Soft Focus in the Darkroom
Willis Boyce
which seems to be de rigueur in portraiture. This is usually
accomplished by using a soft focus lens or a filter of some kind.
Assuming that one has access to a darkroom, why add the diffusion to
the negative? Instead, why not make the negative as sharp as possible,
and add the diffusion in the printing stage? Does anybody make a soft
focus enlarging lens?
Will
Richard J Fateman
I think that if you add diffusion in the darkroom (easy... by lots of
different devices ..screens, cloth, diffusion filters, vaseline on
glass, moving the focus,etc. etc.), you get a different effect from
diffusion in the original.
Blurred shadows vs. blurred highlights, I think.
--
Richard J. Fateman
fat...@cs.berkeley.edu 510 642-1879
Marcus J Ranum
>Assuming that one has access to a darkroom, why add the diffusion to
>the negative? Instead, why not make the negative as sharp as possible,
>and add the diffusion in the printing stage?
If you put the soft focus filter on the camera, then the
whites tend to flare, whereas if you put it on the enlarger, the
blacks tend to flare. Different situations might make one option
or the other more appealing. When I do portraits (esp of blondes)
I like the whites to flare. The black flare look is Very Cool for
industrial moodiness, tho.
mjr.
stuff and some photos:
http://www.tis.com/Home/Personal/Ranum/Page.html
Steve Wall
:
: Assuming that one has access to a darkroom, why add the diffusion to
: and add the diffusion in the printing stage? Does anybody make a soft
: focus enlarging lens?
I haven't heard of soft focus lenses, but I've heard of diffusion effects
for the darkroom. Some people use nylon stockings over the lens. Black
stockings have different effects from white, ands I think black was thought
generally better for negative work.
--
Steve W.
Willis Boyce
Will
rob...@hk.ncc.se
Because... when you soft at the photograping stage, the effect is most
pronounced in the highlights. When you do it at the printing stage, the
effect is most pronounced in the shadows.
--
Robert Claeson Electronic mail: rob...@hk.ncc.se
Zone V Tel: +46 (0)70-593 48 92
Ringvagen 129, 1 tr.
S-116 61 Stockholm, Sweden
Bev Thornton
> Does anybody make a soft focus enlarging lens?
Look for a Pic-Trol-Control. It is a variable softener
for the enlarger.
Later,
Bev thor...@nbnet.nb.ca
-----------------------------end of message----------------------------
Malcolm Williams
> Because... when you soft at the photograping stage, the effect is most
> pronounced in the highlights. When you do it at the printing stage, the
> effect is most pronounced in the shadows.
Softa at the camera stage as a far superior quality than at the
darkroom stage. I at one time decided to keep sharp negs and
soft after so I would have a choice, but not the same quality.
A pleasing effect is to soft at the camera and at the enlarger
with the same neg. Great for portrait glamour using a wafer
and reflector. A trick used by top pro's to photograph ageing
people, giving wrincle free portraits.
BTW> If using a Hasselblad Softa on the enlarger. Keep moving
the filter in circular motions during exposure.
--
Malcolm
FOTOFILL
enlarger lens for about 50 -75% of the exposure. Try varying the distance
and times for
varied effects.
jger...@wln.com
In article <3e6qbu$a...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, <foto...@aol.com> writes:
> Path:
I've also used the technique for softening in the darkroom. It's not really
as good as on-camera softening, but at least you can shoot sharp and THEN
decide on the exact amount of softening.
I've always been unhappy with softening that can't be undone on the negative
and have always been looking for a way to do it after.
Of course, I now have PhotoShop and a flatbed scanner. Combined with a
Fujix Pictographic printer, the results are incredible! Finally, what I've
been looking for all these years.
Of course, the Fujix is $17,000 and I go to a service bureau to get them done
and I have to pay $15 each, but hell, look at the price of a decent
custom color print these days and it's not really so bad. At least I have
complete control over the entire process.
Andrew Hately
Diffusing the negative image spreads dark around and looks
rather different; many people would say "bad".
Andrew.
Emmanuel ORAIN
" Diffusing the positive image spreads light around.
Diffusing the negative image spreads dark around and looks
rather different; many people would say "bad".
Andrew."
Just a question, for being sure I understand :
"Diffusing the positive image" means using a diffusing filter (or another
diffusing stuff) during taking the picture (I mean with the camera), and
"Diffusing the negative i;age" means using a diffusong filter (or another
diffusing stiff) during the printing of the negative in the darkroom.
Is that it ?
If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with Robert
Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
Thanks.
291c...@wmich.edu
> wbo...@panix.com (Willis Boyce) says:
>>I'm sure everybody is familiar with the soft focus or diffusion effect
>>which seems to be de rigueur in portraiture. This is usually
>>accomplished by using a soft focus lens or a filter of some kind.
>>
>>Assuming that one has access to a darkroom, why add the diffusion to
>>the negative? Instead, why not make the negative as sharp as possible,
>>and add the diffusion in the printing stage? Does anybody make a soft
>>focus enlarging lens?
Nope don't think I even do.
> Diffusing the positive image spreads light around.
> Diffusing the negative image spreads dark around and looks
> rather different; many people would say "bad".
Note:
Key word here is "MANY". for the artiste... ANYTHING CAN BE GOOD!
Within reason of course. Try explaing the fuzzy SUPER SLOW shutter speeds
used to create the Guess jeans Ads? Old photos (b&w of course) almsot always
looked this way. Are these bad images too?
Take me on e-mail with your opinions...
Regards...
Michael Chick
rob...@hk.ncc.se
Emmanuel ORAIN <or...@ecoledoc.ibp.fr> wrote:
>If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with Robert
> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
In the few instances that they are softed at all, they are typically
done so at the printing stage.
