Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Back when they advertized on T.V.


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

I dug my Cokin books and brochures out and found color Vaseline kits they also sold for their filter system.  They're still in business, but it seems some of the more, "creative" filters are no longer sold and prices have risen X 10 since I bought them.  I would suggest checking e-bay and buying used if you want to try them. 


  • Ron likes this

#22
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

Thanks, but I rarely use "creative" filters anymore. I can't even remember the last time I used a polarizer. There was a time though ... do you remember Spiraltone? (I think that's how it's spelled?)

 

--Ron



#23
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

I finally got out a couple of the David Hamilton books I have, (haven't looked at them in years) and leafed through them.  He certainly had an affection for soft focus, diffused, pastels, or a foggy type Image.  I then looked through my Cokin catalog and found images very similar using their filters, diffusers #'s 81 83 84, pastels #'s 86 87, possibly dreams #91 along with a warm tone filter.  I'm not saying Hamilton used Cokin filters, but his style should be closely replicated with them.  I got some beautiful  results with them many years ago on the Gettysburg Battlefield about this time of year photographing the flowering trees in blossom on Cemetery Ridge near Little Round Top. 



#24
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Seems Minolta either owned Cokin or was their distributor according to an old brochure.  The address was Cokin Creative Filter System-Minolta corporation-P.O. Box 600-Garden City, N.Y. 11530 

 

Digging out my old Canon F1n kit, I found I have the diffusers, Pastels, Fogs, and warm tones along with a 62mm adapter ring which will work on my old Nikkor 75-300 f4.5-5.6 lens and my Tamron 90mm f2.8 so I may give them a try sometime soon.  I may get to enjoy them as much with my Nikons as I did with my Canon. 


  • Ron likes this

#25
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

Be sure to check those filters for contamination (fungus, etc.) before using them or you may have some unwanted creative effects!

 

--Ron



#26
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

No fungus, but one has a scuff near the bottom.  Probably won't be noticeable on a 62mm dia. lens, but on a 77mm it might show.  

 

Another dumb idea I might try, (chime in if you've tried this) a thin piece of cheese cloth over the lens held tight in place with a rubber band.  With digital, it's not like I'm burning up film to try it.  Also thought of a single layer of an old nylon stocking as a diffuser.  I may give either a try and report back. 



#27
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,587 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

Black stretchy fabric like a stocking usually works best for that dreamy quality. I used two step-up rings with the fabric locked in the threads between them to experiment. A rubber band probably won't keep the fabric taut. A cable tie might work. You might like the diffusing vignette effect of a hole in the centre of the fabric.

 

All of these can be done in post, but getting it at capture time can be satisfying.



#28
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Thanks, Peter, I can do the step up rings as I seem to have a few with no particular other purpose right now. 



#29
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

I've done exactly the same thing that Peter described, in mostly the same way. Worked beautifully. I didn't have the right step up rings so I used two same size filter rings instead. The vignetting I got from this combination was considerable but not too objectionable on short to medium telephoto lenses. The way this combination scattered light, especially around light sources was amazing.

 

--Ron



#30
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

I'll ad an old stocking to my list of things to try and get a 77mm step up ring.



#31
Crotlaus

Crotlaus

    Junior Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Country Flag

My favorite camera was an Olympus OM-4 Ti. How many of you old timers have ever seen a large photo print taken with Kodachrome 64 or 25 and printed directly on Cibachrome?  There was a photo gallery in Sedona Arizona where all the prints that were on sale were printed on Cibachrome. The owner told me that all were taken by a 4 X 5 format. They were out of my price range.



#32
Merco_61

Merco_61

    Nikonian

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,587 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationUppsala, Sweden

Site Supporter

My favorite camera was an Olympus OM-4 Ti. How many of you old timers have ever seen a large photo print taken with Kodachrome 64 or 25 and printed directly on Cibachrome?  There was a photo gallery in Sedona Arizona where all the prints that were on sale were printed on Cibachrome. The owner told me that all were taken by a 4 X 5 format. They were out of my price range.

