Thanks for your reply. So would you rank shooting under visibly hazy conditions as being a more significant factor than using blue sensitive film? Of course the atmospheric effect seen in so many of Atget's photos may be a combination of both -- that is, the blue sensitive film may be exaggerating hazy conditions, but would have little effect under perfectly clear conditions?Copy films tend to be blue sensitive, since they don't need to be anything else. But I don't think it'll quite get what Atget got. Paris in the late 19th/early 20th century was a heavily polluted city. All factories burned coal, every house burned coal, every meal needed a fire to cook. The atmospheric haze was mostly smoke. Even a sunny day would have a haze of smoke.
I do plan to try a roll or two of Ilford Ortho Plus! And I am investigating what "blue sensitive" films may be available. Film Photography Project is selling something called "Svema Blue Sensitve BW" (ISO of 6), but apparently in 35mm, only.A blue filter will cost you a lot of film speed using panchromatic film. Going down the other route, Ilford’s Ortho Plus film is only 80 ISO. That Ilford film was apparently designed for copying work, so I’m not sure there’s much/any difference between ‘ortho-‘ and ‘blue-sensitive’ films.
I would love to know the answer to the question, "Did Atget care about the hazy, atmospheric effect in his photos, and did he seek out conditions, materials and/or techniques to achieve this effect?Atget, of course, would have been able to see flare on his focussing glass. Whether he cared, or whether he even designed it in, is a moot point.
Wow! It never occurred to me that the distance haze might have been added in "post production"!Even in the coal-burning era, some pictorialist photographers contemporary with Atget (eg Frank Meadow Sutcliffe) added distance haze at the time of printing, either by scribbling on the back of the plate with a soft pencil, or interposing carefully cut pieces of tissue paper. In skilful hands, the effect was subtle and convincingly natural.
Demonstrating what?Samples
Holga?
Thanks for your reply. Ilford Ortho Plus 80 is on my list of films to try. I have shot a few rolls of Kentmere 400 but without a filter. Looking at my results, I can see a fair bit of halation under certain conditions. A quick search for 44A filter is not turning up very much. Does it go by another name?For large format, I would shoot xray film, either blue or green sensitive. My experience is with green. Xray has not AH layer. Or Ilford Ortho 80.
For 120 film, I'd shoot Ilford Ortho 80....
or Kentmere 400, with a 44A filter. Kentmere has a AH layer, but it's inferior, and allows for quite a bit of halation effects. Love this film, actually.
Attached are two pages from Michael Hine’s biography of Sutcliffe, which might be of interest.Wow! It never occurred to me that the distance haze might have been added in "post production"!
Attached are two pages from Michael Hine’s biography of Sutcliffe, which might be of interest.
Thanks for your reply. Ilford Ortho Plus 80 is on my list of films to try. I have shot a few rolls of Kentmere 400 but without a filter. Looking at my results, I can see a fair bit of halation under certain conditions. A quick search for 44A filter is not turning up very much. Does it go by another name?
I have the necessary adapters for my three or four medium-format film cameras to use Series 5 filters, so I try to stick to that size whenever possible. Right now, in the Series 5 size, filterfind.net has some 80A and 80B, and a couple of "#10 blue-violet" filters, but nothing in a #47.44A filters are harder to source. You could check out FilterFind. That is where I got Wratten filters from. There are also equivalents, such as Kenko C series. Another filter I like to use for the blue sensitive film look is the #47 Tiffen. I have a video comparing the 80A with various filters for the blue/ortho look...
I have the necessary adapters for my three or four medium-format film cameras to use Series 5 filters, so I try to stick to that size whenever possible. Right now, in the Series 5 size, filterfind.net has some 80A and 80B, and a couple of "#10 blue-violet" filters, but nothing in a #47.
I am trying to work up enough courage to click on your video, but more often than not, videos cause me to break out in hives, so I usually try to avoid them. ;-)
Thanks for that information. I had been wondering why some of Atget's photos have dark, semi-circle areas in the top corners. It is probably obvious to large format users, but it was not to me -- until you explained it!It's a combination of atmospheric haze or air pollution, accentuated or "thickened" by the blue-sensitive emulsion itself, plus deliberate lens flare (mostly toward the top for obvious reasons) due to the characteristics of his lens and how it has been offset vertically (and evident by running out of image circle at the top). Perhaps he used an offset-hole lensboard, unless he had a front-rise feature; likely the former, given the antique nature of his camera.
Good to know -- thanks for the warning!You don't really need a 47 filter, but simply something medium blue like an 82B ordinary conversion filter. With today's high contrast lenses, a 47 or 47B will darken greens into near blackness, even more than typical red filters
Believe me when I say my ambitions fall far short of aiming to "re-create Atget"! As I said in my opening post, all I am trying to do is find out if it is possible to "borrow" some of the atmospheric haze I see in some of Atget's photos. ;-)But all the right tools in the world aren't going to re-create Atget. Plenty of wannabees have tried that already. Genius is hard to come by.
You are correct!With all due respect I think the title of the OP should be how to emulate the Atget look. Only Atget can achieve that look.
By that, I asume you think the lens makes the most significant contribution to the atmospheric haze seen in Atget's photos?
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?