Petzval LF Film Shots

[goamules]

In 2007 or so I started a Flicker Petzval Photographs group (https://www.flickr.com/groups/868027@N25/pool/). It was great back then because it was all large format, no one had figured out how to get a Petzval to work on 35mm or digital. That changed with LOMO, who made their "petzval" which really is NOT that design. They cashed in on the word, but make a different design that basically creates a ton of swirl and aberrations. Today, the group posts 99.9% Lomo lens shots on digital. Too late to change it, but it's creating the image (no pun) in the photography world that every Petzval shot has to be wildly swirled. As we LFers know, in the 1800s they used a larger focal length petzval for format, and would "crop out" all that swirl.

Today it's still difficult to get a fast Petzval that will fit on a Speed Graphic so you can use the shutter. This is one of mine, but it still doesn't cover well. Yet, I like the look. I shot this this weekend. It's a Convair 340 Pilot's chair I pulled out of a boneyard and polished up. Used an 1867 Frederick J. Cox petzval on a Speed Graphic. Stopped down to about F5.6 with a waterhouse stop. Shutter 1/20. Ilford FP4. I shot a few more sheets, coming soon. Post em if ya got em....

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49855702832_b0129cea9f_b.jpg (https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49855702832_92519c75f0_h.jpg)

[Andrew Plume]

That's a very good start Mr A, the Fred Cox Petzval's seem to or did command a good price over on the you know what thing

All best

Andrew

[Scyg]

I've always gotten vertigo from Petzval pictures.

[Two23]

I have two 19th C. Petzvals put in F mount for my D850. One is an 1851 CC Harrison.


Kent in SD

[goamules]

If you look at any portrait from the 1850s to the 1880s, more than half were taken with Petzvals. Scgy, you just have seen the ones that show the swirl, but back in the day, photographers would not allow it to show. So unless you get vertigo looking a portraits of people....

[goamules]

For a larger portrait, I like my 14" Gasc and Charconnet. On 8x10.

https://live.staticflickr.com/4112/4833267818_b15fb65013_o.png

[Scyg]

...you just have seen the ones that show the swirl, but back in the day, photographers would not allow it to show. So unless you get vertigo looking a portraits of people....
I realize that - I was referring to the obvious, swirly ones, like the first image in this thread.

[goamules]

If you have a nice large format petzval photo, this is the place to post it. I didn't start the thread for a discussion of if you like them or not.

[Two23]

8x10 tin type. 1862 Voigtlander Petzval FL-12 in.



Kent in SD

[paulbarden]

Garrett, I didn't realize that Petzval Flickr group was yours! I've been a member for awhile. :-)

You know, I bought one of those LOMO Petzval lenses for my Nikon last year, and it was dreadful. I've never worked with such an awful lens in all my life. I sent it back and got a refund.

Anyway, my favorite large format lenses are my Petzvals: a Darlot 11.75 inch, a Lerebours et Secretan 15 inch, and a Voigtlander about 8 inch focal length. The Voigtlander is my favorite by far.

Here's a couple images from 8X10 inch wet plate negatives made with the L&S 15" lens:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49285292746_77590726a1_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48617756867_64d3ba39f7_b.jpg

And one from a 5x7 inch glass negative using the Voigtlander:

https://live.staticflickr.com/7810/46620236005_ba3f1c1510_b.jpg

You don't have to maximize the Petzval swirl to get the best from those lenses. Sometimes a subtle result is even more rewarding, IMO.

[Andrew Plume]

Love the first one Paul, very good stuff

regards

Andrew

[Andrew Plume]

That's a lovely image of your daughter, Garrett

all best

Andrew

[goamules]

Thanks Andrew, and Paul, I've looked at your great shots on the Flicker site for a long time. You're one of the few that is still posting real Petzval LF shots there. Great stuff.

[Martin Aislabie]

Garrett, I didn't realize that Petzval Flickr group was yours! I've been a member for awhile. :-)

You know, I bought one of those LOMO Petzval lenses for my Nikon last year, and it was dreadful. I've never worked with such an awful lens in all my life. I sent it back and got a refund.

Anyway, my favorite large format lenses are my Petzvals: a Darlot 11.75 inch, a Lerebours et Secretan 15 inch, and a Voigtlander about 8 inch focal length. The Voigtlander is my favorite by far.

Here's a couple images from 8X10 inch wet plate negatives made with the L&S 15" lens:

And one from a 5x7 inch glass negative using the Voigtlander:

https://live.staticflickr.com/7810/46620236005_ba3f1c1510_b.jpg

You don't have to maximize the Petzval swirl to get the best from those lenses. Sometimes a subtle result is even more rewarding, IMO.

This is a fabulous shot

But - I'm not sure if the lenses characteristics have added anything ????

Martin

[paulbarden]

This is a fabulous shot

But - I'm not sure if the lenses characteristics have added anything ????

Martin

Hi Martin.
Thank you very much, I appreciate that.

Has my choice of lens added anything to this photo? Good question. I think that I should have an alternative version (made with a modern lens) in order to make a comparison. Its hard to see the subtleties the Petzval imparts until you have another photo to compare it with. But for me, its obvious that the Petzval signature is present: the curved focal plane, the visual swirl in the upper right area of the window, the general out-of-focus rendering. Its not like any other lens design (unless you include the Zeiss Biotar and its ilk). So yes - I definitely think my choice of lens has contributed significantly (if subtly) to the visual characteristics of the photo.

How about this image, made yesterday evening? Same lens used, but an even more subtle effect. If someone else had made this photo and asked me what lens was used, I do believe I could identify the lens, based on the character of the image.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49860239092_74e6acf379_b.jpg

[Andrew Plume]

Hi Paul

Your attachment hasn't arrived as part of your post................

Martin, to me 'the difference' is very significant, it's hard to envisage how a more modern lens could have produced an effect comparable with,the background
unless it was one of TT's new old design lenses, possibly something similar could have been achieved with an Aero-Ektar but what do I know, Paul's work is high
class (as you'll know)

regards to you both

Andrew

[goamules]

Here is one I took with the same Cox Petzval on 20 year old expired Provia film.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7364/16266486220_7201d769bb_c.jpg

[goamules]

5x6 Wetplate, CC Harrison petzval.

https://live.staticflickr.com/5622/30935467126_7c879b28a7_c.jpg

[Ari]

For a larger portrait, I like my 14" Gasc and Charconnet. On 8x10.

https://live.staticflickr.com/4112/4833267818_b15fb65013_o.png

Very smooth, Garrett, well done.
This shows a lot of what makes these lenses so special.

[goamules]

Thanks, my daughter is 25 now, she was about 16 here.

[paulbarden]

New work from last night. 8x10 collodion glass negative. (Does collodion count as "film"?) The exposure was 8.5 minutes.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49866673558_066bc8da9d_b.jpg

[goamules]

8x10 film, Willard American radial drive petzval, circa late 1860s.

https://live.staticflickr.com/3755/13587008785_7fd5852914_c.jpg

[paulbarden]

8x10 film, Willard American radial drive petzval, circa late 1860s.


Very nice portrait, Garrett! These lenses are (in many ways) the ideal portrait lenses, aren't they?!
Paul

[Ootsk]

203518
Speed Graphic
Tri-X 320 In Rodinal
Darlot that was given to me by a friend.