Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Professional and Advanced Portraiture
SOFT FOCUS PORTRAITURE TOTORIAL.
May 15, 2019 14:36:02   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
I have been involved with soft focus portraiture for a very long time.
It is one of the styles and options I offer my clients, something I
may apply to parts of my wedding coverages and a technique I sometimes
crossover into some of my commercial work as well.

I am not one to set stringent "rules" in photographic techniques or
start off any of my posts with an adversarial tone or an argument,
however, there are many misconceptions, folklore and old wives tales
about this style of work. There are a few specialized prime lenses, a
few filters and a hand full of improvised methods that work
successfully in that order, that is, prime lenses are the best tools
for the job, certain filters are the next runners up and some of the
improvised methods may work but many are debatable and just don't make
the grade.

As you can see, right here on the UHH site and many other forums,
folks are always after the best lenses for certain jobs. There are
many opinions and debates but at the end of the day, the consensus is
usually that there are certain lenses that are suited to specialized
kinds of photography. You can sometimes get around things and
improvise but oftentimes the results are not what we would like. As an
example, a macro lens is the best choice for macro photography, close
up images of flowers, insects, small objects etc. You can use a
standard lens, perhaps with a diopter or close up the filter, but
nothing will beat a high end prime macro. There are telephoto lenses that are
best suited to sports and wildlife photography, oftentimes of
extremely long focal lengths. We could use a tele-extender, shoot
through a telescope or one side of a binocular but nothing beats a
prime telephoto or high-end zoom. So... we dig into our pocketbooks
and purchase the best glass that we can afford.
Of course, you gotta be serious about whatever filed you are
specializing in or want to pursue in a significant way before you invest in dedicated equipment. If you are seriously interested in fine portraiture, soft focus lenses then some certainly specialized lenses and accessories should be in
your tool kit.

There are a number of specialized soft focus prime lenses which I will
describe, however, only one of them is easily adaptable to your DSLR-
as long as it is a Canon. It is no longer in production but there are
many of them on the used market. Canon made a 135mm soft focus lens-
it works beautifully. They are not particularly expensive on the used
market- I have seen them advertised for as little as $150.00 to $300.
Most of them are in great shape because many shooters just didn't know
how to use them or thought the "look" was too old school and gave them
up early in the game. Minolta made a nice one too- for their higher
end film SLRs- so I don't know of any of the current DSLRs or
mirrorless bodies will take them(?).

There are many vintage soft focus portrait lenses that can be adapted
to DSLRs via custom-made adapters and bellows extensions. There were
originally designed for view cameras. I use a Mamiya-Sekor prime SF
140mm lens on my RZ67 with film and a Phase I digital back as well as
a special Rodenstock Imagon adaptation that fits into the 180mm
lense's shutter assembly for the RZ.

So...here's how real soft focus (SF) lenses work. Basically, they
have a controlled degree of SPHERICAL ABERRATION, an optical deficit
that causes a lack of sharpness, that lives in the outer zones of the
lens. As the lens is stopped down to smaller apertures, the film or
sensor "sees" less of the "defect" and they become sharper. The soft
effect is most pronounced at the widest aperture and progressively
diminishes at smaller apertures. Typically, an f/4.5 SF lens becomes
sharp at about f/11.

The Minolta and Canon formula work on floating elements that are
adjusted, as to the level of softness, by means of a ring on the
barrel as well as the variation in aperture settings. The Mamiya and
Rodenstock are more sophisticated in that they work with special
aperture disks, 3 different inserts, each with a central a fixed
aperture and a peripheral array of "adjustable pinholes" that enable
very incremental adjustment of softness levels. Theses aperture disks resemble sink drain strainers but, contrary to a few DYI articles I have noticed, a drain strainer will not convert an ordinary lens into as SF lens nor will any of the actual disks work on their own- the work in conjunction with the special soft focus optics the are designed for. The are no "filters" or lens attachments.

So...here's the big deal. Unlike some filters which simply degrade
the image, these lenses, simply stated, (without the optical jargon)
have two visually perceived effects. They produce a soft image
seemingly superimposed over a sharp image and they create a type of
diffusion that spreads the highlights into the shadows. Depending on
the specularity of the highlights, they kinda "fringe" at the edges
and cause various degrees of shimmer. There are a few filters that
kinda simulate theses effects-I'll explain later! You get a certain
level of "optical retouching" which subdues or eliminates some
wrinkles and blemishes and a very glamorizing kind of aura.

