Iconic james dean photo by Dennis Stock. Which lens he used?

[Erik van Straten]

The picture doesn't look like a print of the whole negative. It looks like a Rolleiflex picture, 6X6cm. The photographer held the camera up to his stomach. So the lens was a 75mm or a 80mm. It is, of course, an enlargement of a part of the negative.

Erik.

 

[p.giannakis]

On the link LargeDrink posted, we can see some contact sheets.

Edit: The difference between No18 and No19 is interesting. Looks like he is walking backwards (or maybe multiple takes to get the picture right?)

 

[Erik van Straten]

Strange negatives, Pan. The space between the pictures is way too big. It seems like a mystification.


Erik.

 

[CameraQuest]

Strange negatives, Pan. The space between the pictures is way too big. It seems like a mystification.


Erik.

yep, the spacing between frames is strange.

wonder if it was 35mm shot in a Rollei TLR or some other 6x6 camera

 

[Erik van Straten]

Yes, I agree with the head bartender here. I've never worked with a 35mm adapter in a Rollei, but they do exist!


Erik.

 

[rfaspen]

yep, the spacing between frames is strange.

wonder if it was 35mm shot in a Rollei TLR or some other 6x6 camera

Now you guys have done it..... I'm compelled to go dig up some negatives made by my M3 and a 50 cron.

The spacing looks believable. But I'm no expert 😉

 

[Agiknee]

50 cron. The amount of darkroom magic that went into that final print is phenomenal. I came across the dodge and burn notes of the flat print and it’s miles away from the contact sheet

 

[jiri_cisler]

darkroom work

darkroom work

https://petapixel.com/2013/09/12/marked-photographs-show-iconic-prints-edited-darkroom/

 

[leicapixie]

I always thought a Rolleiflex TLR.
maybe a 50mm Collapsible Summicron on M3..
But the low angle? Rollei.
I love the "straight" darkroom print!
Yes! BW shooters never had "photoshop"..

 

[leicapixie]

I used 50mm as a wide angle. as a portrait lens, depend on angles and distance..

 

[Larry H-L]

There is a lot of street visible in the foreground, too much of a steep angle seeing down for a 50mm in my experience. Also there is some outward leaning of the top of the buildings. And as many have pointed out, significant DOF on a rainy overcast day. I think it was shot with a 35mm. As for the low point of view, he simply knelt down to keep Dean’s head off the horizon line.

 

[retinax]

There is a lot of street visible in the foreground, too much of a steep angle seeing down for a 50mm in my experience. Also there is some outward leaning of the top of the buildings. And as many have pointed out, significant DOF on a rainy overcast day. I think it was shot with a 35mm. As for the low point of view, he simply knelt down to keep Dean’s head off the horizon line.

Exactly. Also certainly not 35mm in Rolleiflex, that would be a 75 to 80mm lens!

 

[Malcolm M]

This was 1955, before Leica launched the 21mm Super Angulon. The 28mm of the time was the very slow f6.3 Hektor. So, unless Stock used non-Leica lenses, I'd say nothing wider than 35mm.

 

[raydm6]

Although I guessed a Leica M and 50 Collapsible Summicron, do we know he used a Leica? I was just assuming being Magnum and all.

I can't find anything about camera/glass usage but his body of work doesn't appear to suggest a lot of wide-angle shots.

Is it possible he used something other than 35mm format or otherwise another camera with a WLF?

Take a look at this other image of 1955 - James Dean in NY. Perhaps a wider angle lens used? There's a little distortion on the edges (No Parking sign) and convergence on the left - but nothing too exaggerated. Also notice - again - the low angle of the camera (perhaps a compositional decision so as to bring more of the NYC environment into the shot rather than shooting subject straight on):

Dennis Stock | James Dean James Dean in midtown. New York City, USA. 1955. © Dennis Stock | Magnum Photos

 

[mapgraphs]

This article shows the other shots in the sequence:
https://www.vintag.es/2018/04/james-dean-times-square-1955.html?m=1

From the framing and subject distance (see last shot in sequence) a 50 is most likely. The undistorted bars in the fence is one clue.

Dean is slightly out of focus (cf the fence and rain drops). The horizon line is along the bar of the fence indicating the photographer is crouching, camera pointing slightly up in the last frame. It's as if the shot was set up for Dean to walk into focus, f/2.8 ...