The Photography of John Brackenbury

[Harold Gough]

I did a search and found nothing in the forums. It is surprising if no previous mention has been made of such impressive work:

http://db2.photoresearchers.com/feature/infocus280?infocus=280&pf=1

Look at some of the images with enormous depth of field, from macro to infinity, a technique he has pioneered. See his book:

http://www.rotovision.com/description.asp?isbn=2-88046-782-9

Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.

My manual flash setup for high magnification:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843

[rjlittlefield]

Great reference -- I'll have to get a copy.

[Harold Gough]

[rjlittlefield]

OK, thanks.

Despite the unusual combination of lenses, that setup will still be subject to the usual tradeoff between magnification, DOF, and resolution.

The print can look sharp everywhere, while the unusual perspective makes the image memorable, but in the end that enormous depth of field comes at the cost of limited ability to resolve detail on the subject.

We can get into the physics later if you're interested. There's a lot of discussion already posted in the forum archives, but I have to run now and don't have time to make a list of the references.

--Rik

[Harold Gough]

If you look at his images, there is a softness about them, showing that compromise. They are , nonetheless, amazing. I hope to emulate them.
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.

My manual flash setup for high magnification:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843

[Mike B in OKlahoma]

I've seen the book, and the pictures are indeed amazing, but it doesn't have much in the way of technical details. Awe-inspiring photos, but not enough information to persuade me to shell out my hard-earned shekels for it.
_________________
Mike Broderick
Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Constructive critiques of my pictures, and reposts in this forum for purposes of critique are welcome

"I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul....My mandate includes weird bugs."
--Calvin

[Harold Gough]

This website seems to have some leads:

http://www.naturfotograf.com:80/index2.html

via the link: http://www.naturfotograf.com/roll_your_own_lens.html

Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.

My manual flash setup for high magnification:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843

[Harold Gough]

I have just recalled an image I saw, several years ago, in a magazine.

It showed a caterpillar having, apparently, taken a bite out of an apple, the apple on a reduced scale, relatively, so that the caterpillar was of about human size in relation to it.

This is how it was done. The apple, with its own lighting, was imaged by a lens (say, a 90mm) mounted, horizontally, on a tripod (no camera). The caterpillar was placed in the focal plane of the image from the 90mm lens, i.e. behind it. It had its own lighting and its image was captured by a macro lens attached to a camera and focused on the caterpillar and, unavoidably, also the focal plane of the 90mm lens, where its image of the apple was formed.

The alignment was such that the two images entered the camera together, at the same time. That is, the macro lens, in effect looked through the 90mm lens from behind it. Obviously, the apertures and lighting for the two components of the image were such as to give the correct exposure for the shutter speed.

Harold
_________________
Happiness is having the right adapter.

My manual flash setup for high magnification:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=117843#117843

[DaveW]

Didn't Oxford Scientific Films do a similar thing in the 1970's with their "Ariel Image Bench" in order to put an in focus background behind their macro shots of insects etc?

DaveW

[Harold Gough]

[ChrisR]

I do recall that!
I remember being quite miffed because I'd "discovered" a technique then they went and spoiled it by showing marvellous examples.
I'd been using a slide projector, and two slide projectors, and a sheet fresnel lens, to play with darkfield pictures of sundews and venus flytraps with bugs silhouetted inside.
Then with a slide in the projector and the darkfield "stop" (black paper) replaced with something I could focus on, the background became interesting, then with the projector moved in, and focussed differently , more interesting again, and so on.
Somewhere I still have the zoom with gaffer tape glue on it, from where it had been fixed to a projector.

An intermediate stage, backlit subject, oof image background. Then move it round, closer, sharper, remove paper, etc.
WHite line is tracing paper, colors are some picture as projected from a slide.

[DaveW]

I believe the motion picture industry has used aerial image technology for many years:-

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lvUJyB5R660C&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=Aerial+image+Bench&source=bl&ots=lgtKq3IU67&sig=EQu2-3Mkxf0x6pP1XU2FWbJmgn4&hl=en&ei=mY_lStviLs714AbM2a2LDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Aerial%20image%20Bench&f=false

This is a picture of Oxford Scientific's aerial image bench circa 1981. It could use both movie and stills cameras.



Oxford used to make most of their own equipment as at that time they could not buy it since most was experimental and said they had more money invested in engineering machinery than photographic kit.

DaveW

[ChrisR]

I think the Victorians got there a long time ago, for stage illusionists. Clever lot, they were.

[PaulFurman]

[DaveW]

I think that is what Oxford Scientific did years ago with the Optical Image Bench shown Paul. They even used it to put a human in the background further away to reduce their size, with then a close up of what looked like a monster bug approaching them for these films where giant insects take over the world.

DaveW