[pinhole-discussion] Two Zone Plate Photos
A couple of new zone plate scans, one of St. Francis, and one of a nude. I don't know if St. Francis would approve of the nude, but anyway... (if these URLs get chopped into two lines, you may have to piece them back together in your browser...) http://hiddenworld.net/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=Francis_in_the_garden.jpg http://hiddenworld.net/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=nude.jpg
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pintoids
Could you try soldering nuts onto the tins - you would have to sand off the finish etc. On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Marcy Merrill wrote: John; I've been having this problem also. I tried gluing a tripod nut to the Altoid tins, but it simply broke off the first time I attempted to use it. I've been using broccoli rubber bands. This is kind of a hassle. I've also got to figure out a better shutter than black tape, which tends to cause the Pintoid to move during the process of peeling. Someone suggested those flexible magnet strips. Tried them. They want to stick to everything but the camera and, if I attach them to the camera with tape, I end up with the same problem as if I'd simply used tape. Anyway, I'll figure out some sort of sliding shutter, or something. Meanwhile, I'm having a great time with the stereo Pintoid and will post images, maybe tomorrow. -MM http://www.merrillphoto.com/pintoids.htm Marcy Merrill Photographer www.merrillphoto.com ___ Pinhole-Discussion mailing list Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? unsubscribe or change your account at http://www.???/discussion/ - Gordon J. Holtslander Dept. of Biology hol...@duke.usask.ca112 Science Place http://duke.usask.ca/~holtsgUniversity of Saskatchewan Tel (306) 966-4433 Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Fax (306) 966-4461 Canada S7N 5E2 -
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Food for thought
I think that idea of technological depth has some effect on a print's uniqueness, and more to the point, it directly relates to the issue I have been calling authenticity. The deeper the technology the less the authenticity. The following view may not be politically correct, on a pinhole photography discussion group, but here goes... I guess this guy would have to argue that music produced on vinyl is some how more authentic than music produced on compact discs, if indeed The deeper the technology, the less the authenticity Technology advances and changes, but that fact doesn't diminish the integrity of the art which it facilitates, at least in my mind. The author appears to forget that the processes that he embraces as more authentic were technologically cutting edge at one time, and were undoubtedly denigrated as not being as authentic, at that time, as the technology which preceeded it. I usually find that people who argue in this way are usually those who have become entrenched in a particular manner of doing things, despite advances in technology. As time progresses, and easier and better ways are found to accomplish tasks, they become frustrated as they see relative amateurs able to effortlessly produce the same photographic effects that they continue to labor for hours and hours to produce. It is no wonder that they become resentful and denigrate other processes as less authentic. In 200 years, folks will think it is hilarious that anyone ever argued that a darkroom with an enlarger was any more authentic than a darkroom with a scanner and ink printer! I love pinhole photography, and the unique images that can be created, but I do not feel married to the low technology way of doing everything in photography, nor do I feel my art is any more authentic if all my output is the result of 50 year old methods of producing images. I like to mix in high tech componants that work for me- a pentax digital spot meter, a palm pilot to assist me with difficult exposure problems, a microtek scanner to scan negatives and digitally adjust output. And, if I choose to make my final prints with an inkjet, then anyone would be hard pressed to make me feel guilty!
