PDA

View Full Version : My Dream lens.



Tri Tran
20-Apr-2019, 11:38
For years, I've been love with the effect a soft focus lens gives. Sort of pictorial type of look. I wanted to design and make a perfect lens that suited my photography style precisely. It's been a long process, but here are some wide open shots using my 9in soft focus prototype lens for 4x5. Let me know what you think.



https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/923/i09sLT.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pni09sLTj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/921/TC1qHL.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/plTC1qHLj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/924/YNOVbE.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poYNOVbEj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/924/8erzqN.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/po8erzqNj)

Mark Woods
20-Apr-2019, 12:18
Beautiful Tri!

neil poulsen
20-Apr-2019, 12:33
Very nice. You likely have accomplished your goal.

I don't think the lens works so well for more distant scenes like the tree. But, it sure works for the remaining three images.

Keith Fleming
20-Apr-2019, 15:27
Nice images! Looking forward to seeing some of your portraits made with this lens.

Your description of these images being "wide open shots" implies you have the lens in a shutter which has an adjustable diaphragm. Please give us some images showing how the look of the lens changes upon being stopped down.

Keith

Jim Noel
20-Apr-2019, 17:44
I like the glow in the up close subjects. A good lens, Tri.

Peter De Smidt
20-Apr-2019, 18:05
I agree with Neil and Jim. The closeups are terrific.

Two23
20-Apr-2019, 19:23
I agree with Neil and Jim. The closeups are terrific.


Same thoughts here.


Kent in SD

6x6TLL
20-Apr-2019, 19:53
It looks amazing, especially on the closer shots!

blue4130
21-Apr-2019, 03:45
Do you have more information on this lens?

Tri Tran
21-Apr-2019, 07:53
Thank you all for the feedback. What I'm hoping is the glow of the highlight and retained the shadow details, the tonality value of the scene. Clean bokeh, no swirls from aberration and ghosting halo caused by optical prism.
Overall I'm very pleased with the contrast on the negative.
The lens is 9 in at F 5.5 comes with water house stop or can be mounted directly to copal 3 shutter. It will cover 5x7 and whole plate.
Happy Easter

Ed Vatza
21-Apr-2019, 16:51
I like it. I've been playing around with a similar concept using a 200mm Imagon wide open with the aperture disks removed. I won't say the effect is the same but it is similar.

pepeguitarra
21-Apr-2019, 17:00
it seems promising. More photos please.

Tri Tran
21-Apr-2019, 19:09
I like it. I've been playing around with a similar concept using a 200mm Imagon wide open with the aperture disks removed. I won't say the effect is the same but it is similar.

I know what you mean. Most of the Sf lens are really soft and flat which are very difficult for contact printing or alternative process. Thanks for the input

Tri Tran
21-Apr-2019, 19:13
[QUOTE=pepeguitarra;1495392]it seems promising. More photos please.

Will do Jose. 10 1/2 in and 15 in also available for 8x10. Stay tuned.

Christopher Mark Perez
22-Apr-2019, 08:17
I haven't followed along. Have you shared your design process and/or implementation? It looks like you've achieved a pretty nice effect.


Thank you all for the feedback. What I'm hoping is the glow of the highlight and retained the shadow details, the tonality value of the scene. Clean bokeh, no swirls from aberration and ghosting halo caused by optical prism.
Overall I'm very pleased with the contrast on the negative.
The lens is 9 in at F 5.5 comes with water house stop or can be mounted directly to copal 3 shutter. It will cover 5x7 and whole plate.
Happy Easter

DrTang
22-Apr-2019, 10:07
[QUOTE=pepeguitarra;1495392]it seems promising. More photos please.

Will do Jose. 10 1/2 in and 15 in also available for 8x10. Stay tuned.


Hmmmmmm...a 15" for 8x10 sounds mighty tasty - esp if one could stop it down a bit to moderate the softness as wished

Tri Tran
23-Apr-2019, 22:04
[QUOTE=Tri Tran;1495428]


Hmmmmmm...a 15" for 8x10 sounds mighty tasty - esp if one could stop it down a bit to moderate the softness as wished

Of course the option is the Artist's eyes.

Tri Tran
23-Apr-2019, 22:05
Here are a few more shots on my lunch break. No cropping.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/zhUc2X.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pozhUc2Xj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/923/IXn94h.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnIXn94hj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/hKm5uV.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pohKm5uVj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/4PRn5B.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/po4PRn5Bj)

Tri Tran
23-Apr-2019, 22:09
Around the house...

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/JQsAXV.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poJQsAXVj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/921/T0sZvc.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/plT0sZvcj)

pepeguitarra
23-Apr-2019, 22:12
It is indeed a dream lens!

Tri Tran
23-Apr-2019, 22:34
It is indeed a dream lens!

Hope you enjoy it. Thanks for checking

chris77
24-Apr-2019, 01:43
very interesting results.
its a prototype?
can we get a picture of the lens itself?
chapeau!
Chris

blue4130
24-Apr-2019, 02:13
The designing, did you have a specialty shop custom grind the lens for you? Did you grind it yourself? Is it made of off the shelf elements? So curious.

Tri Tran
24-Apr-2019, 06:33
very interesting results.
its a prototype?
can we get a picture of the lens itself?
chapeau!
Chris
Yes this is my prototype. I will post the lens pictures later. Thanks.

Tri Tran
24-Apr-2019, 06:37
The designing, did you have a specialty shop custom grind the lens for you? Did you grind it yourself? Is it made of off the shelf elements? So curious.

Hi. Everything is custom made. R&D by me.Thanks for your interest

Mark Crabtree
24-Apr-2019, 07:07
It would be exciting to see a new soft focus lens offered today. Your results look really promising. Have you done any portraits with it yet?

I hope you'll share some more details about the lens design soon.

Jim Galli
24-Apr-2019, 18:51
Hmmm. Looks a lot like my old "secret weapon" lens ;~')) I have a pile of lovely prints with that, and then as is often the case, it languishes in a drawer waiting.