So...here's some of the misconceptions and bad news. Simply putting
the image out of focus won't make the grade- it will look like an out
of focus picture. So-called fog filters are designed to simulate
atmospheric haze or fog- they just degrade portrait images and usually
cause flat results that lack desirable contrast. There are a number
of so-called diffusion filters that just degrade the image and thereby
preclude any kind of successful enlargement. Using Vaseline or other
substances on old filters may have a novel effect but it gets messy -
it's more folklore than anything else. If any of that goo gets on your
actual lens, it is virtually impossible to clean off. If you want to
try something similar, use clear nail polish on the edges of an old
skylight filter and leave a clear spot about the size of a nickel or a
dime at the center.

Adding blur and some softening effects in post-processing has some
merit but it ain't the real Mccoy. Post production skin softening is a form of
retouching as it is cloning out or "erasing" blemishes" but it does
not have the shimmer and ambiance id a tru SF shot. If you just want to address skin texture and blemishes, retouching methods and post-processing programs like Portrait-Pro are the tickets. These methodologies are not necessarily soft focus. Even if you still do film/analog darkroom work, diffusion on the enlarger will blend the shadows into the highlight rather than
Versa Versa and you end up with muddy prints.

Lighting: It seems logical that soft-focus portraiture work requires
soft lighting, however, in most cases the opposite is true. Most soft
focus techniques, special lenses or good filters will have some
intrinsic diffusion and loss of contrast. If your lighting is too soft
or too flat you will end up with "mush"! If you want that "shimmer"
and fringing effect, you need some good diffuse and specular
highlights and some definable areas of shadow, especially if you are
going for a low-key soft focus effect. Sometimes even a Fresnel
spotlight as the main light source will work beautifully in soft
focus.

Filters: There are only a few that are worth investing in- some are
long out of production and rare. The best ones, that come close to
prime SF lenses are as follows:
Zeiss Softars. These come in 3 grades. They are made of some kind of
optical plastic so you have to clean them gently or they will scratch.
They have tiny bubble-like mini-lenses all over the filter's surface.
They were originally made for Hasselblad but may still be marketed by
Zeiss. The B+W Schneider Soft Pros is the same thing- they come in
all popular diameters and are more likely to fit current lenses and
are still listed as currently available. The effect is obtainable at
all apertures.

Minolta Portrayers- You might find a rare set of 3 different strengths.
Theses the are quite nice but you need a lens with a 55mm filter
thread.

Rollei Soft- Originally marketed by Rolleiflex- theses have
concentric circles etched in the glass. The work best at wide
apertures. There might be other makers using this design.

Harrison & Harrison- theses filter were originally designed for
cinematography and at one time were market by Lindall. They come in
various degrees of diffusion and work decently enough in that they
don't degrade the image quality. The were intend for film images
that are projected on very big screens so the need to provide softness
without loss of quality.

Tiffen- The only models that I found to be useful in the Tiffen line
of diffusion filters were the ones comprised of black netting
sandwiched in optical glass. The breakup or soften the image enough
without a fringing or noticeable shimmer. I can achieve the same
results with ordinary black tulle fabric or black window screening
material. The Tulle comes in various thread counts. I just
stretch it over a lens hood with an elastic band or mount in a
cardboard frame and slide into the filter slot in a matte box or
compendium lens shade.

Nylon Hosiery: FYI- The film version of Fiddler on the Roof was shot
with parts of a kind taupe colored pantyhose stretched across the
Panavision lens matte box. All the time-honored go-to filter and special
effects companies could not satisfy the director of photography's vision so he
came up with that solution for the slightly warm and diffuse kinda old
world look he was after. When I read about that in the American
Cinematographer magazine the article inspired me to experiment. The corner
pharmacy/variety store had a large selection os "nylons" so when the proprietor
spotted me perusing the ladies underwear section he commented that he
doubted if they carried my size! When I explained my mission, after a
few sarcastic remarks, he gave me a swatch sample selection of all the
colors. I stretched a few of them on a lens shade and burned holes in
the center of some of my selections. I don't smoke but a cigaret burn
or a soldering iron will do- you can't cut that stuff or it will run
and unravel- you gotta kinda cauterize it. It smooths things out a bit
and there is quite a difference in effect from conventional lenses and
filters. Try it! I found that a warm gray to be the best so I
purchased a few dozen packages of that hosiery thinking that these
things get discontinued or vary in dye lots. It also eventually loses
its elasticity after a while and sags so I had to make new ones. Of
course, I got a kinda smirk from the proprietor when I bought out his
entire stock of that color! He was the pharmacist - he asked me if I
wanted some estrogen or testosterone tablets to go along with my new stockings! It was the 1970s and folks were not all that PC as yet! Wiseguy!

