...but I'm open to any ideas.
Something to keep in mind here. It's the light that is always going to be diffused. So...
When you create the diffusion effect by placing the diffusing medium over the camera lens when creating the negative, you are causing the highlights (denser areas of the negative) to be softened.
When you try doing the same by placing the diffusing medium over the enlarging lens, you are now causing the shadows (denser areas of the print) to be softened.
Most viewers find the former effect to be often quite pleasing, but the latter effect to be somewhat strange.
Ken
Ken
Quite interesting, I never thought of it that way however, I see your point.
Any suggestions or just do it when taking the picture with the camera?
Am I the only one to notice the difference between shadows bleeding out into highlights (enlarger diffusion) versus highlights bleeding out into shadows (camera diffusion)? The two effects are very different. The former effect just jumps out to my eyes. And although YMMV, I find the enlarger diffusion effect to be... unsettling. Again, YMMV.
Ken
I have a few negatives which I'd like to give a more "ethereal" look. I've tried a few through tissue paper (so-so results) and vellum (terrible). I'd prefer an option that can be laid directly over the paper (or slightly raised above it), but I'm open to any ideas. Thanks.
Am I the only one to notice the difference between shadows bleeding out into highlights (enlarger diffusion) versus highlights bleeding out into shadows (camera diffusion)? The two effects are very different. The former effect just jumps out to my eyes. And although YMMV, I find the enlarger diffusion effect to be... unsettling. Again, YMMV.
Ken
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?