PDA

View Full Version : Struss or Pinkham & Smith?



Tim Layton
4-Jan-2012, 05:21
For my future wish list I am starting the process of learning about the differences between the Struss and the various P&S lenses to see if they are a fit for me or not.

I currently am using the Verito 14 1/2" F4 and Imagon 360 barrel F5.8 for most of my work. I shoot these wide open and like that look the best, and at times I will stop down the Verito to F6. If anyone has experience with all of the above I would be interested in your thoughts about how the Struss and various P&S lenses look in comparison.

I am approaching these questions from a visual perspective, meaning what type of image will the lens produce without considering the technical design elements. I shoot an 8x10 Eastman View No 2 with a 6x6 lens board if that matters when replying. Technically my camera is an Eastman View No. 2 Improved Model of Century View and Empire State No. 2.

I have two questions that will hopefully help me learn more about the two lenses without having access to them yet.

1.) Which of the P&S lenses is the closest to the Struss? When I say closest, I mean the ability to produce similar images without comparing design and technical details.

2.) For those that have used both lenses, I am curious about your thoughts and comments along with any links to photos you have posted. I did find a link where Jim Galli posted some photos comparing the Struss and Synthetic with some vintage autos.

You can view my latest work on my Flickr stream at http://www.flickr.com/photos/timlaytonsr

Thanks,

Tim

eddie
4-Jan-2012, 06:14
what format do you intend to shoot? those lenses you are looking for are a bit hard to find for 8x10....and they are more money.....:) but you knew that....

i have used all the lenses you are inquiring about.

it is very very hard to tell you in words the difference between these sf lenses. they all a slightly different and you need to study the prints side by side to see the subtleties. looking on the ground glass will not do.

exposure and development play a great deal in what the image looks like...as does the exposure and development times in the dark room.

i made a post recently talking about this more....i have yet to be able to find it. i am still looking.

basically you are going to need to use these lenses to be able to tell. you will not be disappointed in either. buy whichever you find 1st. buy the other when you can.

oh! and do not forget kershaw and spencer portland to name a few others....

ken lee has been using a kershaw and a P&S lately. check out his postings. mostly are in the flower section. i think he put up some on his web site as well.

eddie

eddie
4-Jan-2012, 06:21
found one:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showpost.php?p=815366&postcount=4

eddie
4-Jan-2012, 06:24
ofcourse you say this:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=53631

and this:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=78953

goamules
4-Jan-2012, 07:15
I know you've been doing a lot of research and may already know this, but the Struss Pictorial Lens is a single meniscus, and I believe has more chromatic aberrations than the Pinkham & Smiths, which work more on Spherical aberration, like your Verito. My Flickr site has a few Struss shots, if you search on that keyword. In the 1910s when the Struss was out, the film was much different than today. When I shot my Struss with the monochromatic wetplate (works mostly on the blue end of the color spectrum), it was extremely soft. With modern film, it's about like a Verito at about between F4.5 and 5.6.

I'm sorry I'm kind of out of it today, as people can see from my handle, I'm a mule owner and rider. Two of mine that I've had for many years, died from unrelated causes the past two days. So I'm looking at the photo boards again to try to get over them today....

Tim Layton
4-Jan-2012, 14:42
I know you've been doing a lot of research and may already know this, but the Struss Pictorial Lens is a single meniscus, and I believe has more chromatic aberrations than the Pinkham & Smiths, which work more on Spherical aberration, like your Verito. My Flickr site has a few Struss shots, if you search on that keyword. In the 1910s when the Struss was out, the film was much different than today. When I shot my Struss with the monochromatic wetplate (works mostly on the blue end of the color spectrum), it was extremely soft. With modern film, it's about like a Verito at about between F4.5 and 5.6.

I'm sorry I'm kind of out of it today, as people can see from my handle, I'm a mule owner and rider. Two of mine that I've had for many years, died from unrelated causes the past two days. So I'm looking at the photo boards again to try to get over them today....

Garrett, thanks for the reply. I am very sorry to hear about your loss. I will go look on your Flickr page again and check out the Struss images. In the most ideal situation, whether it be P&S or Struss, I would like to stick with 8x10 format if possible, but I do own and use 4x5 and 5x7. I contact print (Pt/Pd) my soft focus images, so I prefer 8x10 as a first option. The other option is that if I have to go with the smaller format, then I would opt for the 4x5 because I have a 4x5 enlarger and I could make gelatin silver prints and enlargements. My gut is telling me that a Struss will be easier to find and definitely cheaper, so maybe that is the place to focus for now and keep a P&S on the wish list.

