Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,291   Posts: 1,535,452   Online: 975
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    If you can, use a "bellows" lens such as the Minolta Rokkor Bellows 100/f/4. It is a lens without focusing helicoid, especially optimized for bellows use and for this kind of work. Just like any other macro lens, it is optimized for short distance work. Unlike normal macro lenses though, those bellows lenses are optimized for planarity of field and border sharpness (or, if you prefer, sharpness uniformity between centre and corners) which makes them particularly suitable for reproduction works - documents, stamps - which is their reason to exist.

    It might be that an enlarger lens is also quite apt to this kind of task.

    If you use a Sony camera I think you can easily find adapters between Minolta AF and Minolta SR. Maybe the Rokkor bellows lens was also produced in Minolta AF mount. As you are making reproduction work I don't think you care about diaphragm automatism, especially if the camera you are using has magnified live-view function for focusing, so you can use any make through any adapter. You don't care about infinity focusing so any "reproduction" lens will be perfect. Again, I suggest looking into the enlarger lens field and their adaptability to this kind of work, for which I suspect they should be quite capable.

    If your numeric camera has magnified live view I would use it for focusing, so that you can focus at the exact work aperture (if you focus at full aperture and then close the diaphragm a small focus shift can be produced, depending on the lens you use).

    Best wishes for the work
    Fabrizio
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  2. #12
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Maybe it's too obvious to tell, but I'd think a B&W film with a polyester base should be the right choice for an archival use.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  3. #13
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,418
    Images
    2
    I have heard the same thing about enlarging lenses making great macro lenses and that could be an option, given my current availability of gear. But how are they for copying a 1.5m painting, for instance? And what f.l.; 50mm, 75, 135?

    Your idea of using b&w film at first seemed impractical, but taking two pictures, one digital & one b&w film, would be an excellent archival asset.
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,042
    Two things.
    1)Remember that flat disc that came with your light meter. you get to use it to check evenness of illumination from corner to corner.
    2)Won't the museum want color for their archives?
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    100
    It was standard practice to shoot on 10x8 trannie using a macbeth colour guide in the first frame.

    As a rule the lights were polarised, you can get hold of the gel here

    http://www.polarization.com/polarshop/

    then cross polarise with a liner polariser on the lens, you can use a circular it makes little difference, use a spirit level and put the lens in the center of the picture using a slightly longer then standard lens, 100mm for Haselblad and a 240 for 5x4 would be a good starting point. To be honest a P65 on a sinar back is the most cost effective way to approach this but the issue of archiving will be a something to resolve. Shooting on black and white might not be the best approach

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,136
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    i have had to do this with blueprints and other things ...
    a flat field ( enlarging ) lens works well for flat-art
    fan your lights 45º and check for even-ness ...
    a friend of mine does this sort of work for a living ..
    he makes it look very easy !

    good luck ( have fun )
    john
    silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
    artwork often times sold for charity
    PM me for details

  7. #17
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by John Koehrer View Post
    2)Won't the museum want color for their archives?
    Yes and no. Prints and statues are normally monochromatic, and B&W is probably the best choice if on film. Documents are also generally photographed in B&W.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  8. #18
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,418
    Images
    2
    I think the B&W could be very useful for things like that... statuary, prints, etc. At any rate, I'd be using both formats.

    Thanks everyone, I've learned a lot of from you all
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

  9. #19
    DanielStone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,962
    Images
    1
    if you're planning on shooting 4x5("5x4" for you euro folk ), then I'd use a 10"(240mm) APO-Ronar, or RED DOT Artar. These were originally designed for flat-field copy work, and are apochromatic(all colors focusing on the same plane), imperative for digital work due to modern "flat" sensor designs, where as film is layered, long story...

    These lenses are easy to come by, and there were even some that were as small as 4-4.5" long(100mm equivalent). Using one of these on a Nikon/Canon bellows(originally designed for macro use) with an adapter board will allow you to use it on your digital camera, if you go that route. They're sharp as all get-out, and also quite inexpensive on the used market. This way you can use the shutter in your camera.

    A friend of a friend does this, with a similar setup as described above, only with a Hasselblad 555ELD, with a Leaf 33mp digital back. He uses strobes(Profoto) instead of a shutter speed(bulb, since its technically a "barrel" lens), and uses multiple "pops" to get the desired light output. Very simple, and very effective.

    He shoots tethered to his laptop, and usually can get a painting(up to 30x40") photographed, and his setup set up, and torn down, in less than 2hrs. He gets $300 for copy work, and can hand off a RAW file to his client(who usually have more than one painting to be copied anyhow) at the end of the job. Very simple setup(polarized strobes in silver-lined softboxes(more specularity vs a white-lined softbox), like the above link.

    Try your setup with shooting a flat couch cushion or something like a blanket(slightly textured) to test your lighting setup before venturing out on this. Better to know something than show up with no knowledge at all. Just sayin...

    best of luck!

    -Dan

    EDIT: remember that BRUSH STROKES add character(and reality) to copy work. They need to be sharp. It helps make a painting seem more "real".

  10. #20
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,418
    Images
    2
    Daniel, thanks much for the advice.

    I'd love to do this on 4x5", but as is the case, I'm just going to be using my D*. Truth be told, they were going to just "take some pictures", probably with a crappy point & shoot (and straight on flash no doubt!). I stepped in and said 'let me do this'.

    Unfortunately I'm not going to have the perfectly ideal gear. I'm going to be using my Panasonic GF1 (micro 4/3) and will have an adapter for my FD lenses. Unfortunately I wasn't able to procure a macro prime in time, so I've got to make do with what I've got. My choices are 28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8, plus a 35mm f/2.5 (FL).

    Any recommendation on which one might have the flattest field and best performance at the distance ranges I' looking at? How about the ideal aperture?

    And good call on trying out my lighting; I better do that tonight, as I'm leaving tomorrow!
    If you are the big tree, we are the small axe

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin