Selective out of focus when enlarging?

StefanDietrich · 2009-07-23T06:12:51+00:00

Hallo miteinander, beim Vergrößern von Negativen lässt sich ja mit Nachbelichten und Abwedeln schon eine ganze Menge erreichen. Was aber, wenn bei dem anson...

StefanDietrich

Hello everyone, When enlarging negatives, you can achieve quite a lot with dodging and burning. But what if, in an otherwise flawless portrait, the aperture could have been opened up by a stop or two more when the photo was taken? Are there any ways to create selective out-of-focus effects (in this specific case, in the background of the image) when making the paper print? I’d be delighted to hear any suggestions or possible approaches! Best regards, Stefan

bernhardmangelsgmxde

I’ve never done it myself, but I’ve heard something about a glass plate and Vaseline. Best regards, Bernhard

StefanCaspari

Hi Stefan! I’ve never tried this either, but I reckon it might work in a similar way to post-exposure through a pinhole mask. You take a large sheet of glass and leave an area free roughly in the middle, in the shape of the part of the image you want to be sharp. Around the edges, you smear the pane (more or less thickly – experiment – start with just a ‘touch’!) with Vaseline. Then you perform the exposure on your paper, gently wiggling the glass plate as you do so. (The parts of the image that are most noticeable come through the uncoated section.) Next, lightly expose the areas that were previously covered by the Vaseline layer using a pinhole mask to make up for the missing light. It’s quite a fiddly process and a lot of trial and error – it’s a bit of a faff for me! Best regards: Stefan

StefanDietrich

Thanks a lot to both of you for your replies! The principle makes sense to me and reminds me of DIY soft-focus filters for cameras (which I haven’t tried yet, though). I’m not quite sure yet whether I’ll give this a go – it sounds a bit of a mess to me, and the thought of Vaseline near negatives or enlargements… it gives me the creeps somehow… ;-) Best wishes & have a relaxing weekend! Stefan

Urnes

Hi Stefan, Alternatively, you can also expose the image through a nylon stocking. You just need to cut a hole in the middle. Something I always find works well is to expose 50% normally and 50% through a piece of white paper. Normally, though, you’d apply this to the whole image. You could also cut a hole in the paper and, to avoid ghosting, perhaps place a piece of glass with a bit of space in between. Regards, Sven.

TR

Theoretically, once you’ve completely dodged everything that’s supposed to be out of focus, couldn’t you also defocus the lens, adjust the head on the column so that the scale is correct again, and then increase the exposure of the area you dodged earlier (by completely dodging the area that was already in focus this time)? However, it would be difficult to get the correct reproduction scale right again. What do you think?

Hoddy

Hello everyone, When enlarging negatives, you can achieve quite a lot with dodging and burning. But what if, in an otherwise flawless portrait, the aperture could have been opened up by a stop or two more when the photo was taken? Are there any ways to create a bit of out-of-focusness in certain areas (in this case, the background of the image) when making the paper print? I’d love to hear your suggestions and ideas! [color="#0000FF"]I use a round embroidery hoop with a piece of nylon stocking (the thinnest kind) stretched over it, with a hole corresponding to the subject as a dodging mask. This also works with colour film without filter correction because the colour of the stocking matches the film mask quite well. Without the hole, it creates a very youthful effect on women with more mature facial features. Use for about a third of the exposure time. No additional exposure required. Regards Waldo (with 10 years’ experience in portrait photography as a semi-professional)