good portrait de-focus filter?? (soften)
Lisa Horton
F/X and Black Softnet. They come in various strengths, with
1 giving a minimal softening and 3 a stronger effect.
Lisa
UG wrote:
>
> I don't even know the name for them, but I know that some prof'l portrait
> photographers use filters that slightly "blur" the image enough to hide
> small facial lines, etc. I sometimes see an ad for some company offering
> these filters in the Photo magazines. But here's my thoughts:
>
> 1) The ad I often see shows the before and after BUT I think the after shot
> looks too blury. I love crisp pictures, my vision is great up close and so
> I notice every time something is not in focus. That company's product
> makes the final output look just plain out of focus to me. It seems I
> really want something that softens the image but still leaving it look
> in-focus.
>
> 2) I had a prof'l photographer take pictures of my family a while back and I
> looked 10 years younger. I believe he used of these types of filters. And
> my wife thinks her skin complexion looks great in that picture. Now I
> think the filter he used is terrific but I can't reach him to find out what
> it was.
>
> Could someone guide me to a brand / model of filter that does what I'm
> looking for with portrait photography, but still keeps the images looking
> in-focus?
Paul Ferrara
wife would probably like it. You can get them from B&H. Coincidently, it
turns out that that's also the one Monte Zucker uses.
Paul
UG <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Lisa Horton
lighter diffusion, I use homemade filters that have little
droplets of hard clear material applied to them. The idea
came from Zeiss Softars, a very expensive softener with
bubble-like lenslets in the material, something like that.
Lisa
UG wrote:
>
> Have you used these yourself? Which filter and strength do you like the
> best?
>
> Thank you for the info.
>
> "Lisa Horton" <ge...@gatorgames.com> wrote in message
> news:3A25BD21...@gatorgames.com...
> > A couple you might want to investigate are the Tiffen Soft
> > F/X and Black Softnet. They come in various strengths, with
> > 1 giving a minimal softening and 3 a stronger effect.
> >
> > Lisa
> >
> > UG wrote:
> > >
UG
Tony Polson
<newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
> Could someone guide me to a brand / model of filter that does what I'm
> looking for with portrait photography, but still keeps the images looking
> in-focus?
Buy a cheap UV filter and some petroleum jelly, and make one yourself.
You can make it exactly how you want it, and if at first you don't
succeed, try, try, try again!
<g>
--
Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK
UG
making a uniform distribution and I'll screw up the picture. And besides,
it sounds like a bitch to store a greasy filter. But thanks for the idea.
"Tony Polson" <tony....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3mcb2t4314bpul42p...@4ax.com...
UG
best?
Thank you for the info.
"Lisa Horton" <ge...@gatorgames.com> wrote in message
news:3A25BD21...@gatorgames.com...
> A couple you might want to investigate are the Tiffen Soft
> F/X and Black Softnet. They come in various strengths, with
> 1 giving a minimal softening and 3 a stronger effect.
>
> Lisa
>
> UG wrote:
> >
Jerry L
or can find a box in a local camera shop with odds and ends
(or a pawn shop...) and get a filter or two that are the $5.
variety.
Next, take some clear nail polish and dab a random bit over the
filter: keep a dime taped in the center to leave that much clear.
Once it dries, test out your creation. If you are not happy with
the results, nail polish remover will let you start anew.
(It is a whole lot less greasy than vasoline!)
= = =
In article <UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com>,
--
-- Faster than the speed of dark --> Is light really that rapid? --
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Blokey
business in a paint program like Photoshop or even a cheap version of
Corel's PhotoPaint. Indeed, Photopaint 8 comes with a host of
photographic filters and effects. Thing is you can select the area(s)
to blur or soften or etc and still keep your sharp photos.
Good luck
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
trav...@my-deja.com
stocking over the lens, or a cheap(est)4X cross screen. Of course, then
you have the $200+ Zeiss Softars. I have a feeling it was a lot more
than some silly filter. That's why your paying him and he's not paying
you.
Tony Polson
<newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
> Hmmm - I heard that can be done but I have a feeling I'll never succeed
> making a uniform distribution and I'll screw up the picture. And besides,
> it sounds like a bitch to store a greasy filter. But thanks for the idea.
Don't be so defeatist! The distribution doesn't need to be uniform, and
you can wipe the Vaseline off the filter before storing it.