Like any kind of off-the-mainstream photographic methodology, this
takes a bit of research, experimentation and hard work and probably
some investment if you want to get into the special lenses or filters.
Some of this stuff is rare, old and long out of production but finding
it is half the fun. Soft focus can be applied to the "Old Hollywood"
style of glamour portraiture, many more contemporary and classic
styles as well and even a few out of the box concepts. I have seen
some outstanding landscapes done with this equipment. Soft focus can
impart an ethereal and romantic mood to any image.

If anyone is interested, I can post more details about the Imagons and
other soft focus lenses. I can write something up and post in the
Advanced and Professional Portraiture section- let me know. by the
way, these lenses give new meaning to "BOKEH" totally crazy! Theses
lenses and the associated style have a long and interesting history.
The instruction sheet that came with my first Imagon suggested a
number of guidelines and basic concepts, however, is stated that each
photographer has mastered its use in various and different ways as to
an infinite combination of settings combining the internal aperture
and the disks that are fitted to the front of the lens. The same
techniques can be applied to the Mamiya version.











Reply
May 15, 2019 14:44:15   #
bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana
 
Hey Ed,
Remember the messy old "Vaseline" around the edge of a clear filter? Back in the days of being an apprentice, I was the "lucky" one who had to clean those off. I never heard of the clear nail polish, though. I wish I had known that some 37 years ago...

Reply
May 15, 2019 18:13:25   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
bkyser wrote:
Hey Ed,
Remember the messy old "Vaseline" around the edge of a clear filter? Back in the days of being an apprentice, I was the "lucky" one who had to clean those off. I never heard of the clear nail polish, though. I wish I had known that some 37 years ago...


Yup! Guys were using Vaseline, Pomatex, Brylcreem , Vicks Vaporub. anti- fog stuff for eyeglasses, and even "sterile lubricant ". I never wanted any of that gook NEAR a lens- it NEVER comes off no matter what you use to clean with. If it accidentally gets on the front element...NASTY! The clear nail polish works but once you put in on a filter, it's for good! It works just as well or better than all that greasy kid stuff! It great at weddings for a romantic look. On a 77mm filter, paint the edges and leave a clear spot the size of a quarter. On a small filter (50-65mm) try a clear spot the size of a nickel. Shot anywhere between f/2/8 and 5.6 and you are in business.

I'll usually shot any given pose with and without the filter- just in case. They usually go for the soft and fuzzy ones. So...1982...here's a lovely bride who had her mom's wedding dress (from that era) restored for HER wedding. This is what the shot with nail polish filter looks like in 30x40- big old canvas print!



Reply
 
 
May 17, 2019 01:19:31   #
Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.
 
Thanks for the overview of the history of the expansive use of what the industry calls soft focus photography. I should like to add what follows as my research into the nature of optical soft focus photography because the presentation seems to gloss over this subject and it is my feeling that it is the real corner stone of the subject. No disrespect to your great presentation.

In the realms of photography there are a number of misunderstood techniques for image creating. One of the most powerful tools is through the use of certain design lenses that when used properly will generate the so called soft focus effect.

The general history, or application of what goes for soft focus images is long and filled with much silliness. Heaped under this title of soft focus images are a pleather of techniques to attempt to achieve a result that is specifically in the domain of a type of optical image that is the source of what is referred to as soft focus photography.

This posting has nothing to do with any of the rather bland attempts to achieve some blurry image that is created by attachments to the optics that are used to make images that mimic the soft focus image.

What then is a true soft focus image? How is it made, and under what conditions may we find this unique image type?

The true soft focus image is created by first taking a rather inexpensively made lens of the anastigmatic design, specifically of the symmetrical design. An excellent example is the Carl Zeiss Tessar design. This basic lens design is quite an excellent basic lens and will make good quality images if it is stopped down at least two stops. We are not looking to have that lens do this type of general work. It is important that the lens be of a symmetrical design, that is the front cell should be like the rear cell, like a mirror of one another. Further, you will want a lens that has a wide aperture and of a quite short focal length (at least half of the focal length for the intended standard image size, and preferably one quarter the standard focal length).