Tim

goamules
4-Jan-2012, 14:46
... My gut is telling me that a Struss will be easier to find and definitely cheaper, so maybe that is the place to focus for now and keep a P&S on the wish list.

Tim

I think you could find the opposite true. I've seen perhaps 15 P&S lenses for sale on Ebay the past 5 years, and quite a few here on this board. I think there is even one in the For Sale section now. Conversely, I missed the last Struss Pictorial Lens I saw on Ebay in 2006 or 7, and didn't see another one until this last year. And I look daily and very conscientiously. I don't believe one has ever been for sale here.

Struss only made them commercially for a few years, he started offering them in 1914, then went off to teach aerial photography for the Army in 1917, then his career was ruined because he was perceived as pro German (an early Red Scare type scenario). He went to Los Angeles to start over in 1919. So...perhaps 5 years of slow production because he was gone half the time? P&S had a MUCH longer history.

Karl Struss was the real deal, he shot some pretty nice pictures (below) with the early pictorialists like Stieglitz and White, he produced a his own lens, and then became a famous Hollywood cameraman, and was awarded the first oscar for lens work using his ideas for soft focus.

http://www.theasc.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/beb-daniels.jpg
http://www.theasc.com/blog/2009/12/17/karl-struss-a-tripod-in-two-worlds-part-two%E2%80%94early-hollywood-years/

More in this post: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=78953

Tim Layton
4-Jan-2012, 14:49
I think you could find the opposite true. I've seen perhaps 15 P&S lenses for sale on Ebay the past 5 years, and quite a few here. I think there is even one in the For Sale section now. Conversely, I missed the last Struss Pictorial Lens I saw on Ebay in 2006 or 7, and didn't see another one until this last year. Struss only made them commercially for a few years, I believe 1914 until about 1920.

Well, thanks for clearing that up... :) It looks like I will be enjoying my Verito and Imagon and patiently waiting for a P&S or Struss lens to become available. I will go take a second mortgage out so I am ready to buy...

Tim Layton
4-Jan-2012, 14:54
So, is the 14" P&S listed on ebay right now for $5k a good buy at that price or not?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pinkham-Bi-Quality-soft-focus-portrait-lens-smith-IV-VQ-style-8x10-5x7-/200690731229?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2eba1988dd

Ken Lee
4-Jan-2012, 15:07
"...it is very very hard to tell you in words the difference between these sf lenses. they all a slightly different and you need to study the prints side by side to see the subtleties. looking on the ground glass will not do.

exposure and development play a great deal in what the image looks like...as does the exposure and development times in the dark room...

basically you are going to need to use these lenses to be able to tell."

What Eddie said!

I'm a novice, but when I look online at my own images made with vintage soft-focus lenses - using an uncalibrated monitor at work - I can hardly recognize them. It's all about nuance. And nuances can vary between Silver Print and Pt/Pd (or inkjet). The color of the final image (warm/cool/neutral) and the texture of the paper (rough/smooth) play their parts also.

In general, sharp is sharp - but there are many types of softness.

jp
4-Jan-2012, 15:36
If you are looking for meniscii to try, I'm digging the kodak 305 portrait. It wasn't built for 8x10, but works fine with a tiny bit of field curvature, but without vignetting. They used to be on Ebay constantly, but haven't been available for a while. A WTB on here might be successful. This lens is often in an ilex5 shutter, which is quite handy to be able to shoot at 1/50 and/or have x-sync. I've seen them sell for $400-2000.

Reinhold could probably make you an even cheaper wollaston meniscus as well for 8x10; I use it with 4x5 and it's pretty nice at f8 or so and has serious potential for wildness as you open up.

I have used a spencer port-land which might be similar to the struss; there is one on Ebay right now for more than I'm willing to pay. Ansel used one before he got all f64ish. Eddie was showing off one probably suitable for 8x10 in his videos.

You might consider the tillman crane / russ young week of soft focus craziness this year in Virginia if you want to see your lens options. I've had fun trying other lenses and seeing what others do with them in previous shorter workshops.

CCHarrison
4-Jan-2012, 17:42
Tim,

You can find some Soft Focus lens sales history on my site here: http://antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenssales.html

There have actually been a few Struss Sales the past 2 years on ebay...here are the ones I am aware of:

2nd Qtr 2011 Struss Pictorial Lens 9" $1,599 Ebay, flange but not original
4th Qtr 2010 Struss Pictorial Lens 12" $3,250 Ebay, damage to iris
4th Qtr 2010 Struss Pictorial Lens 12" $2,650 Ebay, sunken mount
4th Qtr 2010 Struss Pictorial Lens 12" $1,613 Ebay, unmarked, sunken mount
2nd Qtr 2011 Struss Pictorial Lens 18" $2,025 Ebay, blade missing/no flange

Note the frequency of condition issues with the Struss lenses...!

