4x5 Lenses for Wooden Sculpture

[Neil Carey]

I will be publishing a book containing about 200 images of mostly African masks and some figures, and decided to do the photography in-house. Most pieces are an tique, wooden, with incredible surfaces and patinas of accumulated materials on age. Some have dulled old metal attachments, many have brightly colored strings, feathers, fabric, etc. A few pieces are cast bronze. Most are 6' to 12' high, a few figures are 30" high. Most are only 3' to 6" deep, but a few have large hea ddresses that might go 18" deep. The reproductions will be full-page (at least 8 x10")and color. The backgrounds will all be simple gray or black. Of top concer n is sharpness of detail, with adequate depth of field. Although I'm still havin g second thoughts, I was steered away from 8x10 format by some comments about th e difficulty in learning this format as my first plunge into LF. I just ordered a 4x5 Sinar P2 from B&H, and expect it shortly. I think I would prefer "knock 'e m dead" color rather that purely accurate color, and was thinking of using Fuji Velvia. So, my friends, I desperately need input about appropriate lenses for th is project. My thinking was that since short telephotos are usually used for por trait work in 35mm, and since (I think) a normal lense in 4x5 is about 210mm, a 300mm lense would be best...I'm open to any and all suggestions regarding lenses , film, lighting, backgrounds, etc.

[Ellis Vener]

A "normal" focal length lens on a 4x5 is prety much universally considered to be the 150mm length. So I'd go with a 210mm lens over a 150mm or the 300mm. If you are filling the frame , when using the 210mm instead of the 150mm you'll have more distance from the subject which will offer you a better sense of perspective relationships in the objects and more room for lighting close in. The 300mm will also work fine but you'll have to deal with less depth of field and you'll also need a lot more more bellows. In truth I'd recommend the following set of lenses to cover objects of different sizes: the 120mm AM Nikkor, a 180mm or 210mm (I like the Nikon W series and also Rodenstock lenses, but Schneiders are also okay). and maybe a 300mm as well.

Lighting/ well that is a huge question! I prefer using electronic flash equipment (strobe) over hot lights but since it sounds like you don't have a lot of experience hot lights may be better for you since you'll be able to see directly what you are photographing. In electronic flash equipment, my recommendations are (in no preferential order): Balcar, Broncolor, Profoto, Speedotron, Elinchrom and Dynalight. I definitely prefer the Plume Wafer click this link to Plume Ltd. (http://www.plumeltd.com.) and Chimera Lighting (a link to Chimera) (http://www.chimeralighting.com) lighting tools over the copycats like Photoflex, etc.<P. I think you could benefit from reading Ross Lowell's book on lighting Matters of Light and Depth. I also think you can use some on-site consulting to at least get you started.

contact me if you are interested.

[Ellis Vener]

I t should have read: "I think you should read Ross Lowell's book Matters of Light and Depth. I also think you can use some on-site consulting to at least get you started.

[William Marderness]

I would go with a 210mm. A 300mm will be too long.

[Neil Carey]

Thanks to everyone for your advice...It looks like the concensus of opinion favo rs the 210mm. I'll also get a 120mm, but first things first.

Ellis mentioned the Nikkor W series. This is the Nikkor W 210mm f/5.6? Throughout the LF Lense threads in this forum this lense has been highly recomme nded. But how about the Nikkor-AM(ED)Macro 210mm f/5.6? I've seen some great mar ks for this in terms of sharpness. Cost aside, how would this lense perform FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT compared to the W series.

Also, in terms of this project (not landscapes, weight doesn't matter, etc.) wha t would be your second and third choices in 210mm?

Mentions of Sinar's own lenses are few...Who manufactures them? How do they perf orm compared to the corresponding Nikkor/Schneider/Rodenstocks?

Thanks for the recommendations...I will read the book asap and I'm impressed wit h the Chimera equipment.

[Bob Salomon]

Sinar uses Rodenstock lenses.

For best reults for your type of project a macro design that is designed for product photographs from 1:5 to about 3:1 will outperform other lens types.

Currently Rodenstock offers these in 180 and 120 mm.

Older ones were 210 and 300mm.

Your lighying type and technique will be as important as your lens choice.