Tri Tran
24-Apr-2019, 21:34
Hmmm. Looks a lot like my old "secret weapon" lens ;~')) I have a pile of lovely prints with that, and then as is often the case, it languishes in a drawer waiting.

Thanks for the compliments Jim.

Tri Tran
25-Apr-2019, 22:14
Ivy
8x10 Xray Full Frame
10 1/2 in

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/aABMAy.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poaABMAyj)

Amedeus
26-Apr-2019, 08:21
Looking great Tri !


Ivy
8x10 Xray Full Frame
10 1/2 in

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/aABMAy.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poaABMAyj)

3LeggedPanda
26-Apr-2019, 08:51
Ivy
8x10 Xray Full Frame
10 1/2 in

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/aABMAy.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poaABMAyj)

This looks great!
Super curious to see some portraits as well

Alan Gales
26-Apr-2019, 10:17
Looks great! I'd like to see some portraits made with it.

Tri Tran
26-Apr-2019, 10:50
My signature dream lens collection will be available from
9 -12 -15- 18 and 24 in respectively . The 24 in will cover 14x17 nicely.
More pictures will follow later.

Dan Fromm
26-Apr-2019, 11:03
Tri, your example pictures show that the lens produces fuzzy images. They're black/white so tell us nothing about how it renders colors. We can't tell whether they're warm and fuzzy.

Please stop being coy and give us details about the lens. Design type and all that.

Tri Tran
26-Apr-2019, 12:50
Looking great Tri !

Thanks Rudy.

Tri Tran
26-Apr-2019, 12:51
Looks great! I'd like to see some portraits made with it.

Will do. Thanks.

Tri Tran
26-Apr-2019, 14:26
Tri, your example pictures show that the lens produces fuzzy images. They're black/white so tell us nothing about how it renders colors. We can't tell whether they're warm and fuzzy.

Please stop being coy and give us details about the lens. Design type and all that.

Please be patient with me. I'm working on it. Will let you know in detail later.

Tri Tran
30-Apr-2019, 00:13
Here are 2 shots with the 18 in.
Format 8x10.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/QW2xxG.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poQW2xxGj)


https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/921/Zekhnr.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/plZekhnrj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/924/juurM6.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pojuurM6j)

Tri Tran
5-May-2019, 15:54
Here's a portrait of my friend with 18in.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/7tZqbA.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn7tZqbAj)

Jim Galli
5-May-2019, 16:13
Here's a portrait of my friend with 18in.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/vnnVnT.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnvnnVnTj)

Hey Matt! Good to see u. Xlnt Tri

Alan Gales
5-May-2019, 21:10
Here's a portrait of my friend with 18in.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/7tZqbA.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn7tZqbAj)


What do you know? It works for portraits too! ;)

Nice portrait!

Tri Tran
16-May-2019, 09:37
Still life .10 1/2 in on 8x10 with Xray.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/921/JNYQAo.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/plJNYQAoj)

Jim Graves
23-May-2019, 19:09
Tri -- those are all beautiful but hard to tell how they compare to currently available lenses.

How about a couple of side-by-side comparison shots with your prototype and a standard soft focus lens?

Tri Tran
24-May-2019, 11:32
Tri -- those are all beautiful but hard to tell how they compare to currently available lenses.

How about a couple of side-by-side comparison shots with your prototype and a standard soft focus lens?

I know what you mean Jim. Quite some work for me but I will see what I can do . Thanks for the suggestion.

Tri Tran
30-May-2019, 22:10
Ridge route creek
8x10in Platinum Palladium contact print
TT 18in Pictorial lens
Xray double sided negative

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/SvNCAL.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnSvNCALj)

Dan Fromm
31-May-2019, 05:09
When are you going to give us information about the lens?

Tri Tran
31-May-2019, 07:39
Hi Dan.
I don't have anything for you at the moment because the lens prototype is being made. You are more then welcome to sign up your name and contact info on my website so I can keep you updated when the lens will be introduced. Thank you.

Steven Tribe
31-May-2019, 13:10
Hi Dan.
I don't have anything for you at the moment because the lens prototype is being made. You are more then welcome to sign up your name and contact info on my website so I can keep you updated when the lens will be introduced. Thank you.

A little too mysterious for me - but good luck with your enterprise!

Dan Fromm
31-May-2019, 13:15
Hi Dan.
I don't have anything for you at the moment because the lens prototype is being made. You are more then welcome to sign up your name and contact info on my website so I can keep you updated when the lens will be introduced. Thank you.

If the prototype hasn't been built, what have you been shooting with? More serioiusly, I don't want to see a picture of the completed lens, I want to see the lens' cross-section to see which design type it is.

Jim Fitzgerald
31-May-2019, 21:36
I will chime in here if I may. I've been asked to test this lens for Tri. The current lens is housed in a PVC barrel and is a single meniscus lens of Tri's design and is manufactured to his specifications. Be patient everyone as something new takes time. You can't design and make a barrel housing in a couple of weeks. This will be done first class. There will be many options available and we are trying our best to make it affordable for the community. If you have noticed there is no Kickstarter going here. Tri has invested in this and when it is ready we will show everyone.

As far as a cross section I don't know why? It is a single meniscus lens in a barrel that can screw into a Copal 3 shutter or we may have one available with an Iris, rather simple design. If you want to know about the lens design you will have to buy one and reverse engineer it or pay a lot of money to find out from Tri! We are working out the details and there are many. We want to get it right from the beginning.

Most of you want to see the images and Tri has posted several beautiful images. Because I'm a carbon printer I post prints only and it takes me time to get them done. I'm using a 24" lens right now on my 14x17 and I can tell you it looks beautiful on the ground glass. I hope to post some prints soon.

We are relying on outside sources for fabrication and as always they are taking longer than quoted. So hang in there please. This is not mysterious and if you know anything about trying a new lens out a PVC barrel makes sense. I'm surprised that this was not obvious. Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks a lot.

Nodda Duma
1-Jun-2019, 04:48
Tri these are great! Exactly what I’d expect from a well-designed, fast single meniscus.

