max_fun Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Hi, I was just flipping through the current issue of LensWork and I was admiring the photographs of China by James Whitlow Delano. I noticed that all the photos look a little hazy, have pretty severe vignetting and there seems to be a dark aura around the subjects. I suspect that it might be from an uncoated lens with low contrast, unless it's all post- processed. I'm just wondering if anyone's familiar with his work and his gear? Is this the look you get from a really old lens like the Summitar? I think the effect kind of fits the subjects in his photos, but might be harder to use in modern cities. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_hundsnurscher Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Looks like he uses a Holga or a Lomo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sliu Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 He used an M-2. Although I think a Holga would do a better job. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_a Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 <a href="http://www.jameswhitlowdelano.com/">http://www.jameswhitlowdelano.com/</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claudia__ Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 man, that is one sticky link above. had to close my browser to get out of it. i hate sites designed like that! my summitar is coated...aren't they all? no hazy glow from it. maybe you meant a summar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 I asked this question before and many people responded in the past that this is the result of a bag of tricks performed by the printing press masters. And, LensWork has very experienced print masters there. Look at books published by Phaidon Press and Blufinch and you will see the same thing, although they do not glow as consistently as LensWork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 BTW, I'm not talking about photographic lab "wet" prints but book printing techniques. Just wanted to make sure I was clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliot_rosen Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 You don't need to have an old lens to get that kind of effect. There are multiple special effects filters that will do it and they usually come in different strengths (ie. different magnitudes of the effect). There are fog filters, diffusion, soft focus, etc. There are differences in the type of effect you get with different filters, but Tiffen and others offer a variety of these filters. The low tech method is to take a plain (UV) filter and smear some vasoline on the surface :-) Also, some manufacturers (eg., Canon EF) offer soft focus lenses in which you can vary the effect. Any lens not well corrected for spherical aberration will do it, which includes a lot of older lenses. The effect is reduced when you stop down, so need to use a wider aperatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tito sobrinho Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 He uses a M2 + 35mm lens and not a 50mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Max, scroll down <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008FIM">this thread</a> for a DIY in PS primer. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_shively Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 White nylon stockings material under the enlarger lens. Used for part or all of the exposure. Flares the shadows, softens the highlights. Instant glow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max_fun Posted August 12, 2004 Author Share Posted August 12, 2004 Thanks for all the helpful suggestions. Does anybody know if the photos in LensWork are really just somehow printed in the magazine that way? Of did Delano actually use filters or even Photoshop to get the effects? Thanks Lutz, I've tried the gaussian effect and I think it's great, but the look is very even, unlike the Delano photos, which looks more... organic (for lack of a better word). Maybe it's just because I've never tried the method on such very contrasty pictures. I was thinking of getting some Zeiss Softar filters, but I was adviced to use Photoshop for the same effect, that's why I passed on them. But I didn't know that there were other kinds of filters; I'll probably have a quick shop around to see what's available. Personally, I usually prefer to use filters/analog methods than to replicate it with Photoshop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sliu Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 <i> I usually prefer to use filters/analog methods than to replicate it with Photoshop. </i> <p> A more natural way is to use a <b>real</b> Holga ;-)<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_carson Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 I've seen one solution that looked good to me, and heard of three others. The gaussian blur effect described in Lutz's post is just too...even, too perfect. In the analog world the magic comes from imperfection. <p>So, check this product out, the Pictrol soft focus lens for your enlarger here: <a href="http://buyporters.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc? Screen=PROD&Store_Code=PCS&Product_Code=22 -0342&Product_Count=&Category_Code=">link</a>. Break/paint parts of it for a more uneven effect! Porter's has some weird sh**. <p>I've seen work done with it that is very Holga like, and of course, you can vary the effect with it. Never used it, just seen 20x24's of it off of a 35mm neg. I'm not really into printing. <p>I've also heard of printers using different women's stockings in front of the enlarger lens: black vs white, fishnet vs fine, hole(s) vs no hole etc. With a central hole, you could get some interesting sharp/not sharp effects, maybe. <p>Also, I've seen reproductions of work in magazines from people that expose the b/w paper submersed in a liquid (water?). THAT can be really interesting, especially if the paper isn't all 'aligned' and is floating a bit. Impossible to control well, I'd gather. <p>The other thing I 'saw' was a digital solution, a Holga Photoshop plug in here: <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007avv">link</a> <p>I can't vouch for that solution...never seen a print, only a jpg, hence the quotes around the word 'saw.'<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_carson Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 And S. Liu, I have always loved your stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_carson Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Also (I miss posts when I'm responding to other posts!), I'm quite sure that the Delano reproductions in Lenswork are not a high-end magazine printing technique, as that rag is dedicated to the most perfect reproductions of how the artist's original prints look in person. It would be *very* strange for any magazine to alter/enhance an artists work on purpose. They might screw up, of course, but the results wouldn't look nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_carson Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Jesus, I'm on a tear here. I should mention that my print above looks that way, that's why I didn't sharpen it in PS. No other effects applied. Also, it was shot a f/1.4. I really love that lens. Someday, perhaps, a 35mm f/2 pre-asph will also live in my bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnmarkpainter Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Max, Try to pick up a beater Summar....it is a very nice look. It is fairly extreme as I can recognize my Summar Negs when they are hanging 20 feet away. Beware that it flares REALLY easily....a Hood is very helpful. It flares even with Sidelighting. jmp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chi_huang Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 Like this?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted August 12, 2004 Share Posted August 12, 2004 <img src="http://www.streetzen.net/bk/park14.jpg"><p><p>get any old lens thats nice and scratched.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max_fun Posted August 13, 2004 Author Share Posted August 13, 2004 Whao... it's actually quite hard to find a Summar. Would a scratched Summitar do? How about the 35mm Summaron? I know that the Holga is pretty cool, but I tried one and I can't for the life of me tape the bloody thing enough to get rid of light leaks. Really too expensive to keep experimenting and screwing up, that's why I've stopped using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 summars are everywhere.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philip_meadows1 Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 check out the thread for "help with 35 lens" I have a friend who might sell you his Summicron DR! LOL!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rico_tudor Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 Nice, grant. IR effect on the foliage, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claudia__ Posted August 13, 2004 Share Posted August 13, 2004 and don't forget pinhole <img src="http://www.sfbaysailingpix.com/starspalm.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now