LF camera gear for violin photography?

[ben conover]

Hi, I have Mamiya 35mm, Rolleicord TLR, Fuji 69 rangefinders, but no

LF.

 

What is a good cheap LF to use for violin photography? I need basic

full frontals with short telephoto and also big Macro details. Does

the Super Speed Graphic and two lenses qualify? Cost is an issue.

 

Many thanks.

[frank_skomial]

In Los Angeles down town, visible while driving on Harbor Freeway, there is a huge mural photograph showing a violinist holding his instrument. (Possibly that could be a chello ?). The photo is perhaps 2 or 3 stories high, and the LF camera certainly was neccessary to make it.

 

Unless you make mural size photographs of your violin, any good DSLR, or SLR, would be more than appropriate. I do not think you want to use a perspective corrective lens to distort instrument proportions. Rolleicord TLR is very appropriate camera to take violin photos.

 

In violin, the sound is more important than the texture or visual apperance of the instrument.

[mikem77]

A monorail. Cheap, full movements, long bellows (for closeup shots). Calumet CC-400's go on eBay for $150. Get a 210mm f5.6 lens for another $200-400.

 

A speed graphic might work, but getting a monorail is probably cheaper and more flexible (but not nearly as portable).

[ben conover]

Thanks Mike, I hadn't thought of a monorail but I will consider it.

 

My reason for asking in this thread is that I actually want the best possible results, and 35mm certainlt won't cut the cake for me. My TLR is better suited to parties and My Fuji 69's are good for environmental portraiture.

 

Whilst I don't need movements for violin photography, it would be nice to have a versatile camera system which has plenty to offer.

I am a beginner inphotography and I am just assuming that the studio set-up uses a monorail effectively and frequesntly.

 

How does the film flatness and general qualirt of results compare from a Speed Graphic to a Monorail, at the same price?

 

Cheers.

[ken_schroeder]

Another vote for a monorail with 16" bellows and 210 lens. Shorter lenses will render the same "in your face" distortion as short lenses used sith portraiture. One of the olders 210 series, such as the Schneider Symmar S, is a fine lens, and reasonably priced. The longer bellows allow use of long focus lenses (as opposed to telephoto lenses which are physically shorter than their focal lengths) I would recommend getting one with a Copal shutter. They are less trouble prone than the Compur shutters. Don't forget a good dark cloth for focusing and a solid tripod.

 

A fine violin is an object of artistic beauty, and deserving of the image quality of 4x5. Sharpness is only one element. Equally important are smoothness and correction of visual distortion. The view camera is the ideal tool for this work.

 

The best reference book I have found on this subject is Corrective Photography by Lewis Kellsey. This fine book was published in connection with the Deardorff company. It is unfortunately long out of print and expensive in rare book stores. However, if you have your local library do an interlibrary loan search, they should be able to obtain a copy for you to read. The effort would be well rewarded.

[ben conover]

Hi, thanks for the help regarding books, I will find what I can.

 

I thought that by using a short telephoto on large format I could get a good full frontal and that perhaps reversing the same lens with full bellows extension I could get good Macro. Is that loopy or will it work?

 

The Schneider Symmar S with copal shutter will be on my shopping list, thankyou very much.

 

I agree that good photos of fine intruments are needing of smoothness and correction of visual distortion with larger formats. It is my goal to make photos of instruments that have not been done before.

 

I have access to many fine instruments from time to time so it is a realistic goal. Yesterday a guy brought a J.B. Guadagnini made in 1747 to me for repair, I was happy to do the job. Unfortunately I only had 35mm film ready. I think my memories of the instrument are probably more accurate than the photos I got!

 

Photographing the instrumnets I make and play will also be of obvious interest to me for pleasure and business purposes.

 

Many thanks.

[davidv1]

Film flatness comes from the film holders, not the camera body.

 

Grafmatics hvea spring in the back, so they hold film flatter than standard film holders.

[ben conover]

That's interesting that the old Graphmatic keeps film very flat, do the monrail film holders have film flatness issues?

 

Cheers.

[jim_galli4]

Sitting here thinking about this over toast, jam, and coffee this AM. Any light tight box is OK. I like Cambo's for their pricepoint and flexibility. A lot of bang for the buck. Heavy though. 2 lenses come to mind though that have been proven winners for me when I'm after the warmth and roundness I would want with this subject. Voigtlander Heliar 240mm or 305mm, and 11 inch Wollensak Verito. Both are fraught with problems associated with classic era lenses. Balky or no shutters, expensive, etc. But both have beautiful bright images on the ground glass (Verito is f4, Heliar is f4.5) and both supply great warmth and Bokeh. Actually the Rollei TLR would be high on my list for the same job.