Good luck

Dan

PS - the Pinkham you refer to is actually a later model lens, not an original P&S.... read more here http://antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses.html

Here is the sales history I have on the Bi-Quality Lens

1st Qtr 2010 Pinkham Bi-Quality Lens $ 4,200 Ebay
1st Qtr 2010 Pinkham Bi-Quality Lens $ 2,500 Private Sale, fair condition with cap
4th Qtr 2010 Pinkham Bi-Quality Lens $ 4,000 Ebay, fair condition with cap

Jim Galli
4-Jan-2012, 20:44
Struss is generally softer than Pinkham Series IV and Pinkham Series 1 is probably softer than both. So should I buy the Packard or the Auburn Boat tail, or maybe the Duesenberg would be nice. I've got one 1850's Achromatic Meniscus in a shabby old mount missing the entire front, no name, and it's not for sale at any price. It just gets the picture every time I put it on the camera. I think it cost me $65 bucks. I haven't seen a Struss now in quite a while.

Mark Sawyer
5-Jan-2012, 12:53
One thing to keep in mind with the P&S lenses is that many were "hand-finished", with aspherical surfaces introduced by hand, so lenses varied from one to another even with the same maodel of lens. Alvin Langdon Coburn had "about a dozen" P&S Semi Achromats because they each had their own look. So if you see an image from Jim's P&S, and buy one just like it, you may get something else. But I've never heard of any P&S turkeys.

With meniscus lenses, there is a wide variation. I think the best are the Rodenstock Imagon and the Kodak Portrait Lens. These were designed by the best engineers, and made by the best manufacturers. The sharp image that underlies the softness is sharper than with the older, more primative meniscus lenses, and that's one of the things I look for. But I'd trade mine for a P&S meniscus like the Semi Achromat, not for the monetary value, but for the history and mystique.

But the thing with the soft lenses is that even the cheapest piece of crap can give you something wonderful if you just give it a chance:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=35097
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=35482

massimodec
8-May-2012, 07:04
Hi,
from the forum stements it seems you are on line now.
I have almost the same question on P&S and Struss, but I know something more.
What I would like to check are the optical schemas of those lenses...
Do you have any source or knowledge?
Thank you
M

Jim Noel
8-May-2012, 08:42
WHy spend huge sums on a Struss when there are lenses available for less than $100 of the very same design.
Reinhold Schable makes single meniscus lenses housed in lightweight plastic barrels. After using one belonging to a friend, I just purchased a 355mm and a 500 mm for less than $100 each. His web site is
http://www.re-inventedphotoequip.com/Site/Home.html

Currently he is on an extended trip and likely will not reply for at least three weeks.

massimodec
9-May-2012, 05:11
WHy spend huge sums on a Struss when there are lenses available for less than $100 of the very same design.
http://www.re-inventedphotoequip.com/Site/Home.html

...

That was exactely what I was trying to figure out.
But analyzing the wonderful work by Jim Galli I saw some details that made me think that there still is a little work to be done...
This is the reason I asked Jim Galli some details, but he did not answred ...
I will let you know my finds... if any. :) !
Thank you for the link

Jim Galli
9-May-2012, 08:03
That was exactely what I was trying to figure out.
But analyzing the wonderful work by Jim Galli I saw some details that made me think that there still is a little work to be done...
This is the reason I asked Jim Galli some details, but he did not answred ...
I will let you know my finds... if any. :) !
Thank you for the link

I did not know a good answer for this. The Struss lens is a mystery design. I know of no engineering drawings or expanations about it. It is single element, non achromatic. A modified magnifying glass, with a rather off shape, actually.

Pinkhams came in different flavors. The Semi-Achromatics are some kind of cemented doublet, but thereagain, the design and hand work grinding or re-grinding perhaps of the old master who made them is couched in mystery. No one knows.

Achromatic Meniscii are cheap, varied, available. A grand place to begin your experimenting, affordably. The great lenses, in name, and price, do have signatures that are impossible to duplicate with an achromatic meniscus. But the differences are like discussing vinyl music played through a vacuum tube amplifier. Differences are smooth and sweet to the elect, but mostly unnoticed and ignored by the end users.