Portraits with TLR

[Analogski]

Hi,

I want to get more experience with portrait photography. Still no Pentax 67, but I have a beautiful Rolleiflex 3.5F with Rolleinar 1 and 2.

I have a Rick Oleson spilt screen ground glass in my Rolleiflex.

I lean on the coupled lichtmeter (yes I know....). I also use only natural light.

In some pictures I made, if found it hard to focus, and some portraits are slightly out of focus, maybe due to too open aperture, but don't know for sure.

Anyhow, tips and tricks are welcome!

Thanks in advance!

 

[MattKing]

A prism finder is very handy if you make head and shoulders portraits.
And yes, smaller apertures help.

 

[BrianShaw]

Portraits with a TLR are inherently do-able, but that might not be the ideal camera for that task. The best portrait situation seems to be environmental portraiture rather than head-and-shoulders type. Can't comment on the forus issue you mention without further information about your situation. Perhaps a more complete description and example will help. But in general, focus with open aperture can be difficult as the DOF tends to be quiteh thin and any subject movement can affect focus as much as any camera movement. For exposure, consider getting a meter that measures incident, as that makes portrature a bit easier/quicker.

 

[Elmarc]

Hi,

I want to get more experience with portrait photography. Still no Pentax 67, but I have a beautiful Rolleiflex 3.5F with Rolleinar 1 and 2.

I have a Rick Oleson spilt screen ground glass in my Rolleiflex.

I lean on the coupled lichtmeter (yes I know....). I also use only natural light.

In some pictures I made, if found it hard to focus, and some portraits are slightly out of focus, maybe due to too open aperture, but don't know for sure.

Anyhow, tips and tricks are welcome!

Thanks in advance!

Focus is even more difficult with rolleinars attached. I have succeeded in the past with a rolleinar 2 at f8/11 but the end result will not be that flattering for classic portraits even if you do nail the focus. However, isolating details such as hands can work very well with the Rolleinars.
I sometimes like to use the 35mm rolleikin adaptor for portraits as the 75mm lens then has a longer reach.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have shot many portraits with Yashica 124 and D and Kowa SL66. I would focus on upper body, use the split screen on the eyes, shoot with enough depth of field for the face in be sharp focus. think square or take the viewing hood off and use a china marker to draw a grid for 6X4.5. You might need a step stool to give your self some high to bring the camera up giving you some head room.

 

[beemermark]

Don’t use the Rolleinars. If you want a head shot just crop the negative. The lens is good enough

 

[Hassasin]

I agree Rolleinars are not a good idea but getting close without is a challenge.

Focus is critical on the eyes and I think no matter how nailed focus is, Rolleinars will visibly take some off. Also in my view, too much DOF does not work well in portraits. without Rolleinars distance is going to be close, but I think more than F 5.6 is too much. I'd probably test with 4 and 5.6 for comparison.

That's my take.

As for TLR for portraits, it is obviously limiting, but still capable of delivering great results within its limitations.

 

[baachitraka]

Rolleinar I is pretty good for head and shoulder portraits.


You could also use Tele Rollei with Rolleinar to have good working distance.

 

[baachitraka]

Rolleiflex 6×6 with Rolleinars

Rolleinar Close-up lenses for Rolleiflex, Tele-Rolleiflex and Wide-Angle Rolleiflex, an introduction. Table of object distances. Depth Of Field information.

tlr.rolleigraphy.eu

Which Rolleiflex Rolleinar Close-Up Lens is Right for Me? — Dan Wagner, Writer, Photographer, Content Creator

Rolleiflex photographers prize Rolleinar close-up lenses for their sharpness, lightweight, compact size, and ability to bring them closer to their subjects. The Rolleinars pictured above consist of a viewing lens paired with a close-up lens.

www.danwagner.com

 

[blee1996]

In my experience, TLR is great for environmental portraits. But I prefer SLR for head and shoulder tight portraits, especially if you want to keep the lens wide open.

I only use Rolleinar on still life and flowers, which are not moving.

 

[cliveh]

I think that the fact you use natural light is highly commendable. A Rolleiflex is a wonderful camera and you can achieve some great portraits with it using just natural light and reflective sheets of white card. A portrait doesn't always have to be a close head crop, as it could be an enviromental portrait.

 

[Pieter12]

Irving Penn and Richard Avedon seemed to get by making portraits with a Rolleiflex. Just put in the time and patience, use the magnifier.

 

[cliveh]

So did Bill bandt.

 

[Pieter12]

So did Bill bandt.

View attachment 410388

I think that one may have been shot with a Hasselblad SWC.

 

[cliveh]

I think that one may have been shot with a Hasselblad SWC.

Wich like a Rolleiflex is 6cm X 6cm.

 

[Pieter12]

Wich like a Rolleiflex is 6cm X 6cm.

...but not a TLR.

 

[cliveh]

What is your point? TLR or SLR, whats the difference?

 

[Hassasin]

What is your point? TLR or SLR, whats the difference?

SLR has lens choice, TLR does not

 

[MattKing]

They make a great prop for self-portraits .
Pre-focused Mamiya 645 Pro, using the self timer.


I used that C330 to shoot weddings, including lots of portraits. That 135mm lens was great for the portrait work, but the 80mm was also great for more environmental portraiture.
You learn how to focus as you get used to using them for that purpose.

 

[cliveh]

SLR has lens choice, TLR does not

And what lens do you think Bill Brandt has used to take this picture?

 

[Hassasin]

And what lens do you think Bill Brandt has used to take this picture?

View attachment 410392

I don't care, the way of working TLR vs. SLR is totally different, and lens choice gives freedom of changing perspective or required reach for most situations. Most of it is all but gone with TLR.

 

[skahde]

As you can see in the examples the recipe for distortion-free portraiture is in the distance to the subject not in the lens used. Rule of thumb says, you need to have ten times the the depth of your subject for a natural looking reproduction. For a portrait that is the 15 cm or 6" ear to nosetip multiplied by ten. The fl of your lens then determines the size of the subject on the negative.

 

[Hassasin]

As you can see in the examples the recipe for distortion-free portraiture is in the distance to the subject not in the lens used. Rule of thumb says, you need to have ten times the the depth of your subject for a natural looking reproduction. For a portrait that is the 15 cm or 6" ear to nosetip multiplied by ten. The fl of your lens then determines the size of the subject on the negative.

So you are saying you can do same portraiture with ANY lens? Which is of course impossible.

 

[Pieter12]

What is your point? TLR or SLR, whats the difference?

The subject of this thread, maybe.

 

[baachitraka]

SLR has lens choice, TLR does not

Remember...Mamiya c330 et al