Enlarger Lenses, How Sharp?

[Mal Paso]

A forum thread got me thinking about enlarger lenses, I checked ebay and there were a few bargains. My old El Nikkor 135mm is a single coated lens and there have been real advances in design, glass, and coatings since then. I got a very good price on a set, 50, 80, and 150 Componon S lenses and spent yesterday in the darkroom with them. They are sharper, micro contrast and overall but it brings up the question, "Is sharper better?" Along with the acuity you get grain and blemishes. The lenses are not an improvement for every negative and I'll keep the older El Nikkors. It was worth it to see what state of the art was and I can go there if the negative calls for it.

So this brings up a new quest, how to soften an image, even more than the older lens. Do you have a technique to soften an image and still hold some detail?

 

[ic-racer]

If you use some form of diffusion under the lens, the amount of time that is in place will change the effect. You can get just the right amount of diffusion, yes still have sharpness.

One catch is that the diffusion is bleeding of back in to the white areas.

Here is an example with about 50% diffusion and 50% exposure without diffusion.

You can also get a similar effect with foggy enlarger lenses.

Diffusion and softening of the pictures

Hi everyone, I'll soon make some test with my rb67, but I'm wondering... I come from cinematography and in our field with often use diffusion in front or behind the lens. With filters like the Tiffen black pro-mist or sometimes with nets behind the lens. I find it less common in the photography...

www.photrio.com

 

[xkaes]

Every lens has it's BEST spot, and that varies with magnification, aperture, etc. And some lenses have a wider BEST spot than others.

For softer results, whatever that means, you have LOTS of options, starting with using the lenses outside of it BEST spot.

When I want softer results, I use Minolta's Portrayer filters -- which as unique in what they do:

https://portrayer.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/minolta-portrayer-filters/

 

[Pieter12]

Ick.

 

[Paul Howell]

In days gone by it was common to use a light coating of petroleum jelly either on the enlarger lens or on glass over the negative. By trial and error the amount of fuzziness could be adjusted. Other's used nylon stockings over the lens. Depending on the formate you can find 3 elements lens which are often very soft wide open. For soft 6X9 images I use a Federal Stowaway with fixed 2 element lens and waterhouse stops.

 

[Pieter12]

Ick again. Maybe a ProMist filter on the lens?

 

[GregY]

A forum thread got me thinking about enlarger lenses, I checked ebay and there were a few bargains. My old El Nikkor 135mm is a single coated lens and there have been real advances in design, glass, and coatings since then. I got a very good price on a set, 50, 80, and 150 Componon S lenses and spent yesterday in the darkroom with them. They are sharper, micro contrast and overall but it brings up the question, "Is sharper better?" Along with the acuity you get grain and blemishes. The lenses are not an improvement for every negative and I'll keep the older El Nikkors. It was worth it to see what state of the art was and I can go there if the negative calls for it.

So this brings up a new quest, how to soften an image, even more than the older lens. Do you have a technique to soften an image and still hold some detail?

Componon-S lenses have been in production for a long time.... since 1975 (with quite a few changes). Are yours the latest iteration? Do you think the difference might just be your individual nikkor 135? I have several colleagues that produce very fine prints with El-nikkor lenses.

 

[Mal Paso]

Wow! Just looked at the Tiffen, Black Mist. Thanks! The Minolta filters need longer lenses but the concept is intriguing.

Componon-S lenses have been in production for a long time.... since 1975...Do you think the difference might just be your individual nikkor 135? I know several colleagues that produce very fine prints with El-nikkor lenses.

My 135 El Nikkor is a good lens, I wouldn't call it soft. I did print side by side with a late non illuminated 150 Componon S which was sharper and print contrast was higher and an illuminated 150 Componon S which is sharper still. The brochure talks of "glass types", Ultra Flat Field, extended range. etc. I think they've been polishing this apple a long time. The last brochures for the Componon S pitch it for electronic imaging. At print viewing distances the differences are subtile, it won't make or break a picture but it could contribute. It was an itch I could scratch on a budget.

The prints are drying, will see in a few days.

 

[JPD]

The common DUTO type soft filter would probably work as well. It's a flat glass with concentric rings that act like lenses that project an out of focus image that blends with the in focus image to create the softening effect.

 

[xkaes]

The Minolta filters need longer lenses but the concept is intriguing.

That's true of the P (Portrait) models, that are designed for 85mm-135mm (35mm full-frame equivalent) lenses, but not the S (Scenic) models. And the Portrayer effect is not affected by the f-stop, like some other softening filters. I only use the S models.

 

[xkaes]

The common DUTO type soft filter would probably work as well. It's a flat glass with concentric rings that act like lenses that project an out of focus image that blends with the in focus image to create the softening effect.