[pinhole-discussion] Re:Hello
Johanna The pin hole size should be 0.012 in. not 0.012mm Sorry for the mistake in my last post. Dave O GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
[pinhole-discussion] Re: Hello
Johanna I have a XG-7 that I made a pinhole body cap for and it works just fine. I drilled a 1/2 in. (13mm) hole in the center and used silicone adhesive to glue the pinhole on the inside .The silicone adhesive holds great and can be removed with little trouble. Soda can aluminum ( pop can here in the midwest ) is fine. Just paint the back of the pinhole flat black and don't forget to check the pinhole is not covered . With a .012 pinhole the focal length would be about 45mm with a f stop of 145. Exposure times? Call it f180 meter for f16 and add 7 stops. I can't give times to much depends on type of film.You might want to epoxy a step ring on so you could use filters. I hope this helps. Dave O GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
[pinhole-discussion] Food for thought
I have nothing against ink jet printed images, matter of fact, I am saving some pennies to adquire some stuff that'd allow me to do DRY darkroom from scanning to printing.I read the following message in the alt.photo.process list and think it is good food for thoughts, whatever your possition on this topic is. Guillemo HERE IS THE MESSAGE IN QUESTION: ** I give lectures, talks and demos frequently on alt-photo. Lately the question that comes up is Why do you go to all of that trouble when you can do the same thing on an ink-jet printer? Aside from the issue of permanence, I think there is a deeper issue here. Excuse me if this starts to sounding like post-modern woo woo. Well actually it won't be too PM, but I guarantee some woo woo for you. I have tinkered with some of these ideas here before but let me try again. I've recently started a couple of my talks by explaining that I had knowledge of an unpublished report that someone had recently found some photographic prints made by Leonardo Da Vinci. They were found by accident in a leather folder in the Vatican Library. Those in the audience who were not photographically hip just nodded. (Ok, so what?) The hipper folks looked totally startled. (REALLY???) Had I said that they were ink jet prints, the ruse would never had worked. The idea of Leonardo's photographic prints came off immediately as real, or at least plausible. Why? Well it is both obvious and not so obvious. For instance, there are any number of folks here on the list who if they did a little boning up before hand, could jump into their local time machine and visit Leonardo. They could set him up and train him for making photographic prints within a few months. Camera making was within the skills of any good woodworker. A lens within the skills of a spectacle maker. Glass plates no problem. Collodion, silver nitrate, and other stuff for making and developing negatives were in the realm of the local alchemist/pharmacist. Likewise for the materials for making and toning salt prints. Thus there is nothing implausible about Leonardo making photographs, the only question was, was there enough genius in that one man to put it all together. If you know anything about Leonardo you would likely say yes, or at the least:possibly. The issue here is one of technological depth. I would even venture to say that if one had a bit more knowledge, this could have pulled this off in Dynastic Egypt! The technology is shallow enough for that to have happened, only the cultural mind set was missing to explore and support the making of permanent photographic images. The second issue is one of authenticity. Here's my take on this: I have a acquaintance named Ellen Kahn who is a printer, paper maker, and platinum printer. She has a firm called Fakesimile. Yes, fake. She makes duplicates of historic documents for display, etc. some are of children's drawings from Auschwitz, some are of Jefferson's writings at Monticello, etc. She makes duplicate paper and makes platinum copies. They look real as hell. But they are not real. I would get goose bumps holding a piece of paper that Jefferson had written on, but these did not have the same magic. They are not authentic. Ellen's copies are not photographs in the sense that we normally think of photographs .There are really platinum printed photo copies. Real photographs have 3 levels of authenticity., maybe more for now, 3, I want to discuss. There are some on the list who could probably list a dozen but I am not too good at philosophical issues like this. 1. The image is real. Or at least we tend to think of it as real. Jackson's photographs of the West had tremendous impact. It's debatable, but some say the impact was far in excess of the paintings brought back from the West. How real is real is another issue, but for now let's accept that reality for the moment. Level 2 is who made it. A signed print made by Cunningham vs one of Ron Partridge's Foundation prints. The first is worth many times the second. Level 3, and this is where we tie into the first issue of technological depth. I contend that the depth of technology involved directly impacts the print's authenticity. How close is the maker to the object. Is the image fly-by-wire or hands on? Why do we still sign by pen and ink type printed letters? We sign them to authenticate them and to make them real. Pen and ink is more authentic than letters made by depressed keys because there is less depth and the object therefore becomes closer to the person making it. Why is an signed letter by Princess Diana worth more at auction than an email message. Or better yet, what is the value of a hand written note written and signed by her vs a secretarially typed one that was signed? The issue of industrial age multiples has been discussed since the 1930's but it is still a valid issue, especially when it comes to alt-photo. I once owned but later sold, a Whistler etching that
[pinhole-discussion] Epson Printer related...not strictly PH
This company has developed continuous flow systems for the Epson Chip type Cartridge printers. http://www.mediastreet.com/cgi-bin/tame/mediastreet/niagra.tam regards Andy Schmitt Computerist, Photographer, Slayer of Dragons All opinions expressed are mine... Unless otherwise stated or REALLY stupid www.aandy.org - not non-profit on purpose
[pinhole-discussion] Camera Construction -- Thanks
Many thanks to all who suggested T nuts and threaded inserts. I have discovered a new corner of the hardware store. The T nut worked fine on one camera and the threaded insert on the other. Now this nut needs to insert himself behind the tripod-mounted cameras and make some images. Bob
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Digital pinhole?
