Men Only 80-90's

slimOl55 · May 1st, 2019, 06:38 PM

Any photographers or technical people know the camera system that Joanie Allum used on so many well known models - did she shoot Hasselblad, Nikon?

Any details (cameras, lenses, lighting) would be good to know

thanks in advance

slimOl55

**frankoboff** · May 9th, 2019, 12:04 PM

As the photos were shot in a studio for magazine repro they'd be shot on tungsten balance low ISO 35mm colour positive (slide) film.

Speculating that medium format would have been too cumbersome to deliver the 40 or so pictures to a picture editor to put a magazine set together. Medium format cameras have a shallow depth of field per focal length compared to 35mm- not ideal for those legs akimbo shots where the genitals and face both need to be in focus..... Low iso 35mm would have provided high enough resolution plus you've got 36 exposures per roll so not constantly changing the film.

Pretty sure Nikon were the go to 35mm camera of the day for pros. Massive library of lenses and viewfinders for sale or hire- worked with all camera bodies, unlike Canon with FD/EOS mount incompatability.

Looking at modern digital scans of Allum's shots they look overexposed. I believe this is caused by modern flatbed scanners not having the dynamic range for colour transparencies so the highlights are too bright and the shadows too dark. The slide themselves would have been underexposed slightly to give some colour adjustment latitude during repro.

Also- Have a look at the Electric Blue Model Files videos. This will give you some clues as to contemporary kit used.

Worth pointing out that most of a photographer's style comes from lighting arrangment and makeup artist used rather than camera brand.

slimOl55 · May 9th, 2019, 07:10 PM

Excellent responce frankboff, that gives me a lot to think about - love the technical stuff, and points of view. I agree the lighting and set-up would make the shot individual and not avarage. Any other thoughts would be most welcome.

slim

**seany65** · May 9th, 2019, 07:56 PM

On the other hand, medium format slides would be easier to see properly, and 220 backs on MF cameras would give 30 shots if the camera was 6x4.5, and it's far easier to swap backs than unload a film and put a new one into a 35mm camera.

Though what frankoboff says about depth of field for 35mm cameras is true.

**frankoboff** · May 10th, 2019, 11:23 AM

Medium format, even with pre-loaded camera backs would have been a pain to use. Better suited to more static poses and set pieces like Playboy or Page 3

Picture editors generally had a lupe around their neck so transparency size wasn't an issue.

slimOl55 · May 26th, 2019, 04:54 PM

During the 90's I had a photographer shoot for me with Nikon, and the result was OK. Then I re-ashot with Hasselblad and the result was spectacular. I agree the lighting and makeup does play a part, but now its easier to see how much the quality of glass makes a big difference. The Allum shots do have a style and brilliant density to the colour, and I wondered if anybody would hazard a guess to the process.

**frankoboff** · May 26th, 2019, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slimOl55

During the 90's I had a photographer shoot for me with Nikon, and the result was OK. Then I re-ashot with Hasselblad and the result was spectacular. I agree the lighting and makeup does play a part, but now its easier to see how much the quality of glass makes a big difference. The Allum shots do have a style and brilliant density to the colour, and I wondered if anybody would hazard a guess to the process.

If you look at some of the uncorrected/marginally corrected transparencies scanned from that era you'll see that most of the work was done at the DTP/repro stage. Glamour magazines over staturated the pictures massively to make them more lurid.

**seany65** · May 26th, 2019, 05:13 PM

A medium format camera, say a Bronica ETRSi, with 220 back, "L-Grip" and a metering prism which can do "Flash Metering", would've been almost as convenient as a 35mm slr in general use and more convenient for flash as all of the lenses have "leaf shutters" which can sync with flash upto 1/500 of a second.

On the other hand, for some special effects some 35mm slrs can sync the flash with different curtains of their film plane shutters giving more control over where any 'streaks' of movement appear in a photo.

maico · November 6th, 2020, 10:33 AM

When I started out freelance assisting in the 1980s Mamaya 6x7 with leaf shutter lenses, rotating backs filled with reversal stock was the norm on most shoots.
If you were shooting for stock medium format was the minimum requirement for picture libraries. Sleeves of larger transparencies were much easier to impress a picture editor with spread on the lightbox.

slimOl55 · November 6th, 2020, 02:02 PM

You can always spot Joanie Allum prints by the look - I mean its either the lighting style or the choice of lens and film. Any thoughts?