As you know by enlisting Jim’s help, external reviewers are always a good thing. As a lens designer, I’ve been spec’ing and sourcing lenses for many years. I’d like to volunteer my expertise working in the optics industry to review your lens / lens drawings from a technical perspective. It wouldn’t take long, but it will help you avoid the many pitfalls of transitioning prototype lenses to production that you only learn by experience or the (costly) hard way. I can also review your choice of optical shop. I know who the best and cheapest shops are (many of them in the US I know personally), and — more importantly — who to avoid. There is nothing in it for me, except to help a fellow enthusiast succeed.

Just shoot me a PM. And kudos if you already have an optics guy helping you.

-Jason

Dan Fromm
1-Jun-2019, 05:00
Thanks, Jim.

Peter De Smidt
1-Jun-2019, 06:06
Good luck with the project!

Vaughn
1-Jun-2019, 07:38
Jim, why are you not making lens barrels out of walnut? ;)

Great project, Tri Tran!

Jim Fitzgerald
1-Jun-2019, 08:12
Jim, why are you not making lens barrels out of walnut? ;)

Great project, Tri Tran!

Vaughn, you haven't seen my Walnut barrel 14" Commercial Ektar? I'm not kidding! It is cut for Waterhouse stops as well!

Jim Fitzgerald
1-Jun-2019, 08:16
Jason, that is a nice offer. Tri is an Optician with over 30 wars of experience with lenses and lens design so he knows what he is doing and knows the labs that are needed for this project. I'm sure he will hit you up if needed. Thanks again for the offer.

Jim Galli
1-Jun-2019, 09:21
Tri, is this an achromatic doublet or simple single glass meniscus? Ha ha, you are like Henry Ford in 1927. Everybody just had to wait while he got the Model A ready.

Tri Tran
1-Jun-2019, 10:59
Tri, is this an achromatic doublet or simple single glass meniscus? Ha ha, you are like Henry Ford in 1927. Everybody just had to wait while he got the Model A ready.

Hi Jim,
It's a single meniscus lens. TT

Tri Tran
1-Jun-2019, 11:00
Jim, why are you not making lens barrels out of walnut? ;)

Great project, Tri Tran!

Thanks Vaughn, I will try my best.

Tri Tran
1-Jun-2019, 11:01
Thanks Jason and Dan please stay tuned

Steven Tribe
4-Jun-2019, 00:47
Now I have to be careful about what I write - I can see that a lot of time, effort and, perhaps, investment have got into this project.

First of all, I can't really evaluate the first set of Images that the OP posted. I don't know whether the resolution is due to my own Ipad or whether it is a problem for all viewers regardless of viewing medium. The later images - more classic composition for pictorial lenses - do look like photos taken with a long focus meniscus lens. I have a lot of purpose built meniscus lens for both "general" photography and "pictorial" photography. The range is from 6" to 60". The difference between the well designed achromat and the "faulty/arty" achromat is, in my opinion, marginal. I get the impression that composition, side/back lighting etc. are probaby more important than the name on the side of the lens.

What I am saying is that there are 1,000s of meniscus lens available out there which will produce the desired aberrations. Perhaps there is an apparent shortage of the longer focal lengths (greater than 18") but remember there is a hidden unused, for the most part, source in the front cell of your Petzval.

It is fun thing to retrace the deveopments of the 20th century, but for me the most recent interesting and important retro activity at the moment is the development of a new range of dry plates!

Tri Tran
4-Jun-2019, 08:48
Now I have to be careful about what I write - I can see that a lot of time, effort and, perhaps, investment have got into this project.

First of all, I can't really evaluate the first set of Images that the OP posted. I don't know whether the resolution is due to my own Ipad or whether it is a problem for all viewers regardless of viewing medium. The later images - more classic composition for pictorial lenses - do look like photos taken with a long focus meniscus lens. I have a lot of purpose built meniscus lens for both "general" photography and "pictorial" photography. The range is from 6" to 60". The difference between the well designed achromat and the "faulty/arty" achromat is, in my opinion, marginal. I get the impression that composition, side/back lighting etc. are probaby more important than the name on the side of the lens.

What I am saying is that there are 1,000s of meniscus lens available out there which will produce the desired aberrations. Perhaps there is an apparent shortage of the longer focal lengths (greater than 18") but remember there is a hidden unused, for the most part, source in the front cell of your Petzval.

It is fun thing to retrace the deveopments of the 20th century, but for me the most recent interesting and important retro activity at the moment is the development of a new range of dry plates!

Thanks Steven for the info and input. TT

Tri Tran
4-Jun-2019, 08:50
8x10 in Platinum Palladium contact print
Double sided Xray film.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/ry8B3f.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnry8B3fj)

Peter De Smidt
4-Jun-2019, 09:23
That's a terrific photo, TT!

Tri Tran
4-Jun-2019, 09:45
[QUOTE=Peter De Smidt;1502533]That's a terrific photo, TT![/QUOTE

Thanks Peter. We are after the image after all. Don't we?

Tri Tran
10-Jun-2019, 20:58
One was taken with a Pinkham Smith Bi-Quality and other with my lens . Let me know what you think ?

A
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/adCHcb.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnadCHcbj)

B
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/fUf78a.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pmfUf78aj)

Vaughn
10-Jun-2019, 21:10
...I have a lot of purpose built meniscus lens for both "general" photography and "pictorial" photography. The range is from 6" to 60". The difference between the well designed achromat and the "faulty/arty" achromat is, in my opinion, marginal. I get the impression that composition, side/back lighting etc. are probaby more important than the name on the side of the lens....
I have a 500mm Reinhold Meniscus lens that I have never put on the camera -- any significant difference between it and most meniscus lenses?

Jim Graves
10-Jun-2019, 21:53
One was taken with a Pinkham Smith Bi-Quality and other with my lens . Let me know what you think ?

A
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/adCHcb.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnadCHcbj)

B
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/fUf78a.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pmfUf78aj)

Both very nice shots ... but hard to compare two different shots with different subjects under different conditions with different focal lengths.

