Pictorialism lens in medium format?

[baachitraka]

I am searching for a while now to mimic the pictorialism in medium format (yes, negative size is small and may not have same tonal gradation) and the one that came close is Triotar in Rolleicord (not really).

Is there any camera/lens that give such an effect??

 

[Dan Fromm]

http://www.galerie-photo.com/soft-focus-objectif-portrait-flou.html Explanations, lens
cross-sections, example shots. In French.

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

Dan that is an impressive reference on he topic, thanks for posting it.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Glad to see someone interested in pictorialism. Most APUGers want razor sharp images.

The lenses used to create a pictorial effect have uncorrected aberrations. You are probably not going to find this in medium format cameras as their lens are fairly decent. However you can defocus any lens a bit to get the effect. You can also use a clear filter that has been 'dirtied' a bit with petroleum jelly. The amount needed to do this is very small. You can also use a bit of fine black mesh, such as a women's stocking, held in an embroidery hoop. Hold the mesh in front of the lens There are also filters made specifically for the purpose of softening the focus. With any method you will have to do some experimenting.

 

[blockend]

A Zeiss Ikon Nettar might fit the bill. Specifications vary but the more common 6 x 6 varieties have a 3-element f4.5 Rodenstock lens. This is impressionistic at wide apertures and sharpens up when stopped down.

Pictorialists sometimes used Petzval style lenses. Another method is to invert the front element of some of the Brownie cameras. Messing around with old folding cameras, removing elements, placing magnifiers in front of the glass, unscrewing the stops that keep the front lens panel straight throwing some planes out of focus, etc, etc. You can preview the effect by placing a ground glass, or even tissue paper in the frame with the back open, before you load the film.

There isn't a single pictorial solution, it's a question of how far from sharpness norms you want to go. You can continue the process under the enlarger.

 

[baachitraka]

I can also take plate cameras with roll film backs. Only interested in lens(es).

...that soft and glowing highlights is what I get attracted. Very recently have borrowed a book in library about Imogen Cunningham works and I was really stunned.

 

[jim10219]

You might also try slightly unscrewing some of the lens elements on any lenses you already own. By increasing the distance from any air spaced elements, you can often create some soft focus effects. Of you could insert a handmade waterhouse stop style soft focus aperture disc inside the lens. Just be careful with it so that it doesn't interfere with the shutter or scratch the lens elements.

 

[baachitraka]

I am not feeling to capture the diffused or soft light through filters or mods but the feel of real old lenses. Lots of details, kind of smooth that have local contrast and beautiful highlights.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/diana-versus-holga.33363/#post-476307

The feel and effect of the second picture in the above link, albeit without any crazy distortions. Also effect of first picture for this matter....

 

[jim10219]

I am not feeling to capture the diffused or soft light through filters or mods but the feel of real old lenses. Lots of details, kind of smooth that have local contrast and beautiful highlights.

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/diana-versus-holga.33363/#post-476307

The feel and effect of the second picture in the above link, albeit without any crazy distortions. Also effect of first picture for this matter....

Well, you could try using the camera they used in your post. That's a medium format camera that seems to be what you're after. Or you could look for an old Rapid Rectilinear or Petzval lens. The Petzval might be hard to set up a shutter for, but most of the old Rapid Rectilinear/Aplant lenses come with compound shutters. The old compound shutters might need a bit of cleaning to get working, but they're pretty simple shutter designs, and make for a decent DIY project for the first timer if you're up to it. Or you could have it professionally done.

Here's a link to a guy who unscrewed an old Tessar lens (bottom of the page). http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com/BandLTessar/11X14BandLTessar.html You can adjust the amount of the effect by adjusting the distance of the elements. It may not be what you're looking for. Then again, pictorialism may not be what you're looking for either, as it's generally known for soft focus lenses and large format film to be contact printed using various alternate process techniques. The pictorialists tended to avoid straight black and white photography, like what you get from medium format enlargements. They also often wanted brush strokes to show through, like what you'd get from hand coated paper.

 

[cowanw]

It's probably too late to point out that Pictorialism does not equate to soft focus.
Clarence White's lens was a F11 Cooke RV. Even the soft focus lenses of the 1920's were largely sharp by F11. The nature of post production was a big feature of Pictorialism. Choose which kind of post production you like.