To use the lens for soft focus work we must remove the front cell entirely, simply unscrew the front cell. The rear cell is left and this is a lens of moderate to long focal length. Thus the reason for seeking a lens of shorter than standard focal length. A poor choice for this type of conversion would be the Schneider Krusnack Symmar lens. Though a design similar to the Zeiss Tessar, it is NOT symmetrical in it's design and will not produce decent soft focus images.

Where do these basic lenses exist that exhibit the qualities that we are seeking. In the old turn of the century inexpensive armature snap shot cameras. Kodak Browne and Hawkeye cameras. Too expensive and are regarded as collectors items. Instead any cheap roll film camera, the folding type that have a small lens mounted to the front of the camera are ideal for this. Look for one that had a front but no lens in the front, just a hole or some way of keeping dirt out.

The lens can be unmounted from the rear of the folded camera body by removing the holding ring with a make shift spanner. Later the lens can be remounted to the body by the same retaining ring if desired.

How to use the lens for soft focus photography is important. The tendency is to go for a nice pretty sharp image and you can get pretty great results by stopping down the lens, but that is exactly NOT what we want. We want soft focus imagery. So we use the lens pretty much wide open to achieve the results we want. If the lens is mounted on a camera with movements (like a view camera, great choice), then we can place the lens optical center in the area of the face. The rest of the image will disintegrate into the specific aberrations that are charistic of the soft focus image.

Now, there are TWO (2) critical things to know and understand when creating in soft focus. The first is actual FOCUS. It is best (actually quite critical) to use a high powered optical loupe to determine focus in the image. This focus is done ONLY at the optical center where the image is sharpest. The lens (diaphragm) must be at the working f stop or this simply will not work. The lens creates the image using the area of the optical spectrum that is in the green region of the optic. You can not see this as a clear point in the image but that is where you need to have the lens. What you do is to focus as best that can be seen (the reason for an APO loupe), then when you have best focus you must then BACK FOCUS some half a millimeter to put the lens in it's best point of focus.

Now the second item on the agenda, color. Even if you are rendering in B&W you need to do COLOR MANAGMENT. Place opposite colors to the subject. I know this can be confusing so here is the basics Red Cadillacs by GM. That is Red and Cyan, BY= Blue Magenta, and finally GM= Green and Magenta. These are often called 'complements', they are opposites and by placing opposites together you stabilize their effects. This is all I can give as guidance as pretty much the entire world is asleep as to color theory and this is not about color theory.

Still you want to understand this color stuff. To do that you need to understand the far edge of optical soft focus and that is not soft focus but it's cousin Pin Speck imaging. And this is not about Pin Speck photography but you should look into this type of imaging.

So there you have it, optical soft focus photography.

I include two images. The first is a didactic two image compare and contrast in which a Kodak Commercial Portrait Lens is used to image a model. On the left is the soft focus style image and on the right a crisp image. The image on the left was done with the lens wide open (a neutral density filter to reduce the exposure evenly for the second image as anticipated), but an airy diffusion disk was used (the air diffusion disk has hand made and used with this lens and was made using the designs of the airy diffusion disk much like that of an Imagon lens).

The image on the right was made seconds later after removing the airy diffusion disk, ND filter and stopping the lens diaphragm to f22 for a sharp image. Both images were made with a full movement 8X10 view camera in studio using flash gear.

The second photograph was made on Polaroid Pro 4X5 Polacolor print film. The lens was a lens removed from a turn of the century snap shot camera with a rear cell lens and the diaphragm was wide open. The lens was position so that the lens has the optical center on the models face and the effects of the disintegrating soft focus effect is shown. The 'roughness' of the surface in the red region of the background is created by the juxtaposition of the color field created by the cyan shear cloth draped around the models body. This is a perfect example of what soft focus imaging can do when the right tools are applied to technique and the subject is selected, arranged and structured to create an original visionary use of soft focus.


(Download)



Reply
Nov 12, 2020 09:01:40   #
Scotco35 Loc: Michigan
 
Ed, do you remember the name of the discs that were selling back in the 1980’s that were attached to the rear element of the lens? It always seemed that if an attachment was used that the rear of the lens would make more sense. In the film days I used the Mamiya 150 w/6.3 disc on my RB67. After switching to digital in 2000 I searched for a similar way to get that effect in PS, but I have never really been happy. I recently ordered some Zeiss softars and intend on experimenting with them. But I am not terribly optimistic. People say, just do it in Photoshop, you have much more control. Well that is true, but I end up spending too much time tweaking in Photoshop and I miss having the softness on the negative (now file.)