With a small amount of effort you can find out the effect of using
different amounts of Vaseline, and smaller or larger areas left clear in
the centre. It's great fun, and at the end of the day you've lost
nothing except the cost of a film and a cheap UV filter.
But if you can't find it in you to make that small amount of effort, you
will never know. At least you can continue complaining about what's
commercially available, which sounds like *much* more fun than trying
something yourself, shooting some film and looking at the results.
Tony Polson
wrote:
> Yes, I use and like the Soft F/X. I use a 3 often. For
> lighter diffusion, I use homemade filters that have little
> droplets of hard clear material applied to them. The idea
> came from Zeiss Softars, a very expensive softener with
> bubble-like lenslets in the material, something like that.
I don't know how the Zeiss Softars work, but they produce stunning
results, with a softness that does not come at the expense of an
out-of-focus or blurred image.
My friend the wedding and portrait pro uses them exclusively on his
Bronica medium format lenses for weddings and his favourite-of-all-time
35mm portrait lens, the Nikon 100mm f/2.8 Series E.
Mac Breck
Mac
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
ERNReed
lightly with semi-matte photo lacquer (originally intended for spraying
prints). I have two. One has a lighter spray than the other. I sprayed opposite
surfaces and store them with the sprayed surfaces facing each other, to protect
them. Much neater than Vaseline.
----------------------------------------------------------------
E.R.
http://members.aol.com/ernreed
If you aren't spamming, avoid the junktrap
UG
you up a little). Your point is well taken that perhaps I should give it
a try.
"Tony Polson" <tony....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:78mc2tc79bou89sn1...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 03:39:32 GMT, "UG"
> <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm - I heard that can be done but I have a feeling I'll never succeed
> > making a uniform distribution and I'll screw up the picture. And
besides,
> > it sounds like a bitch to store a greasy filter. But thanks for the
idea.
>
> Don't be so defeatist! The distribution doesn't need to be uniform, and
> you can wipe the Vaseline off the filter before storing it.
>
> With a small amount of effort you can find out the effect of using
> different amounts of Vaseline, and smaller or larger areas left clear in
> the centre. It's great fun, and at the end of the day you've lost
> nothing except the cost of a film and a cheap UV filter.
>
> But if you can't find it in you to make that small amount of effort, you
> will never know. At least you can continue complaining about what's
> commercially available, which sounds like *much* more fun than trying
> something yourself, shooting some film and looking at the results.
>
UG
I do want to scan I thought about this. I have photoshop. Do you know the
photoshop option that does exactly what I want?
"Blokey" <blo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:90564m$ntt$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> If you have a computer, a scanner and a good printer, you can do the
> business in a paint program like Photoshop or even a cheap version of
> Corel's PhotoPaint. Indeed, Photopaint 8 comes with a host of
> photographic filters and effects. Thing is you can select the area(s)
> to blur or soften or etc and still keep your sharp photos.
>
> Good luck
>
>
> "UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
UG
size, what do you think of THEIR quality and whether it still looks "in
focus" ???
"Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> wrote in message
news:hlvV5.69$ac.1...@typhoon1.ba-dsg.net...
> Nikon Soft 1 and Soft 2 filters.
>
> Mac
>
>
> "UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Jerry Coffin
newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com says...
> I don't even know the name for them, but I know that some prof'l portrait
> photographers use filters that slightly "blur" the image enough to hide
> small facial lines, etc. I sometimes see an ad for some company offering
> these filters in the Photo magazines. But here's my thoughts:
Professionals who do this a lot normally use soft-focus lenses built
specifically to do this. They really work quite a bit better than
most soft-focus filters.
Given what you've said, I'd echo the advice to try Vaseline on a
cheap filter -- especially when you're looking for a relatively small
amount of softening, this can work quite well (you can get a lot of
softening from it as well, but it starts to get pretty obvious when
you do so).
Soft-focus filters come in various "strengths", and you'll probably
want to try them out to see which one suits you the best. The ads
I've seen show a LOT of softening, I'd guess to make the difference
somewhat eye-catching; in reality, you want exactly the opposite --
for the effect to be so subtle that it's hardly noticeable, but it
simply makes some other things less noticeable as well.
As an additional point, don't discount the effect of careful
lighting. Wrinkles (in particular) show up primarily because they
cast shadows. Extremely flat, soft lighting helps prevent these
shadows even when/if wrinkles are present.
If you use relatively harsh lighting, even the best soft-focus
equipment on earth won't help much; if you use soft enough lighting,
you may not need soft-focus at all...