I have not only seen, but printed lots on P30, both Cibachrome and later Ilfochrome. We mostly used Agfachrome CT 18, though. A 6x7 cm CT 18 slide printed on 60X75 cm P30 stock will always wow the viewer. Mother still has one of my P30 30X45 prints from a 135 slide on her wall. It has been there for nearly 25 years now and the colours are as crisp as when I got it out of the print washer.



#33
daveFM2

daveFM2

    Active Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Country Flag

I'm sitting trying to remember if I ever saw any camera commercials on T.V. The answer is no, of course I'm only 78 so I may be too young. One of the earliest non-camera commercials I remember from the very early 50's or sooner was the dancing legs in a Phillip Morris cigarette ad. The dancer was concealed in a replica of a pack of Phillip Morris. All you could see were some fabulous legs.



#34
krag96

krag96

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Dave, it was the 70's-80's when they were probably at their peak.  Everybody was pushing the new technology, Canon with their new AE-1 Program, (later the new ''Rebel'' cameras).  Olympus had a super model, maybe Cheryl Teigs turning the camera on the photographer showing how easy the new cameras were to use, and all the Minolta commercials ended with, ''Only from the mind of Minolta...''  Nikon I believe used a line from the Simon and Garfunkle song, ''Kodachrome''  ''I got a Nikon camera-I love to take a pho-to-graph...'' Pentax had some, but I don't remember them right now. 

 

All I had at the time was a little 110 camera of some sort, the wife saw the Canon ad for the AE-1 Program and wanted one.  We went to Letts Camera Shop in Lemoyne, PA and bought the kit, camera, flash, and two lenses on sale, all for under $300.00.  I liked it, but wanted something more solid so I bought a Canon F1n, (nobody ever advertised the top of the line cameras that I know of though).



#35
daveFM2

daveFM2

    Active Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Country Flag

Dave, it was the 70's-80's when they were probably at their peak. Everybody was pushing the new technology, Canon with their new AE-1 Program, (later the new ''Rebel'' cameras). Olympus had a super model, maybe Cheryl Teigs turning the camera on the photographer showing how easy the new cameras were to use, and all the Minolta commercials ended with, ''Only from the mind of Minolta...'' Nikon I believe used a line from the Simon and Garfunkle song, ''Kodachrome'' ''I got a Nikon camera-I love to take a pho-to-graph...'' Pentax had some, but I don't remember them right now.

All I had at the time was a little 110 camera of some sort, the wife saw the Canon ad for the AE-1 Program and wanted one. We went to Letts Camera Shop in Lemoyne, PA and bought the kit, camera, flash, and two lenses on sale, all for under $300.00. I liked it, but wanted something more solid so I bought a Canon F1n, (nobody ever advertised the top of the line cameras that I know of though).

I just don’t remember seeing any,and if I did they failed to make an impression. During the 70’s and 80’s I was already taking photos. I began taking photos while in Vietnam, not a combat photographer, just a G.I. with an Olympus Pen EE half frame. In the mid 70’s at work I began using a Canon AE-1. I had never heard of it. My knowledge of cameras came from photo magazines.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

#36
Jim_TX

Jim_TX

    Active Member

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGalveston, TX

Site Supporter

I came into the game after Dave FM2.  Got into two years of Occupational Photography in H.S in 1974.  Third year as Teacher's Assistant in 1976.  USAF directly thereafter.

 

Kodak Retina IIc was my first 35mm.  And I learned a LOT with and from the thing.  Still love it, too.  Mechanical Jewelry it was, and is.  Then, Pentax Spotmatic II, with Super Taukimar 50mm f/1.4.  Then, sell all the camera gear prior to going Active Duty, as every penny needed to support my dying Mom.

 

Always lusted for Nikon, never bought till first FM, after USAF service.  Eventually ended up with HUGE inventory of Nikon, based on F2a and FE systems.

 

Magazine ads were Nikon's turf.  They showed full F2 Moon Systems, with 250 exposure backs, and you KNEW that was the S*IT you gotta HAVE!

