4x5 lenses for wooden sculpture

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread

I will be publishing a book containing about 200 images of mostly African masks and some figures, and decided to do the photography in-house. Most pieces are antique, wooden, with incredible surfaces and patinas of accumulated materials on age. Some have dulled old metal attachments, many have brightly colored strings, feathers, fabric, etc. A few pieces are cast bronze. Most are 6' to 12' high, a few figures are 30" high. Most are only 3' to 6" deep, but a few have large headdresses that might go 18" deep. The reproductions will be full-page (at least 8x10")and color. The backgrounds will all be simple gray or black. Of top concern is sharpness of detail, with adequate depth of field. Although I'm still having second thoughts, I was steered away from 8x10 format by some comments about the difficulty in learning this format as my first plunge into LF. I just ordered a 4x5 Sinar P2 from B&H, and expect it shortly. I think I would prefer "knock 'em dead" color rather that purely accurate color, and was thinking of using Fuji Velvia. So, my friends, I desperately need input about appropriate lenses for this project. My thinking was that since short telephotos are usually used for portrait work in 35mm, and since (I think) a normal lense in 4x5 is about 210mm, a 300mm lense would be best...I'm open to any and all suggestions regarding lenses, film, lighting, backgrounds, etc.

-- Neil Carey (ethnos@starband.net), November 10, 2001

Answers

Hi Neil

I would work almost with a 150mm Lens for the most of it and some smaller with a 210mm. But with 300mm you get much DOF problems! Cheers

-- Armin Seeholzer (armin.seeholzer@smile.ch), November 10, 2001.


A "normal" focal length lens on a 4x5 is prety much universally considered to be the 150mm length. So I'd go with a 210mm lens over a 150mm or the 300mm. If you are filling the frame , when using the 210mm instead of the 150mm you'll have more distance from the subject which will offer you a better sense of perspective relationships in the objects and more room for lighting close in. The 300mm will also work fine but you'll have to deal with less depth of field and you'll also need a lot more more bellows. In truth I'd recommend the following set of lenses to cover objects of different sizes: the 120mm AM Nikkor, a 180mm or 210mm (I like the Nikon W series and also Rodenstock lenses, but Schneiders are also okay). and maybe a 300mm as well.

Lighting/ well that is a huge question! I prefer using electronic flash equipment (strobe) over hot lights but since it sounds like you don't have a lot of experience hot lights may be better for you since you'll be able to see directly what you are photographing. In electronic flash equipment, my recommendations are (in no preferential order): Balcar, Broncolor, Profoto, Speedotron, Elinchrom and Dynalight. I definitely prefer the Plume Wafer click this link to Plume Ltd. and Chimera Lighting (a link to Chimera) lighting tools over the copycats like Photoflex, etc.Matters of Light and Depth. I also think you can use some on-site consulting to at least get you started.

contact me if you are interested.

-- Ellis Vener Photography (ellis@ellisvener.com), November 10, 2001.


I t should have read: "I think you should read Ross Lowell's book Matters of Light and Depth. I also think you can use some on-site consulting to at least get you started.

-- Ellis Vener Photography (ellis@ellisvener.com), November 10, 2001.

I would go with a 210mm. A 300mm will be too long.

-- William Marderness (wmarderness@hotmail.com), November 10, 2001.

Thanks to everyone for your advice...It looks like the concensus of opinion favors the 210mm. I'll also get a 120mm, but first things first.

Ellis mentioned the Nikkor W series. This is the Nikkor W 210mm f/5.6? Throughout the LF Lense threads in this forum this lense has been highly recommended. But how about the Nikkor-AM(ED)Macro 210mm f/5.6? I've seen some great marks for this in terms of sharpness. Cost aside, how would this lense perform FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT compared to the W series.

Also, in terms of this project (not landscapes, weight doesn't matter, etc.) what would be your second and third choices in 210mm?

Mentions of Sinar's own lenses are few...Who manufactures them? How do they perform compared to the corresponding Nikkor/Schneider/Rodenstocks?

Thanks for the recommendations...I will read the book asap and I'm impressed with the Chimera equipment.

-- Neil Carey (ethnos@starband.net), November 11, 2001.



Sinar uses Rodenstock lenses.

For best reults for your type of project a macro design that is designed for product photographs from 1:5 to about 3:1 will outperform other lens types.

Currently Rodenstock offers these in 180 and 120 mm.

Older ones were 210 and 300mm.

Your lighying type and technique will be as important as your lens choice.

Proper lens for this application and wrong lighting will be as bad as proper lighting and incorrect lens choice.

you are already started to a poor result if your decision is solely based on this thread. You must rent/borrow/beg various lenses and try various techniques first. this will probably require that you go to a dealer that specializes in large format and rents equipment so you can see what works and what doesn't.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmaretingcorp.com), November 11, 2001.


