Now here's a thought to horrify purists -digital emulation of old lenses!

[peter]

I am sitting at my computer and it is 5.50 am my time. (Just a

disclaimer so you can put this down to time of day and insomnia, not

madness.) I suddenly had an idea. I use rangefinder cameras (mainly

but not limited to) Leicas and love the images produced by their old

lenses. (Actually I love these old lenses period, but thats another

story.)

 

I also use digital cameras and in any event digitise film based photos

and often then use Photoshop to tweak them. The thought occurred to me

that with the ongoing technical development of digital cameras /

technology, why would it not be possible to develop a Photoshop filter

(or ultimately the same "in camera' software) to process the

information in any photo to emulate whatever old lens you want.

 

So with my latest Leica / Panasonic digi whatever I would just select

from a menu "I want this to look like it was taken by an uncoated

Summar." Bingo your shot is processed accordingly. After all, you can

kinda do this now with a copy of Photoshop and lotsa fiddling with

filter effects. (Increase saturation, decrease saturation, play with

levels and contrast etc.) If you hunt around the internet you will

also find many, many payware (and some freeware) special effect

filters that process digital images to give specific effects that

combine several Photoshop effects into one. There are even "old photo"

effect filters, but the ones I have seen just lower contrast and

renders the image in sepia or yellowish tones. I am thinking of

something that actually sets out to produce the optical

characteristics of specific old lenses - the uncoated elmar / tessar,

the summar etc.)

 

I hate to be a techno geek but find the idea somehow appealing even

though I prefer the real thing - Without wishing to minimise the idea,

its kinda like fast food! I prefer "proper" food but sometimes that

occasional burger goes down a treat.

 

What do you think? Would there be a market for this? (Perhaps there

already is and I have missed it - story of my life. I am always

inventing things that have already been invented.)

[vivek iyer]

Peter, I think that this thread (idea, question, whatever) is not very different than this one from Josiah Carberry:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GJ0W&tag=

[peter]

Vivek, no that was not so much my question. My thought is why not use digital techniques to emulate specific old lens characteristics. After all without wishing to trivialise it, it is "just information" that is being processed - in this case digitally rather than optically!!!???

[cabophoto]

Peter,

 

the problem is that a lot of information simply isn't there anymore - the distance info, for example. You only have a 2D projection of the actual taking lens to work with, so you can't possibly emulate the out-of-focus rendition, for example.

 

Carsten

 

http://www.cabophoto.com/

[peter]

Carsten, I agree that information is lost in the taking process and that only an approximation would be possible. However I am not so sure about distance info - some modern cameras already have multiple focussing sensors to detect focussing info. And some distance related info can be imputed from whats in focus and whats out of focus (this is where the smart software woudl come in.) I am still not convinced that something of the sort would not be possible.

[john_shriver]

The other thing missing is all the stray light that's not part of the image, but hitting the lens.

 

Now, starting from a wider angle 3-D picture...

[peter]

OK here is an example of what I mean (maybe not a good one, but an example none the less.) The photo started out as the color one and ended up as the grainy, low contrast black and white one, which to my eyes looks somewhat as if it was taken with an old lens (it was taken with a modern lens and the effects are courtesy of Photoshop and my very very ordinary Photosshop skills.) All I started with was the info in the picture. I agree this no doubt loses some of the quality of a real olde time photo but to Joe Lunch Bucket in the street, my guess it is close enough. And as I said this is only a quick conversion with out much thought. A well designed bit of purpose built software might do much better.

 

 

 

<img src='http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-10/1093652/AllaPicture6qaa.jpg' width=700 height=490 >

 

<img src='http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-10/1093652/AllaPicture6qa.jpg' width=700 height=539 >

[dan_fromm2]

Peter, politeness prevents me from abusing you for suggesting that grain is an attribute of lenses. Reconsider your postion, I think you're mistaken.

 

Like so many people who want those good old timey images, you're looking in the wrong direction. What you want to emulate is NOT what old lenses do, but what old film and papers do, also inaccurate metering and erratic development.

 

I shoot a variety of uncoated old lenses. In fact today I took a couple of shots with a pre-WWI (I, as in one, not II, as in two) f/6.3 Tessar. Not coated. I think it qualifies as old.

 

It is not a bad lens. Shots taken with it can't reliably be told from ones of the same subject taken with a modern lens of the same focal length at the same aperture on the same emulsion ...

[frederick_muller]

I'm not horrified. There are already sharpening/optimization software packages designed for specific lenses. You can take a photo, digitize it, and tell the package what lens you used. The company that wrote the software already analyzed the lens you used and mapped its characteristics ... the software is designed to correct for the lens's specific aberrations.

 

You can't stop progress. It's not at all inconceivable that I go down to the corner Radio shack and buy a $30 package that makes my 35mm Pre-Aspherical Summilux blow away the latest 35mm Lux Aspherical.

 

Just gotta deal with it, man.

[frederick_muller]

(If we can write software that gets a 35mm PreAsph to blow away a current production Asph, it should be a snap to write software that works the other way too.)