I assume these are similar to the Zeiss Softars -- also made by Hoya. They work fine on taking lenses, but are only designed for longer, portrait lenses at wide f-stops. Stopped down or with shorter focal length lenses, the "mini-lenses" stand out, like blobs. Also, they are designed to spread out the highlights, which in a negative turn out to be the shadows. So use with enlarging lenses would be problematic.

 

[Pieter12]

I assume these are similar to the Zeiss Softars -- also made by Hoya. They works fine on taking lenses, but are only designed for longer, portrait lenses at wide f-stops. Stopped down or with shorter focal length lenses, the "mini-lenses" stand out, like blobs. Also, they are designed to spread out the highlights, which in a negative turn out to be the shadows. So use with enlarging lenses would be problematic.

I believe the ProMist filters are available in both black and clear versions.

 

[reddesert]

I have not really tried or wanted to try introducing softness at the enlarger stage, but everybody's images are different. Could it be that part of what you like is a little bit more flare, reducing contrast, from an older single coated lens?

As someone else mentioned, due to reversal, soft focus attachments at enlarging will diffuse light from dark spots on the print into light areas, rather than create halos around light sources like soft-focus on the camera. When I see this effect in a print, it usually looks like a special effect rather than natural, but again, everybody's images are different. If you want to try introducing just a tiny softness, maybe use the enlarger lens wide open? (Probably more effective with an f/4 lens than the f/5.6 enlarging lenses common for larger formats.) Or you could be a barbarian and enlarge with a taking lens, but that will probably make the corners soft due to curvature of field.

 

[xkaes]

The DUTO filters are Hoya filters and are the same as the Zeiss Softars. They are totally different from the ProMist filters and work in a completely different way. The ProMist is closer to the nylon stocking over the lens -- either white or black.

 

[xkaes]

I have not really tried or wanted to try introducing softness at the enlarger stage, but everybody's images are different.

I normally don't either, but there have been times that it is the only option. A good example is a great portrait of someone but the lens is way too sharp, and a good soft-focus filter, softening the lines, would make the subject much happier. Happened to me many times.

Then there are landscapes that can become more mystical or mysterious with a good softening -- which you didn't or couldn't do when the shot was taken.

I always thought that the real work of a photograph begins in the darkroom.

 

[Mal Paso]

The Black Mist seems to control flair, white/clear would allow some flair?

Black Mist sounds like a place to start.

Thank all of you for a great discussion!

It just occurred to me a filter in conjunction with dodging and burning could offer another level of control.

 

[Pieter12]

It just occurred to me a filter in conjunction with dodging and burning could offer another level of control.

I have thought about burning through a piece of translucent plastic or even tracing paper to darken an area without accentuating the grain, but I have yet to try it.

 

[JPD]

I assume these are similar to the Zeiss Softars -- also made by Hoya. They work fine on taking lenses, but are only designed for longer, portrait lenses at wide f-stops. Stopped down or with shorter focal length lenses, the "mini-lenses" stand out, like blobs. Also, they are designed to spread out the highlights, which in a negative turn out to be the shadows. So use with enlarging lenses would be problematic.

The principle of the DUTO and Softars is the same, but the DUTO has concentric rings while the Softar has "dimples" on the glass. The Rollei Duto were made for normal lenses at large apertures. You're right about the effect being most noticeable in the highlights, and I forgot about that.

The DUTO-type has been made by several filter manufacturers, but was originally invented by Jenö Dulovits and Miklos Tóth, and made by N.v.Tóth in Hungary.

 

[xkaes]

The Black Mist seems to control flair, white/clear would allow some flair?

Black Mist sounds like a place to start.

That's about it. The white MIST breaks up the image and spreads white light around -- reducing contrast -- while the black MIST just breaks up the image without reducing contrast. Tiffen made a similar series called SOFTNET that came in white or black mesh. These diffusers, like most "soft-focus" filters act by simply breaking up the image to a greater of lesser extent, but they break it up uniformly without keeping a sharp image within it. Then there are countless FOG filters, too. The Softar-type filters (one Hoya version was called SOFTENERS) succeed very well with wide, fast portrait lenses, and Pieter's suggestion of duel exposures sounds great. Completely variable from a little diffusion to a lot. Too bad he can't bottle it.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

There was also a Pictrol I think it was called that went below the lens in the darkroom. It kind of looked like shutter blades that extended into the image. The blades were just clear plexi IIRC. I had one at one point but never used it. I sold it to someone who was well known for that in the darkroom.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Then there is the old trick of simply smearing a little vaseline over your enlarger lens - one valid reason for owning an alternative cheap lens. I think I did that only once in my entire life, just out of curiosity, comparing it to some of the already described options for printing less than ideal skin complexions.

 

[xkaes]

 

[Mal Paso]

Just ordered a Tiffen Pro Mist filter 4x4 inch which also fits my Mat Box, which fits all my large format lenses.