Fingerpainting in Light... (a homage to Exa-Klaus)

[iangreenhalgh1]

Hi folks

After Klaus posted his wonderful 'Painting with Light' thread full of dreamy, painterly images I was inspired to try to emulate him and produce some similarly beautiful and 'painterly' images of my own...

Sadly I'm nowhere near Klaus' level of skill but I have enthusiasm and that is what counts, right? lol

I used one of my favourite lenses - a huge and heavy Rathenower Optische Werke Visionar 1.9/168mm lens that was originally used to project films in cinemas.

I think it's a Petzval type lens, it is sharp but the depth of field is incredibly shallow, this leads to only small portions of the image being in focus and the rest lost in a sea of blur.

I called this thread 'fingerpainting' to imply I'm just dabbling and trying to emulate Klaus's wonderful work, anyways, here are the best shots I managed to create this afternoon:

[Himself]

Ohh man, you scared me.
Seeing the title I thought he passed away.

[56 DIN]

your " hommage to Tesco" is excellent

and i am happy that Himself´s concerns are wrong

[Scheimpflug]

[iangreenhalgh1]

Ah, she is a good friend of mine and had an exaggerated, comedic reaction when she saw me pointing my massive lens at her! She was doing a combination smile/gimace while waving and trying not to drop her phone and bag, just a funny snapshot I thought. Out of focus though, the dof is so tiny on this lens.

[iangreenhalgh1]

On a serious note, I'd love to hear some advice on how to achieve a more 'painterly' effect ala Klaus' work, I guess a large part of it is the choice of subject...

[woodrim]

Ian: To do what Klaus displayed, I believe you will need a very fast lens that suffers from ghosting of light areas. Two lenses of mine come to mind; the Cyclop and the Series 1 200mm f/3 at f/3, although the latter will also have plenty of CA.

Perhaps also a diffusion filter will provide an interesting effect. Last summer was so hot and humid here that my lenses were fogging up when I went outside. I shot with them anyway and had some similar results.

[kds315*]

I like that a lot!

(I'm not that (Exa-)Klaus, but the other and took the liberty to mod the title accordingly )

[iangreenhalgh1]

Hiya woodrim, aha, I see now, what i missed was there are two components to the effect Klaus got - super smooth bokeh and that highlight glow, my Visionar has the former but not the latter.

I almost bought a Rodenstock Heliogon on ebay the other week but it went a bit high for my wallet.

I do have the modified Helios-44 to play with, I will try it tomorrow, it does show some of the swirly bokeh and highlight glow of the Helios-40, maybe I can get somewhere close to the effect i seek with it.



In the long run I do want a cyclop...

Thankyou for modding the title Klaus to avoid confusion. I take it you're both called Klaus and for clarity's sake we call you Klaus and him Exa-Klaus?

P.S. What is it you like, Klaus?

[exaklaus]

I think, both lenses are pretty different performers.
Old shots taken with Sigma SD10 several years ago

Klaus

[Pancolart]

Hey Ian first two shots seem totally different from others that are pretty unusable. Is that really the same lens?

[iangreenhalgh1]

Hi Exaklaus. Yes, now I see your images I see how the lenses are very different, your Kinoptik has all that diffuse glow and much more dof it seems.


Pancolart, well spotted, those first two shocked me, particularly the second one of the rose.

It is the same lens for all shots, not sure why those ones are so much nicer.

If you look carefully at these shots you can see hoe small parts of the image are sharp but everything else is blurred:

In this one, look at the woman's hand, it is sharp and in focus but nothing else in the frame is.



In this one, look at the bicycle, the front wheel is in focus as is the woman's foot but her face isn't.



And in this one, several bits around the frame seem to be sharp.



I know this lens has an extremely shallow DOF but the way it rendered these images confuses me.

[kds315*]

Yes, DOF is extremely shallow and focusing is quite difficult, to say the least!

[iangreenhalgh1]

Indeed, focussing is a nightware, best to shoot several shots and hope one is in focus.

This is why this lens takes better pictures of stationary things like the rose and leaves, I could take loads of pics and pic the one where the desired portion was in focus.

To show how frustrating this lens can be to use, look at this pic, the man in the shirt if out of focus, but look at his left hand and the silver watch strap, that is in focus which means the dof was only a mere few cm in front of his face but that was far enough to render it blurry...

[exaklaus]

His tummy is in focus, too
Klaus

[iangreenhalgh1]

Well spotted!

It is bizarre sometimes how this lens renders...

[woodrim]

With all the recent talk about Cyclop, I got itchy for it and did a short walk. Do any of these qualify for the painterly effect?







The last one was manipulated.

[Orio]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I really like that first shot woodrim, painterly indeed, almost ethereal. Thanks for sharing.