Jeff Westhead
>In article <3f628a$j...@vishnu.jussieu.fr>,
>Emmanuel ORAIN <or...@ecoledoc.ibp.fr> wrote:
>
>>If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with Robert
>> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
>
>In the few instances that they are softed at all, they are typically
>done so at the printing stage.
>
--
Jeff Westhead ### jef...@io.org ### Toronto, Ontario
William Bell
>From: or...@ecoledoc.ibp.fr (Emmanuel ORAIN)
>Subject: Re: Soft Focus in the Darkroom
>Date: 13 Jan 1995 14:20:58 GMT
>h...@cfmu.eurocontrol.be (Andrew Hately) says :
>" Diffusing the positive image spreads light around.
> Diffusing the negative image spreads dark around and looks
> rather different; many people would say "bad".
>
> Andrew."
>
time. One of my clients is a theater and the photographer who shoots the
head shots uses modern medium format equipment. The negatives are so sharp
that the actors were unhappy with how they looked. While I know that the
photographer could use on-camera diffusion, and in fact tried it once or
twice, but that just isn't his thing. His attempts were too diffused and
looked un-natural. I do a bit of diffusion with either a small window
screen or a layer or two of black stocking on an embroidery hoop. I do this
for anywhere from 1/4 to 4/5 of the exposure to just take the edge off. The
actors and the theater couldn't be happier.
stra...@ios.com
Diffusion is accomplished by placing some diffusion material between the enlarger lens and the paper during exposure. The material you use, where you place it (closer
to the lens or the paper) and the percentage of exposure that it is in the light path depends on the effect that you want. You have to experiment. One popular material
is pantyhose, stretched across some kind of frame, or a more open mesh cheese cloth, or wrinkled saran wrap. etc. The effect that you get in the darkroom is different
then when you use a diffuser in front of your camera lens while taking the picture. A diffuser will broaden the highlights. In the darkroom the highlights are really the
areas that will pront as dark values on the paper so the tendency is to close down the highlights - different but interesting.
Hope this helps
Peace!
Al Strauss
Walt Mateja
EO->From: or...@ecoledoc.ibp.fr (Emmanuel ORAIN)
EO->Just a question, for being sure I understand :
EO-> "Diffusing the positive image" means using a diffusing filter (or an
EO-> diffusing stuff) during taking the picture (I mean with the camer
EO-> "Diffusing the negative i;age" means using a diffusong filter (or an
EO-> diffusing stiff) during the printing of the negative in the darkr
EO->Is that it ?
EO->If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with R
EO-> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
I can't answer you onMapplethorpe's stuff... but I've use two different
diffusion techniques, fairly successfully for years.
For Camera diffussion, where I want a very soft background surrounding a
sharp subject, I have used a skylight filter, that has some vaseline, or
lip gloss or some clear gel smeared in a circular pattern around the
outside portion of the filte glass. The filter is then placed an inch or
so in front of the camera lens. (depends of the f stop that you're using.)
This gives a sort of misty look to the photo, but keeps the subject sharp,
and is particularly good for close ups.
For Darkroom diffusion, I use an old nylon stocking, that is stretched over
and embroidery hoop. The gadget is moved in and out of the light beam while
enlarging for as much diffusion as you want to apply.
For Portrait type prints, a 30% to 40% ratio of the total exposure time is
usually pretty good.
mat...@iia.org .."u"..and me..and the rest of.."us"..
* Wave Rider 1.30 Beta # 12 *
... My health is good. It's my age that's bad!
-*- SF-Quick/BW 1.00r [#44]
--
| Fidonet: Walt Mateja 1:150/420
| Internet: Walt....@us.cnx.com
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
| Via Connections! BBS - Just Roadkill on the Information SuperHighway!
Sassan Sanei
>>> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
>>In the few instances that they are softed at all, they are typically
>>done so at the printing stage.
>What's a good way to do this?
I use my Cokin diffusion 2 filter and put it on my enlarger lens.
I like the effect quite a bit (it is the shadows that are diffused, and not
the highlights). To my eye it looks more "naturally" soft -- i.e. that it
was taken under good diffused lighting to begin with -- than using the
diffusion filter at the picture-taking stage. But I'm sure a lot of people
would disagree with this.
Cheers
Sass
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sassan Sanei
327 Batavia Place
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3W1
(519) 886-0714
na8110600-Klappal
>
>In article <3fkmvt$k...@ionews.io.org>, <jef...@io.org> writes:
>>
>> >Emmanuel ORAIN <or...@ecoledoc.ibp.fr> wrote:
>> >
>> >>If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with Robert
>> >> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
>> >
>> >In the few instances that they are softed at all, they are typically
>> >done so at the printing stage.
>> >
>> What's a good way to do this?
>
>years around my home-studio-darkroom.
>
>I've found the best method for me is to use a fog filter under the
>enlarging lens for about 25-50% of the time.
>
Black nylon stocking material stretched onto needle-point hoop
is an inexpensive diffuser. Darkroom or camera, if you're careful
Rich
jger...@wln.com
> >
> >>If so (even if not :-) ), what kind if diffusion (IYHO) is used with Robert
> >> Mapplethorpe's pictures ??? Does someone know ???
> >
> >In the few instances that they are softed at all, they are typically
> >done so at the printing stage.
> >
> What's a good way to do this?
I've got a number of soft focus filters that I've experimented with for
years around my home-studio-darkroom.
I've found the best method for me is to use a fog filter under the
enlarging lens for about 25-50% of the time.
It varies and is not predictable between different negs. You just have
to learn to play and experiment until you find out how it works with each
neg and situation.
Have fun!