May 1st, 2019, 06:38 PM	#1
slimOl55 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 845 Thanks: 24,272 Thanked 4,956 Times in 774 Posts	Men Only 80-90's Any photographers or technical people know the camera system that Joanie Allum used on so many well known models - did she shoot Hasselblad, Nikon? Any details (cameras, lenses, lighting) would be good to know thanks in advance slimOl55

May 9th, 2019, 12:04 PM	#2
frankoboff Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 903 Thanks: 2,104 Thanked 25,364 Times in 884 Posts	As the photos were shot in a studio for magazine repro they'd be shot on tungsten balance low ISO 35mm colour positive (slide) film. Speculating that medium format would have been too cumbersome to deliver the 40 or so pictures to a picture editor to put a magazine set together. Medium format cameras have a shallow depth of field per focal length compared to 35mm- not ideal for those legs akimbo shots where the genitals and face both need to be in focus..... Low iso 35mm would have provided high enough resolution plus you've got 36 exposures per roll so not constantly changing the film. Pretty sure Nikon were the go to 35mm camera of the day for pros. Massive library of lenses and viewfinders for sale or hire- worked with all camera bodies, unlike Canon with FD/EOS mount incompatability. Looking at modern digital scans of Allum's shots they look overexposed. I believe this is caused by modern flatbed scanners not having the dynamic range for colour transparencies so the highlights are too bright and the shadows too dark. The slide themselves would have been underexposed slightly to give some colour adjustment latitude during repro. Also- Have a look at the Electric Blue Model Files videos. This will give you some clues as to contemporary kit used. Worth pointing out that most of a photographer's style comes from lighting arrangment and makeup artist used rather than camera brand. Last edited by frankoboff; May 9th, 2019 at 12:18 PM..

May 9th, 2019, 07:56 PM	#4
seany65 Vintage Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 3,651 Thanks: 80,415 Thanked 32,734 Times in 3,527 Posts	On the other hand, medium format slides would be easier to see properly, and 220 backs on MF cameras would give 30 shots if the camera was 6x4.5, and it's far easier to swap backs than unload a film and put a new one into a 35mm camera. Though what frankoboff says about depth of field for 35mm cameras is true. __________________ <-- That's Emer Kenny and I want to be stuck in her front bottom. Quote from electrofreak : I'd rather have questions that can't be answered, than answers that can't be questioned.

May 26th, 2019, 05:13 PM	#8
seany65 Vintage Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 3,651 Thanks: 80,415 Thanked 32,734 Times in 3,527 Posts	A medium format camera, say a Bronica ETRSi, with 220 back, "L-Grip" and a metering prism which can do "Flash Metering", would've been almost as convenient as a 35mm slr in general use and more convenient for flash as all of the lenses have "leaf shutters" which can sync with flash upto 1/500 of a second. On the other hand, for some special effects some 35mm slrs can sync the flash with different curtains of their film plane shutters giving more control over where any 'streaks' of movement appear in a photo. __________________ <-- That's Emer Kenny and I want to be stuck in her front bottom. Quote from electrofreak : I'd rather have questions that can't be answered, than answers that can't be questioned. Last edited by seany65; May 26th, 2019 at 09:44 PM..

May 9th, 2019, 07:10 PM	#3
slimOl55 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 845 Thanks: 24,272 Thanked 4,956 Times in 774 Posts	Excellent responce frankboff, that gives me a lot to think about - love the technical stuff, and points of view. I agree the lighting and set-up would make the shot individual and not avarage. Any other thoughts would be most welcome. slim

May 10th, 2019, 11:23 AM	#5
frankoboff Vintage Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 903 Thanks: 2,104 Thanked 25,364 Times in 884 Posts	Medium format, even with pre-loaded camera backs would have been a pain to use. Better suited to more static poses and set pieces like Playboy or Page 3 Picture editors generally had a lupe around their neck so transparency size wasn't an issue.

May 26th, 2019, 04:54 PM	#6
slimOl55 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 845 Thanks: 24,272 Thanked 4,956 Times in 774 Posts	During the 90's I had a photographer shoot for me with Nikon, and the result was OK. Then I re-ashot with Hasselblad and the result was spectacular. I agree the lighting and makeup does play a part, but now its easier to see how much the quality of glass makes a big difference. The Allum shots do have a style and brilliant density to the colour, and I wondered if anybody would hazard a guess to the process.

November 6th, 2020, 10:33 AM	#9
maico Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 19 Thanks: 21 Thanked 624 Times in 18 Posts	When I started out freelance assisting in the 1980s Mamaya 6x7 with leaf shutter lenses, rotating backs filled with reversal stock was the norm on most shoots. If you were shooting for stock medium format was the minimum requirement for picture libraries. Sleeves of larger transparencies were much easier to impress a picture editor with spread on the lightbox.

November 6th, 2020, 02:02 PM	#10
slimOl55 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 845 Thanks: 24,272 Thanked 4,956 Times in 774 Posts	You can always spot Joanie Allum prints by the look - I mean its either the lighting style or the choice of lens and film. Any thoughts?