Originally Posted by
jp498
Pick up some used books on pictorialism and see how people of old used soft lenses for landscape work. Even Ansel Adams did. Browse the Galli-style thread here to see what Stephane, Galli, et.al. have done outdoors. THere should be no shortage of inspiration.
The differences between the lenses is subtle, but it's good to stick with one lens for a while to learn it for soft work. You may need to shoot 50+ sheets of film over several outings to learn how the lens will do certain scenes, distances, apertures, degree of enlargement, scene contrasts, etc... The big advantage that lens has over the older ones is that it has a shutter, and that's rather useful outdoors, especially one that goes to 1/125.
Outdoors, I like soft focus for closeups of plants and bigger scenes where the detail isn't the reason for the photo. The softness can strongly enhance a composition at the expense of detail. Bright areas (like Diane mentions) can build into definite shapes, and dark areas (like thick forest conifers) can become imposing dark areas. Things get less literal.
If money's tight, you could probably sell it for some serious $, and get a kodak 305 portrait in ilex5 shutter for a soft focus lens with a portion of the proceeds.
Bookmarks