Jeff T
10-Jun-2019, 23:21
Looks to be the the exact scene with slightly different sun positions. Tri, the Pinkham (image A) has obvious signs of swirly in the the corners with overall higher contrast while focus area appears sharper when compares to your signature lens. Image B with Lilly has a soft glow similar to Struss Pictorial or Kodak Portrait Lens. Petzval vs. Meniscus? How did you get Nga the model in image A to wear that outfit when its 90F degrees at mid summer day?

I would love to see you compare your signature lens to a Struss Pictorial lens?

Tri Tran
11-Jun-2019, 13:24
Thanks for the input Jeff. What's Struss's focal length you want me to compare with? 9,10/12 or 15?

Jim Noel
11-Jun-2019, 15:19
Vaughn,
I have six meniscus lense of various lengths, 2 of which are from Reinhold. I have found little difference between them other than focal length. I did have one which I threw away because it was so poorly ground the images were just too filled with weird areas. I didn't want friends mad at me, or customers even more so. Thus the trash.

Vaughn
11-Jun-2019, 15:23
Vaughn,
I have six meniscus lense of various lengths, 2 of which are from Reinhold. I have found little difference between them other than focal length. I did have one which I threw away because it was so poorly ground the images were just too filled with weird areas. I didn't want friends mad at me, or customers even more so. Thus the trash.
Thanks! I'll see if I ever use it...usually not my thing, but perhaps on the 8x10, but probably will work on the 11x14.

Jim Fitzgerald
11-Jun-2019, 17:21
Thanks! I'll see if I ever use it...usually not my thing, but perhaps on the 8x10, but probably will work on the 11x14.

Vaughn, I had that focal length and it was fine for my 14x17. I sold it some time ago. I had many other lenses that were better.

Jeff T
11-Jun-2019, 19:15
Tri, a 9 inch or 15 inch focal would be awesome to see. Thanks.

Tri Tran
11-Jun-2019, 19:50
Tri, a 9 inch or 15 inch focal would be awesome to see. Thanks.
Noted. Stay tuned.

Vaughn
11-Jun-2019, 20:06
Vaughn, I had that focal length and it was fine for my 14x17. I sold it some time ago. I had many other lenses that were better.
Thanks for the info! I might find some use for it. In my mind (odd that it is), soft-focus lenses used for their feeling of softness usually over-power the quality of the light, which is what I am most interested in working with.

Tri Tran
11-Jun-2019, 20:20
Thanks for the info! I might find some use for it. In my mind (odd that it is), soft-focus lenses used for their feeling of softness usually over-power the quality of the light, which is what I am most interested in working with.

That's why you need a lens that also can defocus to suit your vision.

Vaughn
11-Jun-2019, 20:26
That's why you need a lens that also can defocus to suit your vision.
True...and I like many of your soft-focus/focus-distorted images -- it just places too much consideration on the objects/people being photographed for how I wish to express myself with the light. I rarely, if ever, even use selective focusing.

I am sorry you could not make it to the opening in Yosemite -- suppossively we have met before, but that data is no longer available in my brain!

Tri Tran
11-Jun-2019, 20:49
I am also sorry that I couldn't make it to the show! I don't remember us meeting either. Soft focus isn't for everyone - either you prefer more realistic photography, or more pictorial. Totally understand your point about the selective focusing!

Jim Graves
11-Jun-2019, 21:52
I'm always a little confused when people say the don't like "soft focus" lenses ... for a couple of reasons.

First ... soft focus is really how we see. You look at a specific thing, focus on that, and the rest of the image is slightly out of focus. You focus on what is interesting to you. How can a soft focus photo that looks "real" be less desirable than a flat f-64 photo of a scene? Sure ... if all you're doing is documenting the scene ... that's fine ... but who wants to just document a scene? That's not how it looked to you when you viewed it.

Second ... a soft focus lens gives the artist the ability to direct the observer to the most important part of the image. That is why soft focus lenses are virtually always used for portraits. The eyes are where it's at. In closeups the eyes are revealed while the rest of the image fills in the details, mood, or whatever else the photographer deems important ... but nothing is more important than the eyes.

If you are in Yosemite and taking a shot of half dome ... you want half dome in focus ... and nothing else. If EVERYTHING else is in focus, then half dome becomes less important in your photo.

I believe pictorialism became popular because people felt f-64 type photos were simply documents sans the esthetic feel of art. A documentary photo is not art ... but a nuanced photo that directs your vision to what the artist wants you to experience and that displays a feeling with its aura ... well, that's art.

I applaud Tri for his search.

Of course, as with everything else, YMMV (your mileage may vary.)

Sal Santamaura
12-Jun-2019, 07:54
...soft focus is really how we see...No, it's not.

Use of soft focus lenses is a perfectly valid way to photograph. They enable creation of images that reflect what the photographer wants to present, and viewers will either like the result or not. But such pictures most definitely do not duplicate how humans -- at least those without defective vision -- see.

Our eye-brain system is dynamic. As we scan a scene, the brain establishes what it's interested in and the eyes focus on that. The brain is paying attention to what's in optical focus, not what isn't. The out-of-focus areas are, for the most part, not noticed by the brain.

A photograph that seeks to present viewers with a simulation of what they'd have seen at the scene must be of the "f/64" (sharp everywhere) type. It is a static artifact, unable to incorporate the eye-brain dynamic focusing mechanism.

To reiterate and underscore, I offer no value judgement about soft-focus pictures. They're no "better" or "worse" than other photographs. But they don't in any way reflect how humans with normal vision see.

Jim Noel
12-Jun-2019, 08:10
No, it's not.

Use of soft focus lenses is a perfectly valid way to photograph. They enable creation of images that reflect what the photographer wants to present, and viewers will either like the result or not. But such pictures most definitely do not duplicate how humans -- at least those without defective vision -- see.

Our eye-brain system is dynamic. As we scan a scene, the brain establishes what it's interested in and the eyes focus on that. The brain is paying attention to what's in optical focus, not what isn't. The out-of-focus areas are, for the most part, not noticed by the brain.

A photograph that seeks to present viewers with a simulation of what they'd have seen at the scene must be of the "f/64" (sharp everywhere) type. It is a static artifact, unable to incorporate the eye-brain dynamic focusing mechanism.