[ben conover]

Perhaps the Rolleicord would be 'Ok' but there is no real Macro option with it, and I could do better with the Fuji 69 anyhow, rectangle vs, square favoring rectangle for violins etc.

 

Actually, I feel like saving money before investing anymore, but I appreciate all the helpful responses concerning violin photography.

I will probably end up buying a Graphic of some sort, the Graflock back sounds excellent too. I think the subtle movements of the Graphics will be enough for me, and I am hesitant about going in for a Monorail which may just end up in the studio, permanently tripod bound. Having said that I really am just finding my way with all this new stuff.

 

Anyhow, I am still open minded as always so keep 'em coming!

 

Cheers.

[beepy]

Having just shot <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3493898">a

closeup of a "fiddler"</a> with my Canon 1Ds Mark II, I wish I had my Arca-Swiss

monorail. The movements would've allowed me to shift the plane of focus to play with

various images of the violin and the player's graceful hands.

<p>

That said - are you actually trying to take pictures of a violin? Or portraits of people

playing the violin? I was unsure from your post. If you will be focusing on the violin then a

monorail would give you lots of movements for creative effects. If portraits of people with

a violin, less need for those movements (on the other hand my close-up shot could've

benefited from movements - but shooting someone playing with a 4x5 monorail while

engaging in front tilts seems a bit of a challenge).

[peter zisson]

Since you build and repair violins, and those with 250 year old instruments trust you with them, you must have good woodworking abilities. You might consider building a <a href="http://www.benderphoto.com">Bender</a> 8x10 kit. You could get truly stunning photos using that large a format. Even the 4x5 kit will improve on what you can do now.

<p>

As you seem to have grasped, you will need the movements such a camera offers to eliminate the distortion that is unavoidable with a "normal" camera lens.

<p>

I wouldn't worry too much about film flatness, as the depth of field at the film plane with a view camera at f45 or so is orders of magnitude greater than any waviness in the film with modern holders.

<p>

Peter

[scott_walton2]

It's not just the lens/camera (which I do also recommend at least a 210mm if not a 360mm if you have the space...) but the lighting also. Large softboxes are what I love to get the gentle curves. With a 210mm, you can rack the bellows out for some very decent close work. A Speed will get you by but you will be wanting more if you plan to do more of this. A monorail will be more in line with the shot your thinking of.

[ben conover]

Hi, taking a break from another repair. A Cellist came in with a Cello whose neck was broken, I am fixing it tonight. Anyhow, as I said to the guy, I need before and after photos of the repair mainly for insurance reasons. Unfortunately I only had two rolls of 35mm in the house, The rest is all spent 120 and in the fridge. So I got the shots of the Cello just with two rolls of 35mm. Normally I would have loved to have taken more time. I doubt if I will ever have the same two days work, a real treat, so photos help to remember too.

 

I appreciate that shooting players is different, I will get into that soon, but for now I am just concerned with the studio shots.

Having been a player too I find the idea very interesting indeed.

 

Good sugguestion to build a camera, I thought about that and came to the conclusion that I would prefer to save and buy an Ebony with Titannium trimings. Doing the wood work is ok the machining of the metal parts would be tricky. Rather than build a kit camera I will have a look at buying the Hardware and doing the woodwork myself. I would use Ebony and I would certainly take my time!

 

I got an cool email about the Burke and James Watson Press camera. It seems like a very good solution, and keeps me busy with with my paid work instead of pondering camera design forever.

 

Cheers to all.

[ben conover]

Hi, whilst off the thread a little I agree that lighting is essential to quaility results. I have investigated various methods and asked in the lighting forum. It seems that four seperate lights all at equal distances from the violin will give the shadowless and subtle light I need, I have tried it with 35mmm and it works. I am nervous of using alot of strong light and heat around old instruments. The glue is the same as what the Egyptians used 3,000 years ago to seal their coffins etc, it melts with heat even today!

 

Ok, gotta dash and thanks again for all the useful info.

 

Cheers.

[ken_schroeder]

Yes, I might call your idea loopy.....not a bad thought, but loopy. Telephoto lenses are designed to be used with cameras lacking enough bellows length for lenses of normal construction. Think of them like optical sound systems. Like a fine violin being played in a good room, the lens of normal construction, like the Symmar, needs no amplification. Incidentally, the generation before the Symmar S, the Symmar convertible, could be used as a longer lens by unscrewing the front element. The S series aren't convertible, however, they are designed with better correction for closeup work. I firmly stick with my original 210 Symmar S in Copal recommendation. They are plentiful. Be picky and get a nice one. Lenses longer than 210 increase dramatically in size and cost. The same is true with negative sizes larger than 4x5.

