

Plastic magnifier duct-taped on a Speed Graphic Anniversary lensboard, calculated focal length and aperture approx 200mm at f/8, Fortepan 400

https://i.ibb.co/Jc44nzd/Melissa2.jpg

Magnifique !!!

[Inochkin]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49766517067_0c2c244f3b_o.jpg
Cooke TT&H 8'' f4,5

[cowanw]

Well done, Inochkin!

[Hugo Zhang]

Inochkin,

Nice one! What softness setting did you use? Wide open at f/4.5?

[Inochkin]

cowanw, Hugo Zhang, thank you.

This lens has no softness and aperture settings, every time wide open f4,5.

[rrunnertexas]

Inochkin - that is excellent!

[rrunnertexas]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49936682807_3879481b43_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2j5Jy2M)ROC Anthony Fountain (https://flic.kr/p/2j5Jy2M) by rrunnertexas (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18736302@N03/), on Flickr

Rochester Universal full plate - Anthony brass landscape lens, wide open about f/6. Weatherford, Texas.

[cowanw]

Remembering Julia Margaret Campbell
Unbelievable news!
Unconfirmed reports suggest that 2
Great great grand children, direct descendants of Thomas Carlyle, while playing in the attic of the family estate have found and opened an old trunk in which was discovered old prints of Carlyle taken by Julia Margaret Cameron one hundred and forty years ago. Notes found with the prints indicate that the lens used was of the Veritatus style at what would have been F4.5. This might well be the very lens that John Dallmeyer later described as unfocusable!
Fiction is less strange than truth!


209597
209598
209599

[Tin Can]

Very cool and as it is coming from you, I am sure it is valid.

Meaning I trust you as source.

See, nobody should throw out the old 'stuff' as we may never see it again!




Remembering Julia Margaret Campbell
Unbelievable news!
Unconfirmed reports suggest that 2
Great great grand children, direct descendants of Thomas Carlyle, while playing in the attic of the family estate have found and opened an old trunk in which was discovered old prints of Carlyle taken by Julia Margaret Cameron one hundred and forty years ago. Notes found with the prints indicate that the lens used was of the Veritatus style at what would have been F4.5. This might well be the very lens that John Dallmeyer later described as unfocusable!
Fiction is less strange than truth!


209597
209598
209599

[cowanw]

Just to be sure: these are ALTERNATE FACTS, eh! as in true only in my mind.

[Tin Can]

Good enough and the best 'facts' have seen for years!

I still throw out little very little 'stuff'


Just to be sure: these are ALTERNATE FACTS, eh! as in true only in my mind.

[rrunnertexas]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50618633043_ae3dbb8d79_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t)ROC Universal FP Fishing Reels Soft (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t) by rrunnertexas (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18736302@N03/), on Flickr

ROC Universal FP with Wolly WA lens wide open

[Peter De Smidt]

ROC Universal FP with Wolly WA lens wide open

Lovely rendering.

[jp]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50618633043_ae3dbb8d79_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t)ROC Universal FP Fishing Reels Soft (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t) by rrunnertexas (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18736302@N03/), on Flickr

ROC Universal FP with Wolly WA lens wide open

Looks great!

[diversey]

Beautiful shot!


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50618633043_ae3dbb8d79_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t)ROC Universal FP Fishing Reels Soft (https://flic.kr/p/2k7ZJ5t) by rrunnertexas (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18736302@N03/), on Flickr

ROC Universal FP with Wolly WA lens wide open

[Chauncey Walden]

Here's a shot from my unmarked brass lens circa 180mm and wide open at f/11 (and focused!).

[Tin Can]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51243430935_9ec8978bfb_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2m5cYHV)1 Imagon 2 Eyes Wide Open (https://flic.kr/p/2m5cYHV) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51339505078_7516eb97d9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE)amber2 (1) (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[DG 3313]

nice!
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51339505078_7516eb97d9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE)amber2 (1) (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

Really good, Randy!

[DG 3313]

218025 Imagon 200 mm, cropped 4x5

[Mark Sawyer]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51339505078_7516eb97d9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE)amber2 (1) (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

Oh, I do like that! :)

I'd ask which lens, but any answer would involve words...

[cowanw]

Or a picture of the lens!

[Tin Can]

Taylor Hobson COOKE ANASTIGMAT 10 1/2 inch f/4.5 Series II SOFT FOCUS Lens (https://youtu.be/YUtbwQViA-I)


Or a picture of the lens!

[Jody_S]

218025 Imagon 200 mm, cropped 4x5

I like it. I can't get anything this nice from my 250 or 300 Imagons.

Which (if any) disc?

[slavatokar]

4x5, 9 inch Verito:

https://live.staticflickr.com/5744/22277713210_b14d44b99b_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/zWB6ZC)EPSON132 (https://flic.kr/p/zWB6ZC) by Вячеслав Филатов (https://www.flickr.com/photos/115618176@N08/), on Flickr

[Tin Can]

4x5, 9 inch Verito:

https://live.staticflickr.com/5744/22277713210_b14d44b99b_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/zWB6ZC)EPSON132 (https://flic.kr/p/zWB6ZC) by Вячеслав Филатов (https://www.flickr.com/photos/115618176@N08/), on Flickr

[bevdig]

The always lovely Avril in the studio. The background is actually a printed backdrop, illuminated with a Fresnel spotlight and about five feet behind the subject. The key light is a Lowel totalight through a translucent umbrella. With this much skin showing, it was not easy to find just the right amount of "reveal" and it took close to an hour of moving the model this way and that before I clicked the shutter. Taken with a Zone VI view camera with 180mm Fujinon soft focus lens, set at f/8 (wide open with the yellow disk). Tmax 100 sheet film developed in Tmax developer, normal development.218731

[jon.oman]

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51339505078_7516eb97d9_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE)amber2 (1) (https://flic.kr/p/2mdGodE) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

Very nice image!

[Tin Can]

Thanks Jon, I was about to post Pose 2 but I put in the wrong file...

I think I can, I think I can

[Tin Can]

Pose 2, not as good as Pose 1

It was a very long day, this was almost the last neg, I got a free ride, to shoot 5X7 after the Digi shooter got her shots, she paid the bills. 8 hour shoot, then break set...

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51384155622_9fed9b1a42_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2mhDegC)1-Amber pose2 (https://flic.kr/p/2mhDegC) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[Peter De Smidt]

Good stuff, Randy. The first one in particular has a very Old Hollywood feel.

[Tin Can]

Thank you


Good stuff, Randy. The first one in particular has a very Old Hollywood feel.

[Gigibertcha]

Toyo 45 G, simple desktop magnifier as lens.
218800

[Rick L]

Toyo 45 G, simple desktop magnifier as lens.
218800

very nice shot - really like the styling

[AtlantaTerry]

Toyo 45 G, simple desktop magnifier as lens.
218800

I have purchased a couple different magnifying glasses to use for soft focus lenses. What did you use for a shutter?
I am thinking of building a drop shutter with flash synch to use with the magnifying lenses.

[Gigibertcha]

Not any shutter. Permanent or natural light, "au chapeau"

[Tin Can]

Amber again, same shoot

10" Cook SF on 5X7 enlarged to 16X20 on RC, copied with iPhone SE

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50609746821_424b775744_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2k7dbvK)IMG_0027 (https://flic.kr/p/2k7dbvK) by TIN CAN COLLEGE (https://www.flickr.com/photos/tincancollege/), on Flickr

[diversey]

A beautiful print, Randy!

[Peter De Smidt]

Toyo 45 G, simple desktop magnifier as lens.


It's an excellent photo regardless of what lens was used. Given what was used, it's amazingly good!

[Peter De Smidt]

Nice print, Randy!

[Tin Can]

I post it as example of 5X7 SF enlarging which many say is not a good idea

Every time I open that storage drawer

I am smitten again

Thanks guys

[Chauncey Walden]

Unmarked brass lens, wide open, approximately 180mm f/11.220441

[arri]

I tested an aspherical fused silica single lens element with 250mm focus length and a diameter of 115mm.
The lens were a part of a Zeiss lithographic lens for deep blue light, that´s the reason why it were made of quartz glass.
I mounted the lens into a barrel and gave it a fixed pre aperture with f/3.1 and made a few waterhouse stops for it.

Single lens elements are not colour corrected which means that I have to reduce the found sharpness of the groundglass by a formular like this:
(extension²)/50xf = (350mm²)/50x250mm = 122500/12500 = 9.8mm
When I use this correction I get a very good focus to a point I prefer, otherwise it is impossible to use this lenses.
You can use this formular as well when a lens has two lens elements made of identic glass, like a Rodenstock Bistigmat or single lens element sets, some of it are named "Meteor" or the Busch Vademecum.
In the same way you can build your own lens with two single close up lenses, no other way to get a cheaper soft focus lens.

I used 4x5" sheet Fomapan 100 @ISO80, Wehner Developer, Sinar F1 with rear lens shutter.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51724256196_91ce3d05b1_h.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51724497498_8fa2a289bd_h.jpg

[cowanw]

Wow, well done.

[xkaes]

Creating soft-focus lenses from supplementary (AKA auxiliary or close-up) lenses (AKA filters)


http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/softfocus.htm (http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/softfocus.htm)

[Randy]

Creating soft-focus lenses from supplementary (AKA auxiliary or close-up) lenses (AKA filters)


http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/softfocus.htm (http://www.subclub.org/fujinon/softfocus.htm)

Can't get the link to open :(

[xkaes]

Try another browser. Apparently CHROME, etc. have more "filters", than say FIREFOX.

It's there.

[Tin Can]

I see it with Google

I am saving that file

Thank you!