TTH Cooke Soft focus lenses - pamphlet "Pleasing Portraiture"

[mikec]

I have recently acquired a pair of cells for a f/6.3 330mm Cooke Series XIV lens and am trying to get more info on it. VM has little to say other than it is something between a portrait and process lens. I have however come across an interesting little information pamphlet from TTH which contains a little more detail and which I would like to share. I couldn't find a reference to it searching here. It is only 8 pages, including the cover , five of which are example images. The last three give principle characteristics of Cooke Series IID f/3.5, Series IIE f/4.5, Series VIa f/5.6 and the Cooke Series XIV f/6.3.
If anyone has used one of the Series XIV I would like to hear of their experience. I have scanned the document to a PDF which I will try to attach here. If that does not get through the filters I will put it on my web site and post a link here.

[Jim Noel]

Very interesting - Thanks

[BrianShaw]

x2. Those pics look like some really nice 1920/1930's photos I have of my grandma.

[William Whitaker]

Thank you for that post and for including the scan of the Cooke Literature. That is an interesting piece of paper as are the included images, especially the first image which is rather "gripping".

I share your interest in the series XIV lens. I acquired one several years ago from another forum member and it is among my favorite lenses for the 8x10. It came to me mounted in a Compound shutter as shown here.

161924

Fairly early on I made an 8x10 chrome (reversal) with it. It had all the sharpness I could want, yet it retained a warmth and a roundness which is extremely pleasing. In later years I had added a Cooke Series XV lens to the menagerie (this is the original XV and not the XVa, which is the reissued version. And that's not to compare the two, but only to be clear about what I'm using.) The Series XV in its 12" configuration looks very similar to the series XIV in terms of the qualities I described above.

So, the cells you have are from a fine lens and would be worthwhile to have mounted in a reliable shutter.

Since owning my XIV I have tried to find information about it using usual internet resources. But little has come to light. I thought I had written to Barbara Lowry at Cooke Optics to inquire, but I can't find anything in my email archives, so maybe I didn't get that far with it. If you go to www.cookeoptics.com, you should be able to find her listing and contact information.

Good luck with your search and with your lens! Keep us apprised.

[mikec]

I share your interest in the series XIV lens. I acquired one several years ago from another forum member and it is among my favorite lenses for the 8x10. It came to me mounted in a Compound shutter as shown here.
< snip, snip >
Good luck with your search and with your lens! Keep us apprised.

Thanks for that info and the photo Will. I see you have your XIV in a Compound 4. I had calculated that that would probably do and bought one on the strength of my measurements. So I will contact Steve Grimes shop and see about getting the glass mounted.

[Steven Tribe]

Interesting how some of the portraits have artistically survived, whilst others really jar modern tastes!

The series XIV was a slower F.6.3 non convertible design which was made in 13", 16.5" and 21" and priced only a little under the pictorial VIa, F.5.6.

The convertible XV (F.6.8) was only available in the 12 1/4" size in 1934 (Kodak agency in Kingsway, London). It cost as much as the Pictorial IIe 12 3/4" !

Some other comparisons from 1934 for fun!

cooke

series XV 12.25". £25
series IIe 12.75". £25

ross

portrait no.3 12" .£27.75

dallmeyer

3A.£30
3B.£22 !!
5D.£18 !!


Unfortunately, Cookeoptics is not a good source of information about their history.

[Mark Sawyer]

My thanks as well! A great read!

[William Whitaker]

Unfortunately, Cookeoptics is not a good source of information about their history.

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Who would be better?

[Steven Tribe]

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Who would be better?

Cookeoptics are a comparitively recent organisation. Other than the trademark "Cooke", there is little or no continuity between the company Taylor, Taylor & Hobson which developed the "Cooke" triplet and the present company. Post WW2, there were lots of buy-outs, mergers, rationalisation and an unsound market situation which lead, I believe, to specialisation around the growth markets of Cinema and Television production - as well as Contract optics (Military, NASA, Scientific).

All this means that there is no special knowledge (People or Documentation) about earlier large format designs in the organisation which now owns the trademark "Cooke". I am sure that if there was, it would have been shown in their few pages of Cooke history on their website.

An even worse situation exists for the even older name of "Ross" which has been passed on legally to a very poor maker of cheap telescopes.

[mikec]

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Who would be better?

I had heard that requests for info had been an apologetic refusal. Time is money and I guess they have other objectives (!). We will find out as I am mailing them for some more detailed info in the XIV. There is also the fact that archives disappear or are consigned to the bin with time. I did go on the cookeoptics site and found some info which is worth noting, even for silver nuts. The first was that for their cinema lenses, they are introducing an option of uncoated , yes UNcoated frontal elements to re-introduce "lower contrast, milkier shadows, flares, streaks and other aberrations that give a ‘vintage’ look. ". Wow all those characteristics that lens designers have spent years trying to get rid of and that I love.
The second is an article describing how they get the "Cooke look" in their cine lenses. For those interested in that, you can also go to the cinema, or Utube . I know that if I had a couple of grand to spare I would love to have a panchro adapted for my Leicas.

[mikec]

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Who would be better?

I was very pleasantly surprised when I made a request for info to Barbara Lowry at Cook Optics. I got an almost immediate reply and soon after she sent some data that she has been collating.