Reply
Nov 12, 2020 10:11:30   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Scotco35 wrote:
Ed, do you remember the name of the discs that were selling back in the 1980’s that were attached to the rear element of the lens? It always seemed that if an attachment was used that the rear of the lens would make more sense. In the film days I used the Mamiya 150 w/6.3 disc on my RB67. After switching to digital in 2000 I searched for a similar way to get that effect in PS, but I have never really been happy. I recently ordered some Zeiss softars and intend on experimenting with them. But I am not terribly optimistic. People say, just do it in Photoshop, you have much more control. Well that is true, but I end up spending too much time tweaking in Photoshop and I miss having the softness on the negative (now file.)
Ed, do you remember the name of the discs that wer... (show quote)


The Mamiya 150mm SF Lens is based on the Imagon formula except for the aperture discs mount between the elements rather than in front of the lens. These discs are not filters but apertures that have multiple holes that allow different degrees of the special aberration that is designed into the lens to influence the degree of softness. The spherical aberration "lives" at the edge of the lens so the more the aperture discs interfere with the edge, the sharper the image. Those discs are not filters that would work on any other sharp lenses.

Zeiss Softars are the best soft-focus effect filter on the market. They come in 3 strengths, Softar 1, 2,k and 3. Very much like the Imagon and the Mamiya effect, they impart or superimpose a soft image over a sharp image so you get the soft effect without degrading the image and you can produce large prints that don't look out of focus but soft. They are made of optical plastic, so clean them carefully as they are prone to scratching. The Stars work well at all aperture settings. I still and use the Softars in the studio and take out at weddings as well. I can shoot a sharp image and just pop on the filter for a softer effect, Usually, the Softar 1 does the trick for me but if I want a more ethereal effect, I can go to numbers 2 or 3.

Another decent soft-focus filter is the Rollei-Soft. It has concentric circles etched in optical glass. There may be some still on the used market- the ones made for the Rolei 66 TLRs are about 77mm in size. The work best at wide apertures- the more circles the lens "sees" the softer the image.

If you want a prime soft-focus lens for your digital camera there are a few older models that are still around on the used market and maybe adaptable to your camera, depending on the make, Canon has a soft-focus 135mm lens and Minolta has a 100mmm SF as well. Rodenstock Imagaon has a rare 150mm that may be adaptable with bellows.

Photoshop softening is not terrible but using soft focus lenses or Softars provides far superior results. Basically, diffusion after the fact in post-processing blurs the Image or causes the shadows to blend into the highlights with sometimes causes a muddy image. Diffusion at the camera blends the highlights into the shadows causing a smoother transition.

Reply
Nov 12, 2020 11:18:59   #
Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
The Mamiya 150mm SF Lens is based on the Imagon formula except for the aperture discs mount between the elements rather than in front of the lens. These discs are not filters but apertures that have multiple holes that allow different degrees of the special aberration that is designed into the lens to influence the degree of softness. The spherical aberration "lives" at the edge of the lens so the more the aperture discs interfere with the edge, the sharper the image. Those discs are not filters that would work on any other sharp lenses.

Zeiss Softars are the best soft-focus effect filter on the market. They come in 3 strengths, Softar 1, 2,k and 3. Very much like the Imagon and the Mamiya effect, they impart or superimpose a soft image over a sharp image so you get the soft effect without degrading the image and you can produce large prints that don't look out of focus but soft. They are made of optical plastic, so clean them carefully as they are prone to scratching. The Stars work well at all aperture settings. I still and use the Softars in the studio and take out at weddings as well. I can shoot a sharp image and just pop on the filter for a softer effect, Usually, the Softar 1 does the trick for me but if I want a more ethereal effect, I can go to numbers 2 or 3.

Another decent soft-focus filter is the Rollei-Soft. It has concentric circles etched in optical glass. There may be some still on the used market- the ones made for the Rolei 66 TLRs are about 77mm in size. The work best at wide apertures- the more circles the lens "sees" the softer the image.

If you want a prime soft-focus lens for your digital camera there are a few older models that are still around on the used market and maybe adaptable to your camera, depending on the make, Canon has a soft-focus 135mm lens and Minolta has a 100mmm SF as well. Rodenstock Imagaon has a rare 150mm that may be adaptable with bellows.