While you are looking at the Plume website you may also want to consider the cocoon. I consider this oen of my most useful lighting tools for small product tabletop photography.

Cheers,

Ted

-- Ted Harris (slberfuchs@aol.com), November 11, 2001.


Neil,

I would also like to add that lighting technique is important. Depending on the type of color film used and the light source, you may have to use an color compensating filter. I am currently photographing some sculptures using Provia, and tungsten light source (blue colored bulb and had to correct the color with a #10 blue compensating filter.

One other added touch is your background. To obtain the lighter foreground leading to a darker background requires the use of sheet of colored paper that is gradually sloped away and upwards from your masks. Have fun.

-- (caleng@inficad.com), November 11, 2001.


"But how about the Nikkor-AM(ED)Macro 210mm f/5.6? I've seen some great marks for this in terms of sharpness. Cost aside, how would this lense perform FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT compared to the W series. " That lens is basically designed for use with the 8x10 format. I don't think you'll see any real difference, especially considering that you say most of the objects are 6 to 12 feet long.

Since you are spending a great deal of money already, have you considered using the Better Light Scanning Back for use on the Sinar, or possibly that new back from Sinar that combines 16 seperate scans to make one very large image. instead of shooting film and scanning that?

What will the printing resolution be?

Are the images going to be reproduced on a four color or six color press?

-- Ellis Vener Photography (ellis@ellisvener.com), November 11, 2001.


My apologies to everyone...I thought I proofread the original question carefully, but I am hereby humbled: Most of these objects are wooden African masks that are 6 INCHES to 12 INCHES high, NOT feet. They are mostly lifesize, and were actually worn on the face during ceremonies.

So, how does this change your recommendations? (Thanks to Ellis for pointing this out to me).

Bob, in a related thread (September 20, 2001) you wrote" For ratios from 1:5 to 5:1 the Apo Macro Sironar (that is what the Sinar lens is) is best." Does this mean that the lense you are recommending to me is the Apo Macro Sironar 180mm? The ratios seem correct (if my thinking is correct)...This lens would be optimal for 3D objects from 60cm high down to one inch high.

-- Neil Carey (ethnos@starband.net), November 12, 2001.



Oh, I forgot to ask Bob: Sinar mentions a "Macro Sinaron" in 180 mm, and also an "Apo Sinaron" as optimized for 1:1, but not in 180mm. Am I correct that you're talking about the Macro Sinaron?

What is the straight Rodenstock (i.e. non-Sinar branded) version, and what are the differences, if any?

-- Neil Carey (ethnos@starband.net), November 12, 2001.


Rodeanstock = Apo Macro Sironar in 120mm and 180mm. Apo Macro Sironar Digital in 120mm.

Discontinued are 210 and 300mm Macro Sirobar,

Sinar uses there own names for these,

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmaretingcorp.com), November 12, 2001.


"Bob, in a related thread (September 20, 2001) you wrote" For ratios from 1:5 to 5:1 the Apo Macro Sironar (that is what the Sinar lens is) is best." Does this mean that the lense you are recommending to me is the Apo Macro Sironar 180mm? The ratios seem correct (if my thinking is correct)...This lens would be optimal for 3D objects from 60cm high down to one inch high." Yes if yout camera has enough bellows for this ratio.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmaretingcorp.com), November 12, 2001.

How about a 150mm or 210mm G-claron. These lenses are designed for a 1:1 ratio. They are single coated, but flare should not be a problem in the studio. Since the subject is a foot or less, I would go for shorter lenses, even as short as 150mm.

-- William Marderness (wmarderness@hotmail.com), November 13, 2001.

"How about a 150mm or 210mm G-claron. " Yes if you are doing flat art at f22 No if you are doing 3 dimensional originals the Apo Macro series will be superior and function optimally at more apertures then a process lens.

they will also be much easier to focus as they are faster to begin with.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmaretingcorp.com), November 13, 2001.



Mr. Salomon, could you explain why a lens such as the G-Claron is not suitable for 3-dimensional objects? I know they are often times referred to as 'flat field' lenses. Are you suggesting that somehow the 'curved' field would match the 3-d objects?

-- Dave Schneider (dschneider@arjaynet.com), November 13, 2001.

Yjey were designed for making seperation negatives from color art work for graphic art reproduction.

They simply do not reproduce 3 dimensional close range art as well as a macro lens.

Trying is much more effective then describing. That is why a relationship with a dealer that rents is so valuable.

You have to try it yourself.

-- Bob Salomon (bob@hpmaretingcorp.com), November 14, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