To reiterate and underscore, I offer no value judgement about soft-focus pictures. They're no "better" or "worse" than other photographs. But they don't in any way reflect how humans with normal vision see.

I don't know Sal's credentials for making such a statement,but I totally disagree. What I am looking at is in sharp focus,and all else is recognizable, but fuzzy at best.

Vaughn
12-Jun-2019, 08:44
Seeing is a dynamic process which involves not just the eyes transferring data to the brain, but also the brain translating/interpreting/extrapulating that data, based on experience and the occasional brain-fart (there is no such thing as an optical illusion -- better to call them brain-failures, or farts). Or as Berkeley Mike (or is he on APUG?) talked about, even genetic memory might influence how we see. No single static image is going to even get close to representing that complex process. But it is worth trying -- soft-focus, selective focus, or all in focus (even nothing in focus) -- whatever way works for the artist.

Jim Graves
12-Jun-2019, 17:46
Respectfully disagree ... Sal.

If I go out in the front yard and focus on a nearby bush (which I just did) ... the entire park scene across the street is still visible and not in focus. It may not have swirlies as with a petzval ... but it is all there and all visualized in the scene.

Jim Fitzgerald
12-Jun-2019, 19:14
I agree with the Jim's about the way we see. For me, everything that is not what I'm focusing on is soft and out of focus but I see it.

The lenses we speak about were from a time at the turn of the century. 1800's to 1900's when Pictoralism was flourishing. I personally see the word both ways. Both sharp and soft. No right or wrong way just how my feelings are expressed at the time with the image I have before me and how I feel about it. I would highly recommend the following book to those who enjoy this style and want to understand the history behind the great works and workers of this time period.

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300229080/clarence-h-white-and-his-world

It is a great read.

jp
12-Jun-2019, 19:38
Peter Henry Emerson defended the theory that we see sharply at a spot and everything else is soft and he didn't mind addressing such uncertain theories.. (His Naturalistic photography book is a tough read in part due to it's age). So it's not a new idea and if it helps make a good photograph all the better to think of it. Rather than contend for theories, I am more interested in photos and the actual shooting that go with the soft styles. Jim's book suggestions is excellent. The history is inspirational.

I've shot with the Reinhold's meniscus a considerable amount of photos, shot plenty of old multi-element soft focus lenses, and look forward to the results of the TT Dream Lens as people figure it out. All different ways of doing soft focus. I suspect it will take a while and many different users to produce a body of work showing the character of the lens.

Sal Santamaura
12-Jun-2019, 20:28
I anticipated a "strong" reaction to post #81, and you other members did not disappoint. :)


...Our eye-brain system is dynamic. As we scan a scene, the brain establishes what it's interested in and the eyes focus on that. The brain is paying attention to what's in optical focus, not what isn't. The out-of-focus areas are, for the most part, not noticed by the brain...

Humans who aren't photographers, i.e. haven't been trained or trained themselves to see the way a camera does, are constantly scanning the world before them to glean detailed information about things of interest. Their brains directs their eyes to point toward and focus on those things. The brain then evaluates what their eyes have locked onto. That the rest of their visual field is unsharp hardly matters to the brain, unless something moving quickly or of greatly different luminance in that unsharp zone is detected, at which point the brain will redirect eyes to focus on / track the "something."


...A photograph that seeks to present viewers with a simulation of what they'd have seen at the scene must be of the "f/64" (sharp everywhere) type. It is a static artifact, unable to incorporate the eye-brain dynamic focusing mechanism...Perhaps you'll all be less upset if I qualify that by limiting it to viewers who aren't photographers/artists. :)


...To reiterate and underscore, I offer no value judgement about soft-focus pictures. They're no "better" or "worse" than other photographs. But they don't in any way reflect how humans with normal vision who aren't photographers/artists see.

Jim Graves
12-Jun-2019, 20:53
It's not really a "strong" reaction to what you posted. It is simply how we see.

A photograph is static ... just as you said "a static artifact" ... it has nothing to do with "scanning" a scene. If you want to document a scene ... shoot it at f-64 ... if you want to present an image that is important to you as an artistic view ... shoot it in soft focus with only the important portion in sharp focus.

Sure ... it's an opinion ... but ALL of what I consider my best images are presented that way. But as always .... YMMV.

Vaughn
12-Jun-2019, 21:12
I can not disagree with anything you wrote, Sal. While unfocused areas can be in our field of vision, the unfocused areas for most people are sub-dominate to in-focus areas. Recalling any scene, most people will not have a memory of the unfocused areas, but will recall the scene all in focus.

Throwing in other factors, we see in 3-D -- if you have two working eyes and what you are looking at is within 60 feet of you. I doubt we remember the 3-d effect, also. Both might be able to become true memory thru rigorous training, I suppose. Moving things are stopped, or if a long exposure, presented in such a way that our brains do not interpret them.

So to say any type of lens sees the world as we experience is it, IMO, is not a valid statement. But this is not a limitation, but something that frees us to express what we wish to express about an image. A photographic image is not an image of reality, even tho we tend to say, "Yes, that is the way it was."

Jim Graves
12-Jun-2019, 21:15
And now ... we should probably return this thread to Tri ... and his lens development project.

Sal Santamaura
12-Jun-2019, 21:41
...A photograph is static ... just as you said "a static artifact" ... it has nothing to do with "scanning" a scene...Precisely. In order for one to offer viewers of photographs all scene elements that could have been scanned and examined in detail by a human present when they were made, they must be sharp everywhere.


...If you want to document a scene ... shoot it at f-64...Yup. And if one wishes to make a photograph that's soft focus, do that. Either is perfectly valid and neither conflicts with anything I wrote. :)

Tri Tran
12-Jun-2019, 22:14
To each his own, appreciate your passionate discussions in this threat.

Jim Fitzgerald
12-Jun-2019, 22:36
I hope to have some example images shot on 14x17 with the 24" lens that Tri has developed. My last shoot I had a film problem. I'll post some images as soon as I can.