I don't see why you can't use a body cap pinhole on say a Canon D30 or a Nikon Digital to try it out... IN fact I'm making one for a NY Times Staff Photographer...I'll pass on anything I hear back andy -Original Message- From: pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? [mailto:pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ???]On Behalf Of Gregg Kemp Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 10:05 AM To: 'pinhole-discussion@p at ???' Subject: RE: [pinhole-discussion] Digital pinhole? -Original Message- From: pinhol...@aol.com [mailto:pinhol...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 7:20 PM To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Digital pinhole? Is it possible to make a pinhole photo using a digital camera? This may not be the kind of digital image you are interested in, but I have 3 pinhole images made with a Barbie digital camera at: http://www.???/pinholer/exhibits/ Select Gregg D. Kemp under year 2000. :) Gregg ___ Pinhole-Discussion mailing list Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? unsubscribe or change your account at http://www.???/discussion/
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Hello
- Original Message - From: Johanna Zamora jjju...@yahoo.com I am new to the list. Welcome to the list! I am using a body cap with a larger hole cut out, about 5mm or 6mm and then I am applying soda can aluminum to it. Thin enough? I'll work just fine! Later you can get some of the brass or steel shim stock 0.002 or 0.001 thick, some of us use to make our pinholes. I will be using a 30 gauge syringe needle. Which is smaller than a pin. I called BD (manufacturers) and found the external diameter is 0.012mm. Are you sure the diameter is 0.012mm? 0.012mm is extremely thin, a pinhole with that diameter would be optimum for a camera with a 0,1mm focal length!! I have access to the needles, thinking they were pretty small. Perhaps another pinhole source is better? A regular pin or needle is more than enough. See the resources page in the Worldwide Pinhole Photography Day web site http://pinholeday.org/support/ for help. So any ideas if this is workable? Is there anyone who can give me a concept of focal length for this? You should be able to measure the distance from the the lens cap internal side and the film plane, just mount the lens cap (with the center hole already made to it), set the camera to MANUAL and select the longest shutter speed available (30 seconds probably), fire the shutter and use a cotton swab as a measuring stick (do it fast, as you only have 30 seconds before the mirror comes back down, if the cotton swab still inside the camera, you would certanly cause some damage). My Nikon has the inside of the lens cap at about 48mm from the film plane, I'd assume your Minolta is not that far from it. If you had to guess, go with 48mm or even 50mm as the focal length of your pinhole set up. BTW, if you have a GLASS lens with 50mm focal length, when using a tripod, you could use it (the glass 50mm lens) to frame your scene, then install the pinhole lens cap and make the exposure. Exposure times? See the link above. You could guesstimate your exposures based on previous results. But I suggest that in order to have relative success at the beggining, you should know what the f/stop of your pinhole set up is, once you know that, it is just a matter of translating your camera meter readings (when the glass lens is on the camera) to your pinhole set up. Again, see the link above for instructions on how to measure pinholes with a regular flat bed scanner. I'd suggest you start by making exposures using relatively high speed film (iso400 and above) and under bright day light. But, if you are familiar with RECIPROCITY corrections, by all means, use whatever film you want. I am using this size film to start out with because it's portable - well heck anything is portable :) - Have a nice trip to Portland and make sure you share with us your results. Guillermo
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Hello
welcome , one of the first things i was told to do is use thin .03 or thinner silver sheet from a jeweler for it is very mallable and will make a very smooth round opening , it is soft and easy to work with as other metals produce poor edges as the hole is made. There are other ways to do this also. -- Original Message - From: Johanna Zamora Sent: Tue, Jun 26, 2001 9:04am To: Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Hello Hello, I am new to the list. I am also new to pinhole photography. I normally use my Minolta or My Rolleicord Vb to take pictures, but want to play around with pinhole. Since I haven't a clue about developing etc, I thought my first efforts would be with my 35mm cam. Here is the plan: I am trying to make a body cap pinhole cover for my minolta xg-7. Wonder if I could vet a couple of ideas here? I am using a body cap with a larger hole cut out, about 5mm or 6mm and then I am applying soda can aluminum to it. Thin enough? I will be using a 30 gauge syringe needle. Which is smaller than a pin. I called BD (manufacturers) and found the external diameter is 0.012mm. I have access to the needles, thinking they were pretty small. Perhaps another pinhole source is better? So any ideas if this is workable? Is there anyone who can give me a concept of focal length for this? Exposure times? I am using this size film to start out with because it's portable - well heck anything is portable :) - and I am going down to Portland in July, by train and am anxious to do a test run before my trip. Thanks in advance, and I look forward to learning a lot on this list! Johanna Zamora __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ___ Pinhole-Discussion mailing list Pinhole-Discussion@p at ??? unsubscribe or change your account at http://www.???/discussion/
[pinhole-discussion] Hello
Hello, I am new to the list. I am also new to pinhole photography. I normally use my Minolta or My Rolleicord Vb to take pictures, but want to play around with pinhole. Since I haven't a clue about developing etc