Photoshop softening is not terrible but using soft focus lenses or Softars provides far superior results. Basically, diffusion after the fact in post-processing blurs the Image or causes the shadows to blend into the highlights with sometimes causes a muddy image. Diffusion at the camera blends the highlights into the shadows causing a smoother transition.
The Mamiya 150mm SF Lens is based on the Imagon fo... (show quote)


Called an air diffusion disc on the Imagon.

Reply
 
 
Nov 12, 2020 13:18:47   #
Scotco35 Loc: Michigan
 
Right. I remember a 3rd party rear optical attachment for the RB67 lens line, back in the early 1980’s that gave an impressive soft focus effect too. I will have to look back in my old PPA magazines to see what they were called. Seems like they were always back ordered from this small company. I do remember they weren’t widely distributed, but a few photographers were using them, as they were mentioned when diagramming their loan collection prints in the magazine. Maybe it was Ellen Bak that was using them, not sure. Either way, my favorite was my trusty Mamiya RB 150 SF. I did use the Tallyn Softfuser set for many years, but the idea of a front element filter never did impress me much. Thanks guys.

Reply
Nov 12, 2020 13:55:01   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
Scotco35 wrote:
Right. I remember a 3rd party rear optical attachment for the RB67 lens line, back in the early 1980s that gave an impressive soft focus effect too. I will have to look back in my old PPA magazines to see what they were called. Seems like they were always back-ordered from this small company. I do remember they weren’t widely distributed, but a few photographers were using them, as they were mentioned when diagramming their loan collection prints in the magazine. Maybe it was Ellen Bak who was using them, not sure. Either way, my favorite was my trusty Mamiya RB 150 SF. I did use the Tallyn Softfuser set for many years, but the idea of a front-element filter never impressed me much. Thanks guys.
Right. I remember a 3rd party rear optical attachm... (show quote)


The Tallyn and Lyndall filters work differently from the Softarss- not as effective. As for the back of the lens filters- I used many filters and filter packs in the back of the lens with view cameras and some medium format gear with filter holders designed for that purpose. I don't know if that would be a viable or practical solution with modern digital cameras- there are just too many contacts and mechanical and electronic inter-phases back there.

If you are worried about flare or image degradation- the Stars are very high quality, however, stray light directly striking them will cause flare- after all, they are DIFFUSION filters and have a tendency to spread light. I use them in my studio with all kinds of kicker and hair lights and never have an issue as long as I use a good lens shade. Even out of doors with back-lighting- they do just fine.

Reply
Nov 12, 2020 14:43:04   #
Scotco35 Loc: Michigan
 
I did a few trials today with the Zeiss Softar #II and the effect is probably too foggy for my tastes, possibly good for a low key shot. I am expecting a Softar #I next week and suspect that may be what I am looking for. A very subtle, overall effect. Thanks for your insights.

Reply
Sep 16, 2023 06:46:18   #
cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
I have been involved with soft focus portraiture for a very long time.
It is one of the styles and options I offer my clients, something I
may apply to parts of my wedding coverages and a technique I sometimes
crossover into some of my commercial work as well.

I am not one to set stringent "rules" in photographic techniques or
start off any of my posts with an adversarial tone or an argument,
however, there are many misconceptions, folklore and old wives tales
about this style of work. There are a few specialized prime lenses, a
few filters and a hand full of improvised methods that work
successfully in that order, that is, prime lenses are the best tools
for the job, certain filters are the next runners up and some of the
improvised methods may work but many are debatable and just don't make
the grade.

As you can see, right here on the UHH site and many other forums,
folks are always after the best lenses for certain jobs. There are
many opinions and debates but at the end of the day, the consensus is
usually that there are certain lenses that are suited to specialized
kinds of photography. You can sometimes get around things and
improvise but oftentimes the results are not what we would like. As an
example, a macro lens is the best choice for macro photography, close
up images of flowers, insects, small objects etc. You can use a
standard lens, perhaps with a diopter or close up the filter, but
nothing will beat a high end prime macro. There are telephoto lenses that are
best suited to sports and wildlife photography, oftentimes of
extremely long focal lengths. We could use a tele-extender, shoot
through a telescope or one side of a binocular but nothing beats a
prime telephoto or high-end zoom. So... we dig into our pocketbooks
and purchase the best glass that we can afford.
Of course, you gotta be serious about whatever filed you are
specializing in or want to pursue in a significant way before you invest in dedicated equipment. If you are seriously interested in fine portraiture, soft focus lenses then some certainly specialized lenses and accessories should be in
your tool kit.