 

[Alan Gales]

On early Bronica cameras like the S2a and EC and also the Rolleiflex SL66 focal plane shutter cameras you can "cobble" early lenses to the front of the cameras and use the helical focussing of the Bronicas or the bellows focussing of the Rollies. Some of the Heliar lenses used for large format produce a really nice "glow" in the highlights.

If you want soft focus then Mamiya made two soft focus lenses. A 150mm and a 180mm. The 150mm was for the RB67 and the 180mm for the RZ67. Of course you can use the 150mm on the RZ but you do have to manually cock the shutter. With these lenses you can go from really soft all the way to sharp. These lenses were designed for portraiture and may be a bit long in focal length for you though.

 

[tedr1]

...that soft and glowing highlights is what I get attracted. Very recently have borrowed a book in library about Imogen Cunningham works and I was really stunned.

The 140mm soft focus lens for the Mamiya RB67 probably is one possibility. I successfully modified this lens to remove the original RB67 mounting flange and shutter. Over here these lenses are common and inexpensive on ebay.com

The soft focus effect is a combination of blur due to uncorrected aberrations and at the same time a reduction in contrast. For some subjects this is an attractive effect. At f4 the effect is maximum, at f5.6 it is reduced and at f8 it is not present at all, the lens is a sharp 140mm f8 optic.

Here is a simple example of the effect, note that the lens was focused on the subject in the left third of the frame

The highlights are surrounded by bright halos, the contrast is lower, there is a small amount of blur everywhere. The strength of the effect can be adjusted two ways, by variation of aperture and by adding diffusion discs, a set of three is available.

 

[jack straw]

In his book Edward Stichen: A Life in Photography, he talks about how he would smear water on his lens or vibrate the camera during exposure to introduce the visual effects. He discovered these by accident.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Dan that is an impressive reference on he topic, thanks for posting it.

You're welcome.

It and many other references can be accessed through http://www.largeformatphotography.i...to-look-for-information-on-LF-(mainly)-lenses If you're not aware of that list, take a look.

 

[Ian Grant]

The OP mentions the Rolleicord Triotar saying it doesn't really come close to what he's looking for. My experience shooting with a Triotar was it was quite a decent lens even close to wide open, I shot a few rolls of E4 with mine about 40 years ago and the results were excellent.

I'd look at older Anastigmat lenses, and Rapid Rectilinears off old folding cameras. I have a variety in the 75mm/135mm range, Forget Dialytes as they are sharper, you want the real bottom end lenses with the least correction.

Ian

 

[baachitraka]

I will try to find a photo (a book in the library) which has inspired me. Definitely its is not soft or glowing overall. But soft with lots of local contrast and glowing highlights.

 

[BrianShaw]

... and be advised, some pictorialists, like Julia Margaret Cameron, got the effect she got by simply being poor at focusing.

 

[TonyB65]

The article already linked to talks about the Pentax 67 120mm F3.5, with examples, which also gives this effect. Also, the OM 50mm F1.4 (silvernose) also gives a very similar effect when shot wide open, especially on a digital camera where it blooms and is best shot using black and white.

 

[baachitraka]

I will visit the library soon and try to get that book.

 

[choiliefan]

You must have better libraries than we do in my neck of the woods.

 

[cowanw]

... and be advised, some pictorialists, like Julia Margaret Cameron, got the effect she got by simply being poor at focusing.

This is what many of her photographic contemporaries said, even at meetings of the Royal Photographic Society. Her response was " who is to say what correct focus is". Mostly men, her critics may have been exercising an early example of mansplaining. What is interesting to me is the fact that, if misfocus was the issue, then one would expect a plane of correct focus either for or aft of the centre of interest. Which is not seen. Perhaps her lens was in some way not capable of sharp focus. Her lens was a Jamin petzval but may have had elements reversed. It was certainly not a soft focus lens.
Neither was she a Pictorialist in the sense of being part of that "movement". Pictorialism arose several years after she stopped photography. She would have been an ART photographer or even a Pre Raphaelite Art photographer but pictorialism did not exist in her lifetime. Pictorialists also claimed Hill and Adamson as ancestors, but Hill and Adamson would not have known what they were talking about, much less Cameron who was in a class of her own.
Forgive me; part of my rejection of soft focus equals pictorialism.