[lee hamiel]

Peter:

 

Try this plug-in from photoshop - it allows for a wide range of vintage looks as well as letting one adjust beyond - I like it as it's a constant known tweak depending on your choices - be it B&W or Color - it's also free as well.

 

See:

http://www.optikvervelabs.com/

[peter]

Dan I perfectly well realise that grain is not an attribute of lenses! I was merely describing the photo (which HAPPENS to be grainy)

 

I constantly shoot with prewar and early post war lenses on various types of film , although I do not develop or print my own so I cannot play iwht paper and printing. But I do as much digitally as I also constantly fiddle with Photoshop and various filters and plugins for different effects and have realised that as technology advances, the camera maufacturers might well decide to cater to this part of the market by offering the opportunity to provide effects that are similar to various old lenses at the push of a button or tweak of a dial. My Sony DSC f717 alrady has various basic in camera manipulation options like sepia toning and black and white conversion (and some digital cameras already have much more.) So why not this? We should not be luddites about this. There will always be a place for the "real thing" but for many who cannot afford a Leica or are not equipment junkies like most of us, all that matetrs are the results.

[peter]

Lee thanks for the link to the Optik verve plug in I will try it.

[lee hamiel]

I may be way off here - tired but gave a quick adjustment through the optikverve filters.<div></div>

[lee hamiel]

At a glance I can see that your original B&W revamp is better - I will ask that maybe you send the file to me in a larger file size if you are interested & I will redo. Tough trying to re-work under 100k files:)

 

Regards

[peter]

Actually Lee afterdownloading the plugin and trying to install it, I realised I already have it - and in fact, it may be what I used to produce the B/W image that I posted, I cannot recall as I did it a few months back. Alternatively I may have combined several "native" photoshop effects to get the same result. In any event this plug in does a fine job and you are right it is probably one of the better freeware ones.

 

My point is why could not camera manufacturers provide similar processing technology as standard, tweaked to presets that emulate specific results / lenses for ease of use by those more technologically challenged. My guess is that they could.

[jsc1]

In considering the software emulation of old lenses, I am reminded of the debacle of the

Hubble Space Telescope. The first "fix" was software written to correct the error(s). The

results were good but they were not as good as the results from Hubble Space Telescope

"glasses" that were designed and installed at a later date. No one at NASA, or even the

contractor that flubbed the mirror manufacture, ever felt that software was going to be truly

sufficient.

 

Of course, we are talking here about "art;" not science.

[peter]

Lee if you want me to send the image to you, drop me an email at peterm1 (at) grapevine (dot) come (dot) au.

 

I would be interested to see what you could do.

[jerry_lehrer]

Peter,--- Knowing what type of photographic mayhem that you digi-types

are capable of, I have no doubts that the suggested malpractice will be

accomplished. There are enough examples of the old lenses around so that

they can be evaluated and digitally archived.

 

Sort of analogous to the plastic surgery that the rich dowagers of

La Jolla undergo to look 40 years younger--BUT IN REVERSE!

[lee hamiel]

Peter:

 

With regards to your suggestion that manufacturers might provide the adjustments/specs per se for various lenses - thay have nothing to gain financially given that most buyers will either be buying older used lenses or using already bought new lenses trying to emulate the old ones.

 

I understand trying to capture the "essence" of the various older lenses & my feeling is that maybe you should consider creating a plug-in based on various vintage lenses - maybe just the most highly regarded lenses.

 

May be some software engineers or programs that could analyze the differences between say a 2006 Summicron 50 shot & a 25+ year old variant & come up with the minor/not so minor variances between them so as to create an "Early Version" so to speak.

 

Obviously these would need to be shot under controlled situations with similar lighting, etc. . Simple in concept but a bit of work to accomplish & also to have it be marketable.

 

Interesting idea.

 

By the way - story of my life too - I am in the business & too busy to catch the train sometimes:)

[Brad_]

This image doesn't work because of poor the exposure. It has nothing to do with the lens,

nor is there any apparent charm that could be attributed to any lens. There is no real black.

The darkest tones are miles away from black.

 

Bringing out the shadows reveals horrible looking artifacts (due to the poor exposure). It's

not grain and not noise. Could be related to ebola, though.

[peter]

Jerry thats a spooky thought. We have just had Joan Rivers in Australia for an awards ceremony. Kinda frightening to see a 70 year old who has had so many lifts she is sporting a belly button for a nose.

[peter]

Brad, not to put to fine a point on it, as we say in Australia "Get your hand off it sport!"

 

a) I never said it was the best photo, in fact I pointed out that it is not. It was a quick post of something already on my PC to illustrate a point about digital manipulation of images.

 

b) You totally missed my point to go off on some frolic of your own about the picture.

 

So pull your head in and stop being gratuitously rude .

[Brad_]

Sorry Peter, didn't mean to be rude. Just wanted to be frank addressing your points.

[peter]

OK Brad Apology accepted. ( No one minds artistic criticism when criticism is asked for. But that is clearly not what my original post was about.)