Bokeh in Large Format

OK. I'll 'fess up. I posted the text, forgot the image and then edited the post. But Macs are magic anyway. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

David said:

I don't know if it's like the swirly effect on the previous image. Any thoughts? The picture was an experiment.

Click to expand...

Just about perfectly centered in the image is a bit of something (flare? bokeh? magic?) that's almost perfectly circular. For the life of me I can't figure out how that came to be. Does the original look like that, or is this some strange JPG compression artifact?

Yes, it's definitely there in the original. There were so many things that I found that I didn't expect with this image. I can't explain these things either and that's why I posted it here. I don't know if it's bokeh - or what else it might be. Particularly is the spot you mention and the vortexing pattern of the leaves.

I used a cheap digital thing to shoot this from a 16x20 print so it isn't focussed the best but the original has very sharp leaves and branches in a very narrow depth of field - so it's not soft focus all over

The Imagon is a meniscus lens - two elements in one group.
Only so much you can correct for with two elements in one group.

Thought I would resurrect this for a minute and add a question that John PM'd to me.

vet173 said:

Howdy jim,
This is John Berry(vet173), In the post about your heliar I ask about one shot and you correctly refered me to a shot on 14x17 with a verito with the swirly bokeh. I want to get that effect with 8x10. Looking at the shot it looks like I would be using the center of the lens enough to lose the effect desired. Would it be better to use a lens designed for 5x7 assuming the IC was large enough? Thanks,
John

Click to expand...

John, He had an 18" Verito on a 14X17. The equivalent angle of view would be an 11" on 8X10. Normally an 11 inch is considered appropriate for 5X7 and it may even vignette corners on 8X10 until you move in a bit, but that's where Id start if I wanted to try to duplicate that look. Also, image elements are important. There has to be something in the image to swirl. Tree branches come to mind. Might be interesting to aim at a very symmetric background like a brick wall and actually get a feel for what exactly that lens is doing when compared against "knowns". They are difficult to quantify. I was at the Barnbaum workshop and had a 7X11 image of an antique tractor. Bruce accused me of not having the matching negative. The neg looked way out of focus to him but the printed image looked like a Verito image. I couldn't convince him they were the same. Of course Bruce would be happiest if Mortensen stays in the grave.

So Jim, what comes to mind every time I see this thread is when the heck are you gonna offer for sale some of the cheap bokeh beauties that take pics I drool over?

Guilty. Hoarding. Had the 17" APO Skopar on the Eastman yesterday. Developing this morning. That's at the far other end of the scale from soft lenses though. Just so you know I'm hoarding all types.

laz said:

So Jim, what comes to mind every time I see this thread is when the heck are you gonna offer for sale some of the cheap bokeh beauties that take pics I drool over?

Click to expand...

"Bokeh Beauties" I like that phraseology

OTOH.....

"cheap Bokeh Beauties" now that has another connotation for us Nevada folks

Dave Wooten said:

"Bokeh Beauties" I like that phraseology

OTOH.....

"cheap Bokeh Beauties" now that has another connotation for us Nevada folks

Click to expand...

Well, if only a beauty through Bokeh she better be cheap.