There are a number of specialized soft focus prime lenses which I will
describe, however, only one of them is easily adaptable to your DSLR-
as long as it is a Canon. It is no longer in production but there are
many of them on the used market. Canon made a 135mm soft focus lens-
it works beautifully. They are not particularly expensive on the used
market- I have seen them advertised for as little as $150.00 to $300.
Most of them are in great shape because many shooters just didn't know
how to use them or thought the "look" was too old school and gave them
up early in the game. Minolta made a nice one too- for their higher
end film SLRs- so I don't know of any of the current DSLRs or
mirrorless bodies will take them(?).

There are many vintage soft focus portrait lenses that can be adapted
to DSLRs via custom-made adapters and bellows extensions. There were
originally designed for view cameras. I use a Mamiya-Sekor prime SF
140mm lens on my RZ67 with film and a Phase I digital back as well as
a special Rodenstock Imagon adaptation that fits into the 180mm
lense's shutter assembly for the RZ.

So...here's how real soft focus (SF) lenses work. Basically, they
have a controlled degree of SPHERICAL ABERRATION, an optical deficit
that causes a lack of sharpness, that lives in the outer zones of the
lens. As the lens is stopped down to smaller apertures, the film or
sensor "sees" less of the "defect" and they become sharper. The soft
effect is most pronounced at the widest aperture and progressively
diminishes at smaller apertures. Typically, an f/4.5 SF lens becomes
sharp at about f/11.

The Minolta and Canon formula work on floating elements that are
adjusted, as to the level of softness, by means of a ring on the
barrel as well as the variation in aperture settings. The Mamiya and
Rodenstock are more sophisticated in that they work with special
aperture disks, 3 different inserts, each with a central a fixed
aperture and a peripheral array of "adjustable pinholes" that enable
very incremental adjustment of softness levels. Theses aperture disks resemble sink drain strainers but, contrary to a few DYI articles I have noticed, a drain strainer will not convert an ordinary lens into as SF lens nor will any of the actual disks work on their own- the work in conjunction with the special soft focus optics the are designed for. The are no "filters" or lens attachments.

So...here's the big deal. Unlike some filters which simply degrade
the image, these lenses, simply stated, (without the optical jargon)
have two visually perceived effects. They produce a soft image
seemingly superimposed over a sharp image and they create a type of
diffusion that spreads the highlights into the shadows. Depending on
the specularity of the highlights, they kinda "fringe" at the edges
and cause various degrees of shimmer. There are a few filters that
kinda simulate theses effects-I'll explain later! You get a certain
level of "optical retouching" which subdues or eliminates some
wrinkles and blemishes and a very glamorizing kind of aura.

So...here's some of the misconceptions and bad news. Simply putting
the image out of focus won't make the grade- it will look like an out
of focus picture. So-called fog filters are designed to simulate
atmospheric haze or fog- they just degrade portrait images and usually
cause flat results that lack desirable contrast. There are a number
of so-called diffusion filters that just degrade the image and thereby
preclude any kind of successful enlargement. Using Vaseline or other
substances on old filters may have a novel effect but it gets messy -
it's more folklore than anything else. If any of that goo gets on your
actual lens, it is virtually impossible to clean off. If you want to
try something similar, use clear nail polish on the edges of an old
skylight filter and leave a clear spot about the size of a nickel or a
dime at the center.

Adding blur and some softening effects in post-processing has some
merit but it ain't the real Mccoy. Post production skin softening is a form of
retouching as it is cloning out or "erasing" blemishes" but it does
not have the shimmer and ambiance id a tru SF shot. If you just want to address skin texture and blemishes, retouching methods and post-processing programs like Portrait-Pro are the tickets. These methodologies are not necessarily soft focus. Even if you still do film/analog darkroom work, diffusion on the enlarger will blend the shadows into the highlight rather than
Versa Versa and you end up with muddy prints.

Lighting: It seems logical that soft-focus portraiture work requires
soft lighting, however, in most cases the opposite is true. Most soft
focus techniques, special lenses or good filters will have some
intrinsic diffusion and loss of contrast. If your lighting is too soft
or too flat you will end up with "mush"! If you want that "shimmer"
and fringing effect, you need some good diffuse and specular
highlights and some definable areas of shadow, especially if you are
going for a low-key soft focus effect. Sometimes even a Fresnel
spotlight as the main light source will work beautifully in soft
focus.

