That's true but Casablanca is a surprisingly sharp movie if you see it projected or look at the negative (which I have had the pleasure of doing). It's only old television transfers that make it look mushy and soft. It was released in 1942 when Hollywood was quite reactionary against the softer, older styles. Ingrid Bergman's singles are pretty soft and glowy (cinematographers know how to keep their jobs, after all) but the rest of that film is quite sharp and lit hard to a fairly deep stop.
The Imagon is a fairly "simple" lens. I have a 300mm, but to use it you would have to dedicate a lens board to it. The shutter is larger than a #3 hole. The Fuji SF 250mm f/5.6 is a good lens, and my adapted Vesta is good. While the Vesta was not Wollensak's top flight soft focus lens, it does kick in once the front lens is moved to the rear.
Have you looked through the posted soft photographs and seen some images that resonate with you? A lot of it is in the lighting, just like Casa Blanca. (Ever notice in Star Trek they always used a soft lens and dramatic lighting when they were shooting a lady?) The soft/sharp look is also something that I've done with half-frame and 400 speed film. The grain creates the softness all by itself.
"It's the way to educate your eyes. Stare. Pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long." - Walker Evans
Sandy, which size film are you looking to play with?
from wiki with reference
The background of the final scene, which shows a Lockheed Model 12 Electra Junior airplane with personnel walking around it, was staged using midget extras and a proportionate cardboard plane. Fog was used to mask the model's unconvincing appearance
"I am interested primarily in 5X7" format."
IF you can find a B&L 14x17 IIb tessar the rear cell is approx. 270mm f/3.5 and has a nice SF look to it.
I'm preparing for a coast to coast move right now, I can lend you some to play with when I get resettled.
Most lenses loss the SF when stopped down to f/11.
Have fun with the hunt.
Paul
Gee thanks, Bill. You ruined it for me. So the plane wasn't real? Maybe everything else wasn't real either. I'm crushed.
Struss and other cameramen in the day invented and used a LOT of soft focus cine lenses for certain scenes in a lot of movies. Hypars, and a bunch of others we seldom mention here were part to the lens kit of most professionals back in the 20s through 50s. It's quite obvious when they used a soft focus lens, usually for close ups of the leading lady. Then when the scene cuts to the leading man, it's not "sparkly and soft." I don't know about Casablanca, but if you read up on how a lot of the early movies were shot, they used soft focus lenses when needed.
Garrett
flickr galleries
Are the Harrison diffusion filters any good? I thought they were common in the movie biz but hear little about them. I see them on ebay every now an dagain but never bought one to evaluate.
Bookmarks