--
Later,
Jerry.
The Universe is a figment of its own imagination.
Richard Knight
soft transition from the sharp area to the soft area, use the feather option
on your selection prior to blurring.
Richard
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lawV5.6348$b73.4...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
> Unfortunately nothing quite scans or prints well enough yet, but for the
few
> I do want to scan I thought about this. I have photoshop. Do you know
the
> photoshop option that does exactly what I want?
>
>
> "Blokey" <blo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:90564m$ntt$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > If you have a computer, a scanner and a good printer, you can do the
> > business in a paint program like Photoshop or even a cheap version of
> > Corel's PhotoPaint. Indeed, Photopaint 8 comes with a host of
> > photographic filters and effects. Thing is you can select the area(s)
> > to blur or soften or etc and still keep your sharp photos.
> >
> > Good luck
> >
> >
> > "UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
David Starr
<newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>Hmmm - I heard that can be done but I have a feeling I'll never succeed
>making a uniform distribution and I'll screw up the picture. And besides,
>it sounds like a bitch to store a greasy filter. But thanks for the idea.
Use KY. It's water soluble & cleans up pretty easily.
>> Buy a cheap UV filter and some petroleum jelly, and make one yourself.
>> You can make it exactly how you want it, and if at first you don't
>> succeed, try, try, try again!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Professional Shop Rat: 36 years in an auto plant.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
georgio
> If you have a old 'junker' skylight filter (or a Tiffen 812)
> or can find a box in a local camera shop with odds and ends
> (or a pawn shop...) and get a filter or two that are the $5.
> variety.
>
> Next, take some clear nail polish and dab a random bit over the
> filter: keep a dime taped in the center to leave that much clear.
>
> Once it dries, test out your creation. If you are not happy with
> the results, nail polish remover will let you start anew.
> (It is a whole lot less greasy than vasoline!)
> = = =
or smudge the filter with your nose..
georgio who has a big noze
--
Remove the *NOSPAM* part in my email if you reply..
Tony Polson
<newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
> Yeah but vaseline has a cost too! (OK - I'm just kidding here to lighten
> you up a little). Your point is well taken that perhaps I should give it
> a try.
Well done. My advice is "go for it". You'll not only have some fun,
but you'll also learn a lot along the way.
Also, when the time comes to splash out on the soft filter you'll use
for the rest of your life, you'll know *exactly* what you want.
Good luck!
JR
<pa...@nospam.columbusoft.com> wrote:
> I use a Tiffen Soft/FX 3. At f8 it provides just a touch of softness.
> Your
> wife would probably like it. You can get them from B&H. Coincidently,
> it
> turns out that that's also the one Monte Zucker uses.
>
> Paul
>
>
I just bought a soft fx/3...hav not used it yet, but will this
weekend...I'll post my results.
JR
UG
thread. Thanks!!
"JR" <j...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:jr-277994.21...@news.earthlink.net...
Paul Ferrara
may like it or not or want one stronger or weaker. This is a very popular
filter and I've never seen anyone knock it. And most folks that do
portraiture with women use one. I like the 3 but may end up getting one
stronger also for certain shots.
Paul
UG <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2RIV5.7581$b73.4...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Tony Polson
(georgio) wrote:
> or smudge the filter with your nose..
>
> georgio who has a big noze
... and who pokes his "big noze" into many threads, but never
contributes anything positive to any of them.
Blip
set of pre-set filters for this - ask in ngs. Look to for some free
filters - try the Filter Factory. The thing is you have to try them
out for the effect you want. There is a book 'Photoshop 5 & 5.5
Artistry A master Class for Photographers Artists and Production
Artists' by Barry Haynes which should help you in this and many other
PS things. There are many blur options in PS and many ways to achieve
a blur effect. You might try searching on Photoshop in the ngs and ask
questions there.
Good luck
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lawV5.6348$b73.4...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
> Unfortunately nothing quite scans or prints well enough yet, but for
the few
> I do want to scan I thought about this. I have photoshop. Do you
know the
> photoshop option that does exactly what I want?
>
>
> "Blokey" <blo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:90564m$ntt$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > If you have a computer, a scanner and a good printer, you can do
the
> > business in a paint program like Photoshop or even a cheap version
of
> > Corel's PhotoPaint. Indeed, Photopaint 8 comes with a host of
> > photographic filters and effects. Thing is you can select the
area(s)
> > to blur or soften or etc and still keep your sharp photos.