Filters: There are only a few that are worth investing in- some are
long out of production and rare. The best ones, that come close to
prime SF lenses are as follows:
Zeiss Softars. These come in 3 grades. They are made of some kind of
optical plastic so you have to clean them gently or they will scratch.
They have tiny bubble-like mini-lenses all over the filter's surface.
They were originally made for Hasselblad but may still be marketed by
Zeiss. The B+W Schneider Soft Pros is the same thing- they come in
all popular diameters and are more likely to fit current lenses and
are still listed as currently available. The effect is obtainable at
all apertures.

Minolta Portrayers- You might find a rare set of 3 different strengths.
Theses the are quite nice but you need a lens with a 55mm filter
thread.

Rollei Soft- Originally marketed by Rolleiflex- theses have
concentric circles etched in the glass. The work best at wide
apertures. There might be other makers using this design.

Harrison & Harrison- theses filter were originally designed for
cinematography and at one time were market by Lindall. They come in
various degrees of diffusion and work decently enough in that they
don't degrade the image quality. The were intend for film images
that are projected on very big screens so the need to provide softness
without loss of quality.

Tiffen- The only models that I found to be useful in the Tiffen line
of diffusion filters were the ones comprised of black netting
sandwiched in optical glass. The breakup or soften the image enough
without a fringing or noticeable shimmer. I can achieve the same
results with ordinary black tulle fabric or black window screening
material. The Tulle comes in various thread counts. I just
stretch it over a lens hood with an elastic band or mount in a
cardboard frame and slide into the filter slot in a matte box or
compendium lens shade.

Nylon Hosiery: FYI- The film version of Fiddler on the Roof was shot
with parts of a kind taupe colored pantyhose stretched across the
Panavision lens matte box. All the time-honored go-to filter and special
effects companies could not satisfy the director of photography's vision so he
came up with that solution for the slightly warm and diffuse kinda old
world look he was after. When I read about that in the American
Cinematographer magazine the article inspired me to experiment. The corner
pharmacy/variety store had a large selection os "nylons" so when the proprietor
spotted me perusing the ladies underwear section he commented that he
doubted if they carried my size! When I explained my mission, after a
few sarcastic remarks, he gave me a swatch sample selection of all the
colors. I stretched a few of them on a lens shade and burned holes in
the center of some of my selections. I don't smoke but a cigaret burn
or a soldering iron will do- you can't cut that stuff or it will run
and unravel- you gotta kinda cauterize it. It smooths things out a bit
and there is quite a difference in effect from conventional lenses and
filters. Try it! I found that a warm gray to be the best so I
purchased a few dozen packages of that hosiery thinking that these
things get discontinued or vary in dye lots. It also eventually loses
its elasticity after a while and sags so I had to make new ones. Of
course, I got a kinda smirk from the proprietor when I bought out his
entire stock of that color! He was the pharmacist - he asked me if I
wanted some estrogen or testosterone tablets to go along with my new stockings! It was the 1970s and folks were not all that PC as yet! Wiseguy!

Like any kind of off-the-mainstream photographic methodology, this
takes a bit of research, experimentation and hard work and probably
some investment if you want to get into the special lenses or filters.
Some of this stuff is rare, old and long out of production but finding
it is half the fun. Soft focus can be applied to the "Old Hollywood"
style of glamour portraiture, many more contemporary and classic
styles as well and even a few out of the box concepts. I have seen
some outstanding landscapes done with this equipment. Soft focus can
impart an ethereal and romantic mood to any image.

If anyone is interested, I can post more details about the Imagons and
other soft focus lenses. I can write something up and post in the
Advanced and Professional Portraiture section- let me know. by the
way, these lenses give new meaning to "BOKEH" totally crazy! Theses
lenses and the associated style have a long and interesting history.
The instruction sheet that came with my first Imagon suggested a
number of guidelines and basic concepts, however, is stated that each
photographer has mastered its use in various and different ways as to
an infinite combination of settings combining the internal aperture
and the disks that are fitted to the front of the lens. The same
techniques can be applied to the Mamiya version.
I have been involved with soft focus portraiture f... (show quote)


Thanks for a very interesting article!

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Professional and Advanced Portraiture
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.