 

Standard double holders have served countless photographers for decades, including Ansel Adams, Karsh and Edward Weston. They work year in and year out. I am partial to the plastic Fidelity Elite holders. Start out with four. I would buy new or nearly new. As you gain experience you will want to add some holders. Four is a good start, especially for studio work. I would bypass grafmatics. Start simple. Start reliable.

 

A simple monorail like the Calumet will serve you much better than a Graphic for this work. The Graphics were designed for newspaper work. for that they are a fine and versatile tool. In a pinch, they can be used to some extent in a studio.

 

You will find the larger negative ideally suited for photographing violins. The wood grain will photograph much more smoothly. 4x5 contact prints have a jewellike quality. One who appreciates the quality of sound of a fine violin might also appreciate the quality of a finely crafted contact print nicely mounted. In this digital age, many think of pixels. When a 4x5 negative is enlarged to 8x10 (a 2x enlargement), the grains of the film are much closer together than the same size print from a 35mm negative (an 8x enlargement). The closer grains create more subtle micro contrast. The larger negative is capable of yielding subtle highlights like the upper register of a good Steinway. The lower values are rich, also. (not a violin metaphor, but I'm sure you know what I mean.)

 

The movements are essential. This is where the monorail really shines. Let me give an example: I once photographed the front of a harpsichord for the builder. I wanted to show both the keyboard and the builder's name. To keep the letterning straight, the camera back had to be kept parallel with the frontpiece of the harpsichord. a higher camera position allowed more of a three dimensional quality to the keys. Using the falling front let me keep the back parallel and still get the composition I wanted. Tilting the front allowed me to change the plain of focus to include more of the keyboard. Choosing the front tilt meant I did not have a looming effect. (Using back tilt would have made the foreground appear larger.) The view camera gives the photographer the creative choices. The monorail does that better than a flatbed or press camera.

 

Once you have the camera, don't forget the value of practicing. Practice setting up, viewing and focusing. Forget the movements untill the basic straight camera is second nature. Then build gradually.

 

Good luck, and do not allow yourself to become discouraged.

[ben conover]

Thanks Ken, I am very grateful for that reply. The upper registers of a Steinway are indeed something that can inspire, discouraged I shall not be. Practice rings a bell with me, thanks for the reminder.

 

I'm outa time right now but I will reply soon in more detail to your excellent advice.

 

Cheers.

[ben conover]

Ken, I agree that my idea may be loopy, but aren't telephoto lenses also used for their inherant optical aspect? Like, if I use a short tele I will get a little bit of copression in the subject. That was my idea for using the tele. The macro thing was just to make extreme close details as large as possible, using a satndard lens reversed.

 

Cheers.

[ben conover]

No edit button here......

 

Compression from tele.

[troyammons]

If you want a good solid setup, go for a Sinar F1 or F2 and a either a 545 film holder if you want to shoot quickloads, or pick up a few sheet film holders and a changing tent.

 

Add to that a sturdy tripod and a G-Claron 210mm lens and you are good to go. I have that lens and its the sharpest LF lens I own. If you want wider, go for a 150 or a 180. Longer go for a 240 or a 305.

 

The body will cost a little more, but its worth it. I paid $310 for my G-Claron lens.

[ken_schroeder]

Ben, the term "telephoto" is generally misused. A telephoto lens is physically shorter than its focal length. (like most violas?) The opposite is a retrofocus lens. 35mm wide angle lenses are retrofocus lenses, built physically longer than their focal lengths in order to clear the mirror. In both cases, designers have complicated the design in order to overcome constraints.

 

I like the term "long focus" lens. Lenses of normal construction, like the Symmar, are designed to be the same physical size as their focal lengths. Generally, the best performing closeup lenses are built this way. Using longer lenses allows greater distance between the lens and the subject. That is the compression you mention. Indeed, that is a very useful visual option. (one quite often lacking in portraits, hence all the puffed cheeks and large noses)

 

There are several reasons why I recommend the 210 Symmar S. A somewhat longer lens might work very well for you. However, 210 is the last reasonably priced length. Most of the longer lenses require larger shutters which makes the cost skyrocket. The exceptions are the G Claron lenses. I think you would be happier with the faster (f5.6) Symmar. The extra speed makes the groundglass brighter and easier to focus. Learning to really use a view camera requires time and effort. The extra brightness and magnification of the 210 make this easier. With experience, you might want to add one of the longer G Claron or Nikon M lenses. However, you will not outgrow the 210 Symmar. In recommending the Symmar, I do not mean to put down comparable lenses by Rodenstock, Fuji or Nikon. All are fine lenses. I started with the 210 Symmar S in 1981, and it has served me faithfully ever since then.