Tri Tran
12-Jun-2019, 22:42
Here's the newest one that I just shot with the 18in F7.5 wide open. Xray Double sided. 8x10.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/921/POQOqg.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/plPOQOqgj)

Tri Tran
12-Jun-2019, 22:52
This one was taken with the 24 in F10 wide open with single sided Xray on 14x17

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/4IfiVE.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn4IfiVEj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/0uiDgt.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn0uiDgtj)

Tri Tran
12-Jun-2019, 22:54
I hope to have some example images shot on 14x17 with the 24" lens that Tri has developed. My last shoot I had a film problem. I'll post some images as soon as I can.

Jim, look forward to see your test. TT

Mark Crabtree
13-Jun-2019, 10:48
Here's the newest one that I just shot with the 18in. Xray Double sided. 8x10.



The pictures look great. Apertures used for the photos would be helpful. Perhaps you stated that earlier, but it would still be useful with each picture so as not to have to reread.

Tri Tran
13-Jun-2019, 11:21
Corrected. Thanks for reminding me.
I normally exposed without the light meter then developed the negatives by inspection.

Peter De Smidt
13-Jun-2019, 12:14
Lovely photos, TT.

cowanw
13-Jun-2019, 18:25
Looks to be the the exact scene with slightly different sun positions. Tri, the Pinkham (image A) has obvious signs of swirly in the the corners with overall higher contrast while focus area appears sharper when compares to your signature lens. Image B with Lilly has a soft glow similar to Struss Pictorial or Kodak Portrait Lens. Petzval vs. Meniscus? How did you get Nga the model in image A to wear that outfit when its 90F degrees at mid summer day?

I would love to see you compare your signature lens to a Struss Pictorial lens?

Funny I had the same observations except for precisely opposite A vs B prints; B looks swirley to me and sharper in the centre.

Hugo Zhang
13-Jun-2019, 19:34
Lovely pictures, Tri!

Alan Gales
13-Jun-2019, 20:56
Nice portraits! Your lens is dreamy! :cool:

I also like how the tree frames the woman in the first shot.

Rainymac
13-Jun-2019, 21:31
This one was taken with the 24 in F10 wide open with single sided Xray on 14x17

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/4IfiVE.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn4IfiVEj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/923/0uiDgt.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn0uiDgtj)
Just superb! The closest I will come to your dream lens is to enjoy the images you post, but that's OK. What a treat...one can only imagine how beautiful these large images are viewed as a physical print.

Tri Tran
15-Jun-2019, 08:19
Just superb! The closest I will come to your dream lens is to enjoy the images you post, but that's OK. What a treat...one can only imagine how beautiful these large images are viewed as a physical print.

Thanks for the compliments. I'm glad you enjoyed them.

Tri Tran
15-Jun-2019, 08:21
Again thanks everyone. Here's another one with 18in at wide open F7.5. 8x10 with double sided Xray. Developed by inspection.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/kz86z5.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pmkz86z5j)

Jim Galli
15-Jun-2019, 09:10
I would highly recommend the following book to those who enjoy this style and want to understand the history behind the great works and workers of this time period.

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300229080/clarence-h-white-and-his-world

It is a great read.

Ooooooooh. $65. Can I borrow your copy :p:cool:

For Tri: Actually, the bokeh in the 14X17 of the elder in the chair is troubling to me. That of course is personal preference and completely subjective. I'm speaking of the oof area above and left.

Tri Tran
15-Jun-2019, 09:25
Ooooooooh. $65. Can I borrow your copy :p:cool:

For Tri: Actually, the bokeh in the 14X17 of the elder in the chair is troubling to me. That of course is personal preference and completely subjective. I'm speaking of the oof area above and left.

No worries Jim, once I have to barrel completed I will send out to the VIP Alpha test list. TT

Jim Noel
15-Jun-2019, 10:49
I agree with the Jim's about the way we see. For me, everything that is not what I'm focusing on is soft and out of focus but I see it.

The lenses we speak about were from a time at the turn of the century. 1800's to 1900's when Pictoralism was flourishing. I personally see the word both ways. Both sharp and soft. No right or wrong way just how my feelings are expressed at the time with the image I have before me and how I feel about it. I would highly recommend the following book to those who enjoy this style and want to understand the history behind the great works and workers of this time period.

https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300229080/clarence-h-white-and-his-world

It is a great read.

This is such a terrific book it is under-priced in my mind. I have hundreds of books and it is one of the two best Iown.

Tri Tran
15-Jun-2019, 12:47
This is such a terrific book it is under-priced in my mind. I have hundreds of books and it is one of the two best Iown.

Great book. I ordered on Amazon.

Jim Fitzgerald
15-Jun-2019, 21:07
Ooooooooh. $65. Can I borrow your copy :p:cool:

For Tri: Actually, the bokeh in the 14X17 of the elder in the chair is troubling to me. That of course is personal preference and completely subjective. I'm speaking of the oof area above and left.

The book is actually $43.00 on Amazon. It is a wonderful read. Just about a buck a page!

Jim Fitzgerald
15-Jun-2019, 21:08
This is such a terrific book it is under-priced in my mind. I have hundreds of books and it is one of the two best Iown.


Jim, it is one of the best I own as well. Way under priced especially for the quality of the images in the book as the printing is excellent.

Pete Roody
16-Jun-2019, 17:55
Jim, it is one of the best I own as well. Way under priced especially for the quality of the images in the book as the printing is excellent.

Yes the book is very nice but the exhibition was outstanding. I saw it at the Davis. Seeing the prints in person put the prints in the book to shame. The exhibition was in Cleveland too, but I see it closed there. Does anybody know if will be continued?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jim Fitzgerald
16-Jun-2019, 21:50
Yes the book is very nice but the exhibition was outstanding. I saw it at the Davis. Seeing the prints in person put the prints in the book to shame. The exhibition was in Cleveland too, but I see it closed there. Does anybody know if will be continued?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pete, I can only imagine what the prints must have looked like. Lucky you. I wish I could see the prints and I do not know if it is available anywhere.