It did not unfortunately have any technical specs, and most was take directly from the booklet that I posted here.
Here is what I got:

Series XIV, f/6.3
For use with Panchromatic film

Appeared in Cooke lens catalogues: c.1935 to 1955

Lens construction (if known): “The Series XIV are of the three-glass type, and are intermediate between Process and Portrait lenses” (c.1935).

Photo(s) of lens – 1955
Specs – c.1936 (I did not get the photos or specs.)

Other photos, with captions and anecdotes

Lens is built for:
For portrait and commercial work with Panchromatic film

“The growing use of panchromatic material for general photography has made such lenses essential for certain types of work. Super-sensitive panchromatic plates and films do not require the large aperture so essential in the ordinary Portrait Anastigmat, and assisted by this fact we have been able to produce lenses which focus all colours with critical sharpness and uniform size of image on all types of sensitive photographic material.

Cooke Series XIV lenses are designed to give images varying in scale between one-fourth the size of the object and ‘infinity.’ They are recommended for use in the studio, especially for group work, and are also suitable for colour separation negatives from life or other originals.

For copying work in black and white and in colour, Cooke Process lenses should, of course, be used” (c.1935).

Up to 1947, the lenses were not coated. The 1955 catalogue entry notes that the “lenses are supplied with all air-to-glass surfaces coated, to ensure maximum transmissions and contrast values.” Some time between 1936 and 1955, the 21 inch focal length was no longer offered.

Samples

Series XIV, f/6.3, SN 247343

Series XIV, f/6.3, SN 516885
----------------------------------------------------

I was surprised to see that it had such a long production span, which would indicate that they are fairly common, as I had not seen one advertised before the elements that I had picked up.

She told me that she is at the moment creating a compendium of Cooke lens data that will when completed be added to the Cooke Optics site. I mentioned to her that the user community would be a good source of info (pics, doc etc) so we may get requests here in future.

[Steven Tribe]

Well it was advertised in the 1934 Kodak brochure, which was probably printed in 1933.

Nice to know they are preparing an old lens summary, even though it is hardly their key development area!

[IanG]

Cookeoptics are a comparitively recent organisation. Other than the trademark "Cooke", there is little or no continuity between the company Taylor, Taylor & Hobson which developed the "Cooke" triplet and the present company. Post WW2, there were lots of buy-outs, mergers, rationalisation and an unsound market situation which lead, I believe, to specialisation around the growth markets of Cinema and Television production - as well as Contract optics (Military, NASA, Scientific).

All this means that there is no special knowledge (People or Documentation) about earlier large format designs in the organisation which now owns the trademark "Cooke". I am sure that if there was, it would have been shown in their few pages of Cooke history on their website.

An even worse situation exists for the even older name of "Ross" which has been passed on legally to a very poor maker of cheap telescopes.

It's the other way around really the current TTH company had moved into different areas and separated off the lens division as it was just with a different name, but with all the heritage. it, so the current Cooke company is essentially still the same when it comes to lenses.

It's an interesting PDF and it's important to note that the plain Series II lenses (the Cooke Triplet) aren't included, some people seem to muddle them with the adjustable soft focus Portrait Series II versions and pay to much for them.

Ian

[Ceebee]

Hi excuse my ignorance but is the adjustable soft focus lens a triplet with adjustment that works by moving the position of the rear element only relative to the other two ?

Carl

[Steven Tribe]

Pictorial triplets work by moving the central double -ve lens towards the back of the front lens. The Universal Heliar, Cooke and the late Dallmeyer anastigmat are the best known.

A well equiped lathe, a very experienced operator and a stock of brass or aluminium is all that is necessary to turn this series XIV into a soft lens. Of unknown characteristics, of course!

[karl french]

I'd been watching that set of orphaned cells for a while. Definitely better glass than the somewhat scruffy example I have. I have the Series XIV in 13" and 16 1/2". If you need the length of the barrel of the 13" for shutter mounting let me know.

I've shot a bit with the 16.5. It's a nice lens. Not meant to be soft focus at all. And nothing at all like the Series XV (in terms of lens design.)

Here is a portrait from my first session with the lens (16 1/2" XIV.) I think I shot this at f11.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/summicron2020/26831886575/in/dateposted/

They do seem to be quite uncommon. I think it was probably the last triplet Cooke introduced. I would love to have the 21" version to complete the trio.

[Mark Sawyer]

Keep in mind that as the aperture size diminishes, so does the soft effect. At f/6.3, you may have to shift the central element's position considerably more than in the faster versions.

[Ceebee]

The reason I ask is because I have a couple of projection lenses that are Cooke triplets and the necessary machining facilities and so will try to sort something out. An interesting experiment and good thread turning practice..!

[Steven Tribe]

Lots of late large triplet projection lenses around. I did this with an Epis which had a simple focussing device between the long sleeve and the barrel with the three lenses mounted. I cut the barrel, just leaving the central lens in place and mounted the front and rear lens in the sleeve tube. The focussing knob just moves the shortened barrel from the original position forward. Results were less than satisfactory - in spite of being careful with measurements, I seem to have got the mounting of the first and last lenses slightly wrong. But the softness does increase as expected. So I went onto to other projects!