 

TV documentaries showed combat photogs wielding Nikon rigs, and nothing else.  Whatcha gonna DO?


  • Ron likes this

#37
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

Oh yeah.... those 250 round exposure magazines! I think all of the major camera companies doing business in the late sixties through the rest of the film age had their own version. And, they all looked exactly like something that you could only wield in low or nonexistent gravity. I don't think I've ever seen one in use though, although I have read National Geographic articles that mentioned how a story was shot on a camera equipped with one. 

 

My better half owns a couple of Pentax Spotmatics, along with a number of other Pentax models. As far as she's concerned, other cameras don't (or shouldn't) exist.

 

There certainly was a time when Nikon dominated photography ... both journalistic and artistic, but I think somehow the company lost it's way and squandered away much of their dominance. Of course, we (meaning the photography community as a whole) can debate this theory ad nauseam, but whatever the reason, other brands have been eating their lunch for at least the past decade or so. 

 

--Ron



#38
Jim_TX

Jim_TX

    Active Member

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationGalveston, TX

Site Supporter

Nikon lost their edge to Canon, purely because Nikon really wasn't positioned to "Go Pro" in the digital world.  Canon's neck-deep plunge into broadcast grade TV cams gave them a Digital Education second to none, while Nikon was still wallowing more or less aimlessly to nail down their Digital Concepts.

 

Any of the broadcast-grade hardware manufacturers had the advantage going into the digital age.  Fujinon broadcast lenses were the standard glass for NFL games for a solid decade, SONY's digital evolution from analog tapes, the same.  

 

Nikon also got lost in the Sporting Optics world, binocs, riflescopes and such.  (they made some VERY good riflescopes, but never built up to the standard of a Nightforce or Leupold MkIV or Mk5.)

 

Had Nikon maintained a market presence of Serious Gear for Serious Photogs, eschewed the bottom-grade consumer stuff, and put their considerable talent into R&D-ing for that Pro Market, I think they'd have remained at the top.  Even Nikkormat was considered SERIOUS GEAR, in it's day.

I'd love to see a Nikon renaissance and revival!


  • Ron likes this

#39
McCoy

McCoy

    New Member

  • Forum Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationWest Virginia

Speaking of camera phones - They have changed the world of photography. I have spent my entire life standing behind one camera or another and I remember working hard and moving up a grade in camera gear (mostly nikons) and working to improve my craft. Today you pull a phone out and BANG you just took a picture, ran it through some filters, and you're done. If you use a slr or dslr everyione looks at you like you're a relic at the museum. It's a shame but what was once an honored craft has been replaced by a telephone. Don't get me started on AI. Oh Lord, I'm I getting old?



#40
lightcapture

lightcapture

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNC

Nikon lost their edge to Canon, purely because Nikon really wasn't positioned to "Go Pro" in the digital world.  Canon's neck-deep plunge into broadcast grade TV cams gave them a Digital Education second to none, while Nikon was still wallowing more or less aimlessly to nail down their Digital Concepts.

 

Any of the broadcast-grade hardware manufacturers had the advantage going into the digital age.  Fujinon broadcast lenses were the standard glass for NFL games for a solid decade, SONY's digital evolution from analog tapes, the same.  

 

Nikon also got lost in the Sporting Optics world, binocs, riflescopes and such.  (they made some VERY good riflescopes, but never built up to the standard of a Nightforce or Leupold MkIV or Mk5.)

 

Had Nikon maintained a market presence of Serious Gear for Serious Photogs, eschewed the bottom-grade consumer stuff, and put their considerable talent into R&D-ing for that Pro Market, I think they'd have remained at the top.  Even Nikkormat was considered SERIOUS GEAR, in it's day.

I'd love to see a Nikon renaissance and revival!

I don't totally agree with everything you've said. Nikon like all optical manufacturers has to diversify to stay alive. For example Olympus is heavily invested in medical imaging.

I have their binos and they're great. My eyeglass lenses are by Nikon. Chose them because their progressive lenses have a wider field of view than others. Plus the have active transition glass is a step up and will work in a car.