> >
> > Good luck
> >
> >
> > "UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
message
> > news:UdiV5.5877$b73.3...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Richard Knight
"Paul Ferrara" <pa...@nospam.columbusoft.com> wrote in message
news:907qg...@news2.newsguy.com...
> There's nothing to test, per se. It's a chocolate or vanilla issue and
you
> may like it or not or want one stronger or weaker. This is a very popular
> filter and I've never seen anyone knock it. And most folks that do
> portraiture with women use one. I like the 3 but may end up getting one
> stronger also for certain shots.
>
> Paul
Paul, I seem to remember reading that the amount of softness is controlled
by the taking aperture. Is this correct or is it applicable for the soft
focus lenses only?
Richard
Paul Ferrara
degree by changing the aperature.
Paul
Richard Knight <adreamca...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:0tUV5.35645$nh5.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Fradley
UG wrote in message ...
>I don't even know the name for them, but I know that some prof'l portrait
>photographers use filters that slightly "blur" the image enough to hide
>small facial lines, etc. I sometimes see an ad for some company offering
>these filters in the Photo magazines. But here's my thoughts:
>
>1) The ad I often see shows the before and after BUT I think the after shot
>looks too blury. I love crisp pictures, my vision is great up close and so
>I notice every time something is not in focus. That company's product
>makes the final output look just plain out of focus to me. It seems I
>really want something that softens the image but still leaving it look
>in-focus.
>
>2) I had a prof'l photographer take pictures of my family a while back and
I
>looked 10 years younger. I believe he used of these types of filters.
And
>my wife thinks her skin complexion looks great in that picture. Now I
>think the filter he used is terrific but I can't reach him to find out what
>it was.
>
>Could someone guide me to a brand / model of filter that does what I'm
>looking for with portrait photography, but still keeps the images looking
>in-focus?
>
>
Most comercial sf filters simply defuse the entire immage evenly. not
something I like.
Soft focus lenses were once avaliable using a metal sheet with a large
aperture in the centre for a sharp immage and smaller apertures round the
edge to provide a soft focus *halo*.
I don't know of any still made, but I believe Cockin make a filter with a
like effect. called the *dream* filter or somesuch.
The same effect can be achieved on still-life by taking one exposure in
focus and one out, on the same frame and remembering to compensate for the
two exposures. Experiment to find your ideal out-of-focus\exposure ratio
settings.
best of luck
Merlin
Agpix
offer less diffusion. Check out the Tiffen Soft-FX filters. The lowest
diffusion retains sharpness throughout the image while slightly smoothing out
the edges.
The other type of filter is called a center-spot, with diffusion surrounding a
non-diffused central area.
Gene Hurwitz
A&G's Picture This!
Philadelphia PA
UG
"Paul Ferrara" <pa...@nospam.columbusoft.com> wrote in message
news:909am...@news1.newsguy.com...
UG
portraits? The filters are expensive enough that I'd like to get it right
the first time. I'd like that "in focus" but "no wrinkles/ bags under eyes
/ inconsistent complexion" look.
"Agpix" <ag...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001202065032...@ng-fw1.aol.com...
Paul Ferrara
that's also the most commonly sold one. Tiffen has a very good web site.
I'd see what they have to say. www.tiffen.com
Paul
UG <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eibW5.7895$b73.4...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Paul Ferrara
Paul / ColumbuSoft
www.columbusoft.com
UG <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:PebW5.7894$b73.4...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Magambo
I used a 1 before and that did really nothing.
Agpix
>portraits?
I just started using Tiffen #1, and I think I like it. It is very mild, hardly
noticeable when shooting, but just enough to soften rough edges. #2 or 3 might
be better if you are shooting mainly middle aged people. View them at a camera
store before buying, to see your preferences.
Mac Breck
> Yeah, I have a Nikon 77 mm lens, and although I'm not sure they make that
> size,
Unfortunately, they don't. 52mm and 72mm only. You might get by with the
72mm and a step ring.
> what do you think of THEIR quality and whether it still looks "in
> focus" ???
It's beautiful. It still looks "in focus" but the unwanted facial blemishes
are eliminated. It also gives women a nice "glow" (verrrry flattering).
I'll have a couple of negatives that show this, but it would take a good bit
of digging to find them!
Mac
Mac Breck
news:909sgv$5pu$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> Most comercial sf filters simply defuse the entire immage evenly. not
> something I like.
