I would second that advice. The formulas give you supposedly the most "sharp" picture for the given focal length and pinhole size... but, is that really what you want from a pinhole image- the most sharp picture you can get? You can be *way* off, and still get great pictures.
On Sun, 2002-03-10 at 07:12, Bill Erickson wrote: > There are at least two different formulas for the pinhole to film plane > distance question. There are lots of different tables already calculated > that have been referred to before. See Eric Renner's book for a long > detailed description. Also, since you can be off from the "right" distance > by a factor of 10 and still get usable images, just try something and see > what you get. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "cfowler" <cfowl...@tampabay.rr.com> > To: <pinhole-discussion@p at ???????> > Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 7:49 AM > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Zero 6x9 pinhole > > > > Hi all, > > > > How about different subject than photoflo ! > > > > I am getting ready to order the zero 6x9 multiformat pinhole > > camera, has anybody used this camera's ? is it worth 200 Bucks ? > > I have mostly used large format camera's, I have a big 5x7 view > > camera, I dont think it be hard to convert to pinhole but how do > > select the distance of the bellows ( pinhole to film plane ) ? > > is there certain rule ? > > > > C.H. Fowler > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??????? > > unsubscribe or change your account at > > http://www.???????/discussion/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list > Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??????? > unsubscribe or change your account at > http://www.???????/discussion/