Proper lens for this application and wrong lighting will be as bad as proper lighting and incorrect lens choice.

you are already started to a poor result if your decision is solely based on this thread. You must rent/borrow/beg various lenses and try various techniques first. this will probably require that you go to a dealer that specializes in large format and rents equipment so you can see what works and what doesn't.

[Ted Harris]

While you are looking at the Plume website you may also want to consider the cocoon. I consider this oen of my most useful lighting tools for small product tabletop photography.

Cheers,

Ted

[Cal Eng]

Neil,

I would also like to add that lighting technique is important. Depending on the type of color film used and the light source, you may have to use an color compensating filter. I am currently photographing some sculptures using Provia, and tungsten light source (blue colored bulb and had to correct the color with a #10 blue compensating filter.

One other added touch is your background. To obtain the lighter foreground leading to a darker background requires the use of sheet of colored paper that is gradually sloped away and upwards from your masks. Have fun.

[Ellis Vener]

"But how about the Nikkor-AM(ED)Macro 210mm f/5.6? I've seen some great marks for this in terms of sharpness. Cost aside, how would this lense perform FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT compared to the W series. " That lens is basically designed for use with the 8x10 format. I don't think you'll se e any real difference, especially considering that you say most of the objects are 6 to 12 feet long.

Since you are spending a great deal of money already, have you considered using the Better Light Scanning Back for use on the Sinar, or possibly that new back from Sinar that combines 16 seperate scans to make one very large image. instead of shooting film and scanning that?

What will the printing resolution be?

Are the images going to be reproduced on a four color or six color press?

[Neil Carey]

My apologies to everyone...I thought I proofread the original question carefully , but I am hereby humbled: Most of these objects are wooden African masks that a re 6 INCHES to 12 INCHES high, NOT feet. They are mostly lifesize, and were actu ally worn on the face during ceremonies.

So, how does this change your recommendations? (Thanks to Ellis for pointing thi s out to me).

Bob, in a related thread (September 20, 2001) you wrote" For ratios from 1:5 to 5:1 the Apo Macro Sironar (that is what the Sinar lens is) is best." Does this mean that the lense you are recommending to me is the Apo Macro Sironar 180mm? The ratios seem correct (if my thinking is c orrect)...This lens would be optimal for 3D objects from 60cm high down to one i nch high.

[Neil Carey]

Oh, I forgot to ask Bob: Sinar mentions a "Macro Sinaron" in 180 mm, and also a n "Apo Sinaron" as optimized for 1:1, but not in 180mm. Am I correct that you're talking about the Macro Sinaron?

What is the straight Rodenstock (i.e. non-Sinar branded) version, and what are t he differences, if any?

[Bob Salomon]

Rodeanstock = Apo Macro Sironar in 120mm and 180mm. Apo Macro Sironar Digital in 120mm.

Discontinued are 210 and 300mm Macro Sirobar,

Sinar uses there own names for these,

[Bob Salomon]

"Bob, in a related thread (September 20, 2001) you wrote" For ratios from 1:5 to 5:1 the Apo Macro Sironar (that is what the Sinar lens is) is best." Does this mean that the lense you are recommending to me is the Apo Macro Sironar 180mm? The ratios seem correct (if my thinking is correct)...This lens would be optimal for 3D objects from 60cm high down to one inch high." Yes if yout camera has enough bellows for this ratio.

[William Marderness]

How about a 150mm or 210mm G-claron. These lenses are designed for a 1:1 ratio. They are single coated, but flare should not be a problem in the studio. Since the subject is a foot or less, I would go for shorter lenses, even as short as 150mm.

[Bob Salomon]

"How about a 150mm or 210mm G-claron. " Yes if you are doing flat art at f22 No if you are doing 3 dimensional originals the Apo Macro series will be superior and function optimally at more apertures then a process lens.

they will also be much easier to focus as they are faster to begin with.

[Dave Schneidr]

Mr. Salomon, could you explain why a lens such as the G-Claron is not suitable for 3-dimensional objects? I know they are often times referred to as 'flat field' lenses. Are you suggesting that somehow the 'curved' field would match the 3-d objects?

[Bob Salomon]

Yjey were designed for making seperation negatives from color art work for graphic art reproduction.

They simply do not reproduce 3 dimensional close range art as well as a macro lens.

Trying is much more effective then describing. That is why a relationship with a dealer that rents is so valuable.

You have to try it yourself.