 

By the way, large format lenses are mounted on lensboards, and can be changed to fit other cameras. So, if you start with one camera and switch cameras, all you need to change are the lensboards.

 

Once you become proficient, you will find that two or four sheets of 4x5 black and white film actually cost than a roll of 35mm.

 

Sometime when you are at a bookstore of library, look at the woodworking books by Ernie Conover. Ernie is an excellent writer, a fine teacher, and (at least in the past) did all his own shooting with a softbox. His photos are several notches above most bookwork.

 

When you get your 4x5, the first mistake you will make is having your eyes too close to the groundglass. Put on some calming music, like the Famous Canon, and spend some time getting to know your camera. You should get a large cotton focusing cloth. Keep your eyes about a foot from the groundglass. (Give yourself a break and focus on something which is bright.) The trick to seeing the corners is moving your head up and down and side to side. This will soon become second nature. Don't even think about replacing the groundglass until you learn to view and focus. You will probably want a good loupe. The Calumet 7x loupe has served me well for many years. Keep your camera setup in a corner and return often. This simple exercise is like longbow exercise. Get the maximum tone out of your camera. Don't start the scales until you get the bow tone right.

 

Sixteen inch bellows are very nice for this work. Personally, I think 22" would be too much of a good thing. Don't expect a monorail camera to be a compact hiking camera. In your price range, don't worry about interchangable bellows (bag bellows). Let the doublebasses play the low notes and the brass and winds to their things. The monorail camera works very well for its part.

 

Enjoy the creative control and the rich tones and textures of the large negatives. Stay simple and focused.

[ben conover]

Thanks Troy and Ken.

 

The long focus lens and lots of practice will be my goal. You are right to compare violins to violas like lenses, that helps me understand lenses anyhow. A 'normal' viola is indeed a few inches shorter than it's natural string length should be. However, the design has evolved that way, hence all the viola jokes. The violin is a managable size to play for most people, but the equivalent viola would be too big to play in the same manner, and as proficiently with such versatility. originally there were some eonormous violas which probably sounded amazing but were just toooo big to play. Most old violas of humungus porportions have been cut down. As a result, repairs of instruments became integral with design, and so the evolution of the modern 'sound' and msuic followed.

 

I copied part a book about Ernie Conover years ago when I was starting out, it was about turning Tagua wood. I will look out for his book online to see his photos, since the copy of the book I made (friendly Library) is so poor. I really look forward to reading photo books about woodworkers, musicans etc.

 

I will definitely investigate and save for the lens and camera you recomend Ken.

 

Must get back to the workshop now, thanks very much for all your help in getting started in LF violin photography.

 

Cheers.

[kevin_peng1]

Frank, the LA Chamber Orchestra lady and man visible from the Harbor Freeway is just a mural. I don't think the artist (Kent Twitchell) needed a LF photograph to paint it...maybe he just used a snapshot, or maybe he just knew how he wanted the musicians to look. I mean...it's a mural, right, so it wasn't printed from a negative or anything of the sort...?

 

Amiably yours,

Kevin

[ben conover]

I agree, and I do love murals. Chuck Close is an artist I find very inspiring, he works from huge photographic prints then goes to paint.

I intend to do similar. Some people will even print directly onto canvas, I think it is cheating but certainly gives a good start for laying down the paints! In fact, I have seen enormous panoramic oil paintings that are a bit thin on the ground, you can see the pixels peeping out from under the paint, what a joke, and what a rip off!

 

I had to pass up the opportunity to buy a complete Linhof Bi-Kardan system recently for a great price, I will save up. I think LF photography will always be a true art form. The large movements and traditional proccess of printing are very interesting to me.

 

I thank you all for your input in helping me get started.

 

Cheers.

[ben conover]

Thanks again Ken.

 

I finally bought a B&J press camera with 165mm Optar and 7 DDS's + meter for $200. The B&J has 1:1 ability and the bed drops quite a bit. I removed the viewfinder, the rangefinder, cleaned off the rust and dirt, replaced the leather, and touched up the paint. The bellows was fine. I also bought a 135mm Optar with hood and a 210mm Schneider, was given some excellent B+W filters too. I plan to use the camera for studio work of violins etc, landscapes, and portraits.

 

I sold the other camera gear.

 

Cheers.