Prior to getting my Nikon Soft 1 and Soft 2, the filters I used for soft
focus/diffusion achieved the effect by having the front surface of the
filter having a irregular surface. The problem is this introduced the prism
effect (bleeding of colors). The Nikon Soft 1 and Soft 2 filters' front and
rear glass surfaces are flat, and a thin layer of silver is vacuum deposited
on the front surface. Hence, the bleeding of colors is now a thing of the
past for me. I find the Soft 1 to be a good filter, but the Soft 2 is just
too much softening. It makes me wish they'd make a Soft 0.5 filter.
Mac
UG
their 80-200 zoom (77 mm)!!
"Mac Breck" <macb...@access995.com> wrote in message
news:O9yW5.105$V5.2...@typhoon2.ba-dsg.net...
Mac Breck
enough.
Maybe if enough people write to them (or call) and ASK for it.....
http://www.klt.co.jp/Nikon/Network/index.html
Nikon Inc.
1300 Walt Whitman Rd., Melville,
N.Y. 11747-3064
Phone: +1-631-547-4200 (Photo) or 1-800-645-6687 Customer Relations(not
6678, that's Service).
and
Nikon Corporation
Imaging Products Division
3-9-16, Ohi, Shinagawa-ku
Tokyo 140-8505
Japan
Mac
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2VQW5.9425$b73.5...@typhoon.san.rr.com...
Karmadon
"UG" <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
> Which number (1-3) would you recommend for 30 to 40 year old people,
right
> the first time. I'd like that "in focus" but "no wrinkles/ bags
under eyes
> / inconsistent complexion" look.
Tiffen SoftFX-3 might be the best compromise. However, the softening
effect depends on the aperture setting, while the overall impression
depends on the angle and crispness of your light source. E.g. poorly
lit, and yet strongly diffused portret may well look "out of focus";
the same filter under the same lighting conditions will yield softer
image when used with wide open lens. Just one more thing to consider
is Warm SoftFX-3, which is 812 (basically, 81A - light amber filter)
combined with SoftFX-3. If you have 81A, don't bother with warm one,
just stick one on another and give it a try. I have regular SoftFX-2
and Warm SoftFX-3, so I use 2 with 81A if I need an extra warmth. As
for vaseline, stocking over the lens, etc. it might be a lot of fun,
yet, if you desire repeatable results, IMHO, you would be better off
with a soft filter.
Regards,
Igor
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Paul Ferrara
adult female, they looked like crap with some shots I took of a 1-yr-old
this past weekend. They look badly out of focus but if you look at the
details closely, you can see that they're not. I normally shoot at f8 for
portraits but there's also a possibility that I didn't have the switch on my
EOS 3 locked to prevent the dial on the back from moving and changing the
aperture. This has happened in the past. IAE, I think I'll take it off for
kids.
Paul
Karmadon <karma...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:90h4oi$ne4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Anon
<newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:
>I don't even know the name for them, but I know that some prof'l portrait
>photographers use filters that slightly "blur" the image enough to hide
>small facial lines, etc. I sometimes see an ad for some company offering
>these filters in the Photo magazines. But here's my thoughts:
>
>1) The ad I often see shows the before and after BUT I think the after shot
>looks too blury. I love crisp pictures, my vision is great up close and so
>I notice every time something is not in focus. That company's product
>makes the final output look just plain out of focus to me. It seems I
>really want something that softens the image but still leaving it look
>in-focus.
>
>2) I had a prof'l photographer take pictures of my family a while back and I
>looked 10 years younger. I believe he used of these types of filters. And
>my wife thinks her skin complexion looks great in that picture. Now I
>think the filter he used is terrific but I can't reach him to find out what
>it was.
>
>Could someone guide me to a brand / model of filter that does what I'm
>looking for with portrait photography, but still keeps the images looking
>in-focus?
>
>
I use the Tiffen black Softnet # 2 filter. cuts the hard edge but
doesn''t flare or blowout the highlights.
UG
In seriousness, that's a bit awkward if (like me) you want to take pictures
of adults holding babies. I wonder if the SoftFX2 is the best compromise
for middle age adults and babies together.
"Paul Ferrara" <pa...@nospam.columbusoft.com> wrote in message
news:90h8v...@news1.newsguy.com...
Paul Ferrara
to know for sure.
Paul
UG <newsDELETETHI...@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:_N_W5.9490$b73.5...@typhoon.san.rr.com...