Jeff -
Other options:
* White pantyhose over lens
* Vaseline over a cheap filter
* Photoshop softening filter
* More expensive softening filter
* Porters has a neat softening gadget (Cokin P system compatible) that uses
some sort of difraction grating, very neat.
* Canon does have a soft focus macro lens, check BH Photo video
The one Rebel (or was it an Elan) that had the softening function worked
like this. It was a barcode program. Basically the camera reprogrammed
itself to take two multiple exposures: one at "straight" focus and one with
the focus slightly diffused. Merged, the portrait would have a nice "soft"
effect. Minolta also had this.
The problem was that the subject had to stay absolutely still for the ~1
second that the camera took to take the two photos. And of course you had
to use a tripod. And of course you had to have the barcode program book,
the barcode reader, and the proper camera. Which is why this turned into a
one-hit wonder and Canon (and Minolta) never came out with this feature
again.
Karen
ps. The Photoshop option seems the best to me. You can control the level
and area of the softening effect quite nicely.
At 1:44 PM -0800 3/23/01, Jeffrey Higa wrote:
>Hi,
>I currently own a Rebel G and am starting to take a lot of protrait
>shots of people using either my 100mm EF (old style) Macro or my 28-135
>IS. I always mount the camera to an old Vivitar bracket and use
>available light with a 380 EX flash + Sto-Fen Onmi bounce for fill.
>
>I've been trying a variety of soft-focus filters and have been
>dissatisfied with the results (I'm also tired of buying those filters).
>I remember reading on the list that there is a Rebel body (the II?) that
>has a soft focus option, and I am also looking at the 135 f2.8
>soft-focus lens. Anybody have any direct comparison experience between
>to the two and prefer one over the other?
>
>I'll probably upgrade bodies within the next 3 months or so (the dot com
>I work for is still alive so I figure I better buy when I still have a
>salary), so the lens might be a better option, but I'm open to getting
>another body to use for portraits if the II(?) is worth it.
>
>Thanks for your input,
>Jeff
>
>***********************************************************
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
