Hi Sandy
first up, you're much respected in the UK, for the quality of your work, general modesty, knowledge and total lack of b******t, and someone who I immediately relate to along the lines of Merg Ross (who should be considered as being a 'treasure of the LF world')
the last time that we talked online, you had a Shen Hao, I'm assuming that you have moved on from that one..........?
soft focus images haven't from my memory, been part of your regular output but I'd immediately echo an earlier post. maybe from the respected Mark Sawyer, buy a known sf lens, it will hold it's value
best regards
andrew
Hi Andrew,
I certainly appreciate the kind comments. Along with the arthritis age does impart some wisdom in communicating with others about areas of common interest.
I have owned two Shen-Hao 5X7" cameras and liked both of them, but sold them because I found myself still using most of the time the small and compact 5X7" Nagaoka that I purchased back in the early 1980s. I have also owned some other 5X7" cameras over the years but for one reason or another I keep coming back to the Nagaoka as "the camera of my life." You might not be surprised to know that I have been married to the same woman since 1968!
You are absolutely correct in that soft focus has not been part of my personal photographic vision, but I am fascinated by it in the same way that I am fascinated by Pictorialism, though I don't often make images that would be considered pictorial. At least not in the sense of capital P pictorialism. In any event, for some reason I have reached a point in my life when I would like to experiment more with images that are not necessarily tack sharp so I am definitely looking into the possibility of buying a nice soft focus lens. The only issue is that the small lens board and limited bellows draw of my Nagaoka, which to this point has not been an issue in landscape photography, does limit the choice of soft focus lenses.
BTW, just so you will know that I have not abandoned sharp focus stuff I am attaching a revised image I am currently working on. The original is a 12X20" negative made a decade ago, the final version of which is still pending. I am getting close, having printed the attached file as a 24"X38" inkjet with Cone K7 inks, and as a 16"X 24" carbon transfer. My wife had indicated that she liked the image and would like to have a print in her office. I expected she would want the carbon transfer, but she burst my bubble in asking for the inkjet. I guess it is just we photographers who get process! Curious, it is one of those images that does not look sharp at all when printed small, but once you go big the detail just sings.
Best,
Sandy
Last edited by sanking; 19-Jan-2013 at 16:25.
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
(Flickr: Johnnyoptic, DIY Soft Focus Lens: Replicating the Rodenstock Imagon)
Ok, that's a problem. I presume that you can fit a Copal 3 on your lens board. The next question is, how close do you want to focus? The best lens for your is probably a 250mm, either Fuji or Rodenstock. Since your maximum draw is 385mm, you could definitely do portrait distances with it, but you wouldn't get close to macro. I presume you have a 240mm lens. Focus range wise, how does that work for you?
"It's the way to educate your eyes. Stare. Pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long." - Walker Evans
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
Sandy, do you have any petzval's at all in your collection? 6" projection petzval maybe? If so, turn the front element alone around to face the film. That doublet is the basis of most of the soft focus lenses. I have a nice 5" projection petzval I can sell you cheap. The front element alone is about 8 1/2" soft focus.
I have used my 250 Fujinon soft focus lens on my Wista 4x5 and managed to mount the big shutter on a Wista lensboard. Needed a top hat board for portrait distances because of the shorter bellows draw on the Wista. I have a 67mm softar and several Tiffen 52mm soft focus filters that I have not used in a long while. Don't know whether these filter sizes would work for you. If you wanted to borrow one or more of these and would be willing to pay shipping and to return them to me when you are done I could loan them to you for experimentation. Shipping would be probably only a few dollars. The softar has a defect that has shown up in a print, but also has not been a problem at times. There is a learning curve with soft focus filters.
Doug Webb
I appreciate your comment, Mark. If you'd be so kind, I'd appreciate any criticisms as well sent as a PM. Am in the process of rewriting the dissertation to publish as a book - with the addition of about four more chapters and maybe another 200 illustrations. Give me some guidance, please.
Mark Sawyer's earlier post does a great job of summarizing why filters which destroy resolution are not equivalent to a soft focus lens. Perhaps the key issue is that when soft focus is produced by spherical aberration (perhaps in combination with some chromatic aberration), the image formed has a firm core image overlain by a less sharp image. No filter placed in front of a sharp lens can achieve this effect although the original form of DUTO filter is the closest approximation.
Russ
Is that link disabled or obsolete ? I can't get to the document.
Bookmarks