Rolleiflex portraiture

shortstop

shortstop

Well-known
Local time
12:38 AM
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
524
hi, I have a Rolleiflex 3.5 F with Rolleinar 1 and Rolleinar 3. Someone has tried them for the portrait? Planar 75 is a focal too short? the distance to the subject would be too short. Thank you, Antonio
 
Here's a photo shot with a Rolleiflex 3.5f, Rolleinar 3, Kodak Tri-X 120 of noted cinematographer Edward Lachman, 5/26/2013 on the corner of 34th St and 9th Avenue, NYC.
tumblr_mnhb5deAs61r916qao1_500.jpg


And here's a shot of a boy at the Coney Island Mermaid Parade 6/23/2012 shot with Rolleiflex 2.8f and Rolleinar 1.
tumblr_m6ck48eAa11r916qao1_1280.jpg
 
NY_Dan said:
Here's a photo shot with a Rolleiflex 3.5f, Rolleinar 3, Kodak Tri-X 120 of noted cinematographer Edward Lachman, 5/26/2013 on the corner of 34th St and 9th Avenue, NYC. And here's a shot of a boy at the Coney Island Mermaid Parade 6/23/2012 shot with Rolleiflex 2.8f and Rolleinar 1.
Click to expand...
I think I'll go to use my Rolleinars (1and3) for portraiture. These are convincing examples. Rolleiflex never ceases to amaze me.
Best
Antonio
 
Rolleinar 3 is best for macro-type photos... too tight for face shots, unless it's a very specific application, i.e. crop of the eye.

I've used 1 and 2 happily for head shots, but as KoNickon wrote, #1 is what I use the majority of the time. I might use #2 today to photograph my daughter who just lost her first tooth so I'll want to get in pretty close.
 
shortstop said:
I think I'll go to use my Rolleinars (1and3) for portraiture. These are convincing examples. Rolleiflex never ceases to amaze me.
Best
Antonio
Click to expand...

Avedon used Rolleinars - and that's good enough for me :)

I also shoot with the number 2. The challenge with Rolleinars is interacting with your subject in such a way as they become comfortable with having a stranger photograph them from such a close distance. A Rolleinar 1 is level one of trust, going to a 2 is even more, and by the time you get to a 3 you've really achieved something. Imagine meeting someone on the street, gaining their trust, making a photo with a Rolleinar 3, and going on your way all in under 3 minutes. That always blows my mind. But if you're sincere, and if the subject has a good sense of self and appreciates artistic stuff, then it can be done. With a Rolleinar 2 or 3 one often wants to have a prism finder handy because a waist level is much harder to employ unless your subject is sitting. Be sure to mount the Rolleinar viewing lens with red dot at 12 o'clock so the parallax is positioned properly -- very accurate by the way. And Rolleinar viewing lenses are easy to take apart and clean.

Other considerations: I focus on the eye closest to me. I also recommend smaller f/stops like 11 1/2. Rather than only using the focusing know, I also move the camera in and out very slightly to hit focus. The focus even at small f/stops is incredibly shallow.
 
mfogiel -- if you want head and shoulders you need a #1 rolleinar, or if you have a Tele Rolleiflex and a .35 Rolleinar that works too. As for the photo by Bailey -- just my opinion, but it's not my fave at all -- except for the lighting of her face. Now his Peter Sellers photo -- that's extraordinary!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom