Here is one made with a 210mm Heliar.
http://www.harleygoldman.com/photo/freesia/
Here is one made with a 210mm Heliar.
http://www.harleygoldman.com/photo/freesia/
Ok - I just made a couple of portraits, using a Heliar 250mm F6.5
Pol 665 solarized (I don't know whether the characteristics of the Heliar shows...
and one not solarized
(both painted with light)
Last edited by Emil Schildt; 3-Feb-2010 at 17:32. Reason: new image codes
I think that the Heliar look is shown best when both sharp and blur are present in the same photo, preferably along an edge.
In Harley's photo, (as in Jim's) it adds to the photo, but does not overwhelm or replace the original subject. Like a spice, a little goes a long way.
Here's one of mine, where the effect may have been taken too far.
Last edited by Ken Lee; 22-Oct-2010 at 14:14.
I have a 300mm Heliar, and am still exploring what it can do. Nothing comes close to what Ken Lee has done, but I'm trying.
Both are on xray film cut down to 4x5, for that old-time high contrast look.
and this one shows that magic 3D look that these things can produce.
George
George -
These images are lovely, with real feeling. What size film are you shooting with the 300 ?
Compliments are certainly appreciated ! Truthfully, I have just been borrowing from others on this forum, using whatever seems to work. We can learn freely from one another in this environment, at a highly accelerated rate - and you can't beat the price either
In the first picture, I really like the rendition of the "blurry disks". Not only how uniform they are, and circular, but also how well they work within the image, taking it to another level so to speak.
When shooting this way, I check a variety of apertures - and almost never shoot wide open - to find just the right the degree of blur and depth of field, where the parts of the image begin to resonate with one another, rather then just sit there. I think the first image does that extremely well. For my 2 cents, it gets the "Bravo Maestro" award !
I'm using it on both 8x10 and 4x5. With closeups like these, the 8x10 has narrower DOF because you need to get closer to fill the frame. With 4x5, you can stand back a little more. So it depends mainly on what I feel like doing that day. I haven't even begun to plumb the depths of what this thing can do. It's truly a unique lens.
Well, I really mean them. I am constantly astonished by how controlled the tones are in your shots -- pure velvet.
George
The nice tones are there because I keep learning, slowly over time, to just "forgettaboutit", unless nice tones are already in the subject.
I have mentioned this before, but my father's clarinet teacher emphasized the importance of tone over all other musical qualities, telling him that "people will like just about anything you play, as long as the tone is beautiful".
That's one of the advantages of working with film. While digital shooters can just spray and pray, the added time and effort of film processing makes us learn faster from our mistakes - they sting.
After pretty girls and flowers, here's a portrait of Øystein Wolf, a Norwegian poet. Shot with a 300mm heliar from 1922 (I plan to go next June to take a portrait with that lens of my grandfather who was born that same year).
Bookmarks