Graflex.org

[DenisP]

Hi,
I have a Pacemaker Speed 2x3, and I like to "play" with oddball lenses on it...
I've adapted an Agfa "Repromaster" 210/9 lens to use with my 2x3, and it works... but is not exactly what I'm looking for.
I'm trying to achieve that "vintage" look in some of the portraits I've seen, with shallow depth of field... Usually just the eyes are sharp, the rest is falling out of focus... with rather distinct out of focus areas.

One recent example, which I can't get out of my mind, is Robb Kendrick's portrait of a girl on the cover of National Geographic's "In Focus" book of portraits. Admittedly, the photo is actually a tintype, so it adds to the "character", but the vintage look of that portrait is very appealing.

The photo can be seen here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/079227363X/qid=1110407427/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-6655113-3873614

Anyway, does anyone have any suggestion regarding a lens I might try to achieve similar look, with very shallow DOF and that "vintage" look on usual photo materials (roll film), using my 2x3 Speed?
I guess I would have to look for faster lens... My "Repromaster" is f9, so the DOF isn't really very shallow...
Oh, yes, and I'm not looking to spend a fortune on some rare exotic lens... Just something I can hack to fit on my Speed...

TIA,

Denis

[ This Message was edited by: DenisP on 2005-03-09 14:29 ]

[ This Message was edited by: DenisP on 2005-03-09 14:31 ]

[Dan Fromm]

[Henry]

If you want a vintage look, why not use a vintage lens? Case in point for my Century (1954): Optar 101 f/4.5. YMMV.

[DenisP]

Dan, thanks for the advice. I guess I might try an Ektar 127mm for a change - or something a bit longer, provided it's in shutter. Most of my Repromaster (210mm) shots came out rather blurry, although I used a shutter release... The focal shutter seems to have rather strong recoil

Henry, I'm using 101 Ektar on my 2x3 SG - but it's a bit wide for portraits, and the effect I'm looking for is rather shallow depth of field - therefore I think I should try longer focal lengths and faster lenses (faster than f9, that is).

Thanks,

Denis

[Dan Fromm]

[DenisP]

[troublemaker]

I have one of the 8" Tele-Raptars that I believe were made for the 2x3 Graphics by Wollensak (and that is all they will cover). Though I got it for a longer landscape lens, it is definately more of a soft portrait lens, and I wonder if this were not its intended use. The nice thing is it is in an easily serviceable #2 Rapax shutter, and interchanges on the lens board with any 135 Optar or Wollensak in any Graphex or Rapax shutter of the same size (which are quite common). I see the 8" Raptars up ******* regularly and they are not too pricey. I also like to use any one of my 135 Optars for portraits, one of which has a nice vintage glow. I just shoot a little farther away and crop the image down to size. The Raptar is single coated, but not as contrasty as the 135, or 101 Optars which I find very contrasty. So the Raptar is about in between an older uncoated Ektar and the later coated lenses.
There's my two cents worth.
Have fun,
Stephen

[glennfromwy]

f you think the shutter is causing problems, hang a gallon jug of water from the tripod center post. It also may help to put your hand on top of the camera and press firmly, straight down when tripping the shutter. A long, heavy lens hanging out there can surely be causing it.
Though the Repromaster is a process lens, it should give good results at small apertures.

_________________
Glenn

"Wyoming - Where everybody is somebody else's weirdo"

[Dan Fromm]

[quote]
On 2005-03-10 08:29, DenisP wrote:

[Henry]

WRT vibration, all of the after-market lensboards I have bought for my Century needed adjustment because they wobbled in the front standard. Adjustment involved merely bending the lensboard flanges ever so slightly with smooth-jaw pliers until, by trial-and-error, the fit came tight. Vibration from this cause might be more of a problem when using the front shutter with cable release than it would be when using the FPS (wouldn't know---no FPS on the Century!), but it might be worth a look-see in any case.

[DenisP]

I found out a bit more about those images that are haunting me (tintypes by Robb Kendrick in Nat.Geo.)... The images were taken by 8x10 view camera on 5x7 metal plate "negatives", using Holmes Booth and Hayden lens (ca. 1863). So, it was quite an authentic setup.

I've been checking out some other resources on the Web, and I came across a site on Civil War photography, with some stunning photos...
Check out this one: http://www.robertszabo.com/gallery/Living-History/slimberg

Hmmm, it looks like another "mad project" in the making. I'll be looking for VERY old lenses, 6" to 8" focal length (the faster the better, faster than f8, f4 would be ideal), and will try to mount those on my 2x3 SG. Basically, brass barrel lens - the older, the better

I'd appreciate any help in obtaining appropriate lens... If you have anything similar you're willing to let go, drop me a note

Regards,

Denis

[ This Message was edited by: DenisP on 2005-03-11 13:43 ]

[pmartin]

Dennis,
i'm not that familiar with the Graflex camera but it sounds like the technique you're trying to recreate is a standard large format camera effect. By tilting the front lens plate backward to an out-of-parallel position to the film plate, you can achieve the effect you're describing. Check out this link at: http://www.toyoview.com/LargeFrmtTech/lgformat.html
The page describes the technique exactly and uses the model's eyes example.

Good Luck.
Pete

[t.r.sanford]

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, we might remember that "portrait" cameras used to be made with one movement, a swinging back. B&J's "Rembrandt" model is a fairly recent example.

The idea was to use a fast lens, seat the subject comfortably with head turned for a more or less three-quarter view, then swing the back so the catchlights in both eyes were sharp on the GG.

This got much of the plane of the face into the zone of acceptably sharp focus, and everything else diffused away into a romantic blur. It often worked surprisingly well, as you can see by looking at the old formal portraits that were popular right into the 1950s.

Prewar portrait lenses, with user-controlled aberrations, seem to command premium prices at present. Perhaps starting with a well-corrected lens and adding commercial or homemade diffusing screens would be a more flexible and economical approach.

It used to be well-known that the same diffuser (e.g., a piece of crumpled cellophane with a hole in it, or a haze filter with vaseline strategically smeared around its perimeter) gives a different effect when used on the camera and on the enlarger. This increases the options.

I have fond memories of the Arkay "Pictrol" device, which I believe is still available from some successor to Arkay.

The "Pictrol" has been around since Hector was a pup. For those who haven't seen one, it is a round apparatus with half a dozen iris-like blades molded in thick, striated transparent plastic, with a surrounding ring that causes them to intercept more or less of the image-forming rays approaching the lens.

It is supplied with three radial rubber-tipped setscrews that secure it to the lens -- usually an enlarger lens, but it can be used on a camera too, if the lens diameter is small enough to accept it.

When used on a camera, the "Pictrol's" effect depends quite a bit on the taking aperture. This makes the thing sub-optimal for accurate previewing on a focusing screen, unless you shoot wide open. But it is a very versatile gadget, and entertaining to play with.

[DenisP]

In the meantime, I got hold of several older lenses, mostly from old 6x9 and 9x12 folders (those are European measures, in centimeters!)... Also one beautiful brass barrel lens - which is too long for my 2x3 SG. I added a close-up lens in front, so I can still mount it and take photos with it, without stretching the bellows beyond the limit.

I'm currently experimenting with removing and adding various lens elements, close up-lenses, etc., which will hopefully "degrade" the image in a pleasing way. Softness was rather easy to achieve, but mere "softness" is not what I'm after... I want good sharpness in the center, with rapid degradation towards the edges... Not very easy to achieve with "modern" lenses - which is what I have.

Will report as soon as I manage to produce some shots.


[ This Message was edited by: DenisP on 2005-04-05 08:55 ]

[RichS]