Tri Tran
28-Jun-2019, 10:26
My TT signature pictorial lens. This one will be a Limited Edition T6 Aluminium in 2 tone Mat Silver.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/922/gk4DmX.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pmgk4DmXj)

Peter De Smidt
28-Jun-2019, 10:48
Looks terrific!

Dan Dozer
30-Jun-2019, 15:30
So Tri,

I've been patiently watching the progress with all of your great images. Do you have some sort of timeline on when your lenses might be available to all of us? I'm dying to try one out.

Dan

Tri Tran
30-Jun-2019, 21:07
Thank you Dan. We had your name on the list for the first batch.


So Tri,

I've been patiently watching the progress with all of your great images. Do you have some sort of timeline on when your lenses might be available to all of us? I'm dying to try one out.

Dan

Nodda Duma
2-Jul-2019, 08:33
The machining looks great! Would love to give it a run to review from my perspective.

Cheers,
Jason

Tri Tran
2-Jul-2019, 10:10
Thanks Jason. Eagerly waiting for your order. TT


The machining looks great! Would love to give it a run to review from my perspective.

Cheers,
Jason

Tri Tran
2-Jul-2019, 10:11
Introducing the Tri Tran Signature Fine Art Lens.
Please follow the link https://www.tritranphotography.com/tt-signature-lens?fbclid=IwAR1Mg-vPQJsQ9qABIjmcYhI3b83QviQ9eDWwJOT5IzJYLRWGnXN5kqmFb-I

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/924/o92dZE.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poo92dZEj)

Steven Tribe
6-Jul-2019, 01:52
Had a good read of the prospectus!

Just a few things that seem a little "off"!

- while some of the classic pictorial lenses are under-represented in shorter focal lengths - for example, Graf variable - the situation is different for meniscus lenses, like T,T & H RVP and Spencer Portland where the 6" -9" sizes are plentiful.

- the availability of "vanity" serial numbers is IMHO a unfortunate reflection of current society. Real serial numbers is the best way ensure that the history of the TT lens era is written correctly in a century or two!

Tin Can
6-Jul-2019, 05:32
Very Interesting Tri Tran.

What are the flange focal distances at infinity?

I understand the desire and need for personalized numbering.

Congratulations on bringing this product to market!

Tri Tran
6-Jul-2019, 12:47
[QUOTE=Tin Can;1507793]

What are the flange focal distances at infinity?





Hi , can you rephrase your question ? I dont quite understand what you mean. Thanks. TT

Tin Can
6-Jul-2019, 13:14
It is either the distance from the lens node, iris or mounting flange to the the film plane at infinity.


Old thread with some explanations, https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?114588-Optics-focal-length-versus-flange-focal-distance&p=1148610&viewfull=1#post1148610


I have a Gundlach Portrait 16-1/4 f6 Achromatic Meniscus which has a much longer flange distance than 16".

But I did not exactly measure it.

Tri Tran
4-Aug-2019, 21:47
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/924/SAeb1P.png (https://imageshack.com/i/poSAeb1Pp)

8x10 plate
12 in
Xray film

Tri Tran
4-Aug-2019, 21:48
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/922/QW3EsD.png (https://imageshack.com/i/pmQW3EsDp)

8x10 plate
12 in
Xray film

Tin Can
4-Aug-2019, 22:26
Like!

Both

Tri Tran
5-Aug-2019, 11:17
Like!

Both

Thank you !

Tri Tran
5-Aug-2019, 11:20
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/xq90/924/2iejw6.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/po2iejw6j)

8x10 plate
12 in
Xray film

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/923/4ZY2JI.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pn4ZY2JIj)

Nodda Duma
5-Aug-2019, 11:33
Flange focal distance is the distance from the mounting flange to the image plane when the lens is focused at infinity. It is a mechanical distance usually unrelated to optical properties, except the “focused at infinity” convention.

As an example, the Nikon F-mount has a standardized flange focal length of 46.5mm.

Dan Dozer
11-Sep-2019, 15:00
Look what I just got! My brand new 15" Tri Tran Dream Lens. Excellent craftsmanship and I can't wait to try it out this weekend.

Jim Galli
11-Sep-2019, 17:10
Wow Dan, gorgeous. I hope it gives you many perfect photo's. Share images when you get some.

Jim Fitzgerald
11-Sep-2019, 17:26
Dan, awesome! Mine is coming in tomorrow. Can't wait to see it. I have an 18" and 28" lenses with mine. Should be nice on the 14x17.

Matt Stage
11-Sep-2019, 19:54
I was very happy to get mine (it has my name on it!). A huge debt of gratitude is owed to Tri Tran for pouring his heart and soul into making this dream a reality!

195383

Matt Stage
11-Sep-2019, 20:09
After picking mine (and many others) up at the factory, the first thing I did was take it to the Three Shadows Photography Art Centre 三影堂摄影艺术中心 in Beijing for show and tell in the pomegranate garden.

195384
195385
195386

Dan Dozer
11-Sep-2019, 22:27
You're absolutely right Matt. Tri spent a huge amount of time and effort in putting this design together, and he has turned out a first class professional lens that I'm going to be really proud to own. But let's not forget you and Jim F. for your work as well.

I feel honored to have Tri give me serial #001 of the black 15" model. Been getting a lens board ready so hopefully, I'll be able to take a couple of 8 x 10 photos with it this weekend.

blue4130
12-Sep-2019, 02:11
After picking mine (and many others) up at the factory, the first thing I did was take it to the Three Shadows Photography Art Centre 三影堂摄影艺术中心 in Beijing for show and tell in the pomegranate garden.

195384
195385
195386

Matt, Do you travel to Beijing often? Would love to see the lens in person if you are in the area.

Matt Stage
12-Sep-2019, 14:35
Not sure when my next visit will be but I will be sure to set up a meeting to show you the lens -- if you haven't already purchased one.

Tri Tran
13-Sep-2019, 09:25
Hope you all are enjoying it. Please share your images here when you can. I recommend to put on the 72mm NiSi PRO Nano HUC Protector Filter in the back of the ring. 72mm ND filter will fit right in the inside the lens hood. If you are using Lee system please order 105mm adapter ring for the its threated hood. Have fun.

Daniel Niles
14-Sep-2019, 00:12
Thank you all for the feedback. What I'm hoping is the glow of the highlight and retained the shadow details, the tonality value of the scene. Clean bokeh, no swirls from aberration and ghosting halo caused by optical prism.
Overall I'm very pleased with the contrast on the negative.
The lens is 9 in at F 5.5 comes with water house stop or can be mounted directly to copal 3 shutter. It will cover 5x7 and whole plate.
Happy Easter

Jim Fitzgerald
16-Sep-2019, 17:33
Here is my lens. I have the 18" lens component and the 28" lens component. This is the 28" for the 14x17 and it looks sweet on the GG. Just got it and had a busy weekend at the LightBox Symposium this weekend and hope to shoot it soon.

Tri Tran
17-Sep-2019, 10:11
[QUOTE=Jim Fitzgerald;1517485]Here is my lens. I have the 18" lens component and the 28" lens component. This is the 28" for the 14x17 and it looks sweet on the GG. Just got it and had a busy weekend at the LightBox Symposium this weekend and hope to shoot it soon.[/

Enjoy your 007 :)

Matt Stage
17-Sep-2019, 16:30
Here are a couple pictures of the TT Signature Lens System I received. As you can see, I ordered a few elements in a range of sizes to cover several formats. I could not be happier with it!!!

Peter De Smidt
17-Sep-2019, 17:21
Great looking setup!

Matt Stage
17-Sep-2019, 17:27
Absolutely! The lens looks great on the camera, but it looks even better through the camera!!!

Tri Tran
18-Sep-2019, 09:45
Here are a couple pictures of the TT Signature Lens System I received. As you can see, I ordered a few elements in a range of sizes to cover several formats. I could not be happier with it!!!

You are so organized, enjoy the system Matt.

Richard Martel
18-Sep-2019, 19:53
Dreamy looking photographs with your lens Mr. Tran, sort of an Orten look. Nice!
Cheers Richard

Tri Tran
19-Sep-2019, 09:37
Thanks Richard, really appreciated. TT

Matt Stage
10-Nov-2019, 01:06
First, a scan of a negative (8x10 Shanghai 100) made using the Tri Tran Signature lens. Backlit aspens in a grove just outside of Lee Vining. I look forward to printing this image.

197341

Matt Stage
10-Nov-2019, 01:12
Here are a couple of carbon transfer prints made at Yosemite with the Tri Tran Signature Lens. They were shot in Yosemite and printed in Ansel Adams' Darkroom as part of a workshop with Vaughn Hutchins and Jim Fitzgerald. Big thanks to Vaughn, Jim, and Elizabeth! The first was shot with the 12" element and the second with the 18" element.

197342

197343

Jim Fitzgerald
10-Nov-2019, 10:15
Matt, very nice. The images were beautiful and a joy to help you print during the workshop.

Tri Tran
10-Nov-2019, 22:47
Here are a couple of carbon transfer prints made at Yosemite with the Tri Tran Signature Lens. They were shot in Yosemite and printed in Ansel Adams' Darkroom as part of a workshop with Vaughn Hutchins and Jim Fitzgerald. Big thanks to Vaughn, Jim, and Elizabeth! The first was shot with the 12" element and the second with the 18" element.

197342

197343


Good job Matt, keep practicing. You've got Best Carbon printers mentors.

Jim Galli
10-Nov-2019, 23:22
Awesome Matt. This is the stuff we dream about.

Vaughn
11-Nov-2019, 09:29
Here are a couple of carbon transfer prints made at Yosemite with the Tri Tran Signature Lens....

197343

That is a magic lens! The first time I have seen reflections that seem sharper than what is being reflected! The carbon printing process did hold those highlights nicely! it was great to have you in the workshop!

Hugo Zhang
11-Nov-2019, 10:51
Matt,

That is a really nice picture and congratulations!

Tri,

I need to borrow your 18 inch lens someday to test it. :)

Hugo

Tri Tran
11-Nov-2019, 11:52
Thank you Jim , Jim Galli and Vaughn.
I'm glad that you both keep the Carbon process alive and happy to hear the lens has produced adequate contrast for Carbon printing.
Hugo, you can join me to shoot anytime with my TT lens , all focal length are available up to your 16x20 plate. My favorite and most use is 18in from 8x10 to 7x17. Here are a couple 7x17 Carbon that I have made recently. BC, Light Black , Sumi, Umber and Metallic gold pigment was used for these images. Arches Platine water color for final support.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/922/WkOlSt.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pmWkOlStj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/923/Dyya3a.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/pnDyya3aj)

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q90/924/eDmnqR.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/poeDmnqRj)

Tin Can
11-Nov-2019, 12:08
Very nice TT

and interesting!

Hugo Zhang
11-Nov-2019, 12:26
Tri,

I will take your generous offer and these are really glowing images of trees. I think you should make a slight change of your first name to Tree. :)

Peter De Smidt
11-Nov-2019, 13:46
Great stuff!

Jim Fitzgerald
11-Nov-2019, 20:57
Tri,

I will take your generous offer and these are really glowing images of trees. I think you should make a slight change of your first name to Tree. :)

Only if I can be Mr. Walnut Oak

Vaughn
11-Nov-2019, 23:03
Lovely, Tri Tran. I used Sumi ink quite a while ago, but when the bottle ran out, the replacement bottle did not work for me -- images were grainy. I used it with lampblack watercolor to give warmth to the image and it does a nice job. I made some nice prints with just sumi ink, too...perhaps I should give it another go. I look forward to seeing your prints someday.

Tri Tran
12-Nov-2019, 12:04
Lovely, Tri Tran. I used Sumi ink quite a while ago, but when the bottle ran out, the replacement bottle did not work for me -- images were grainy. I used it with lampblack watercolor to give warmth to the image and it does a nice job. I made some nice prints with just sumi ink, too...perhaps I should give it another go. I look forward to seeing your prints someday.

Thanks Vaughn, they all work for me. There is a few Japanese Art stores where I live , I will swing by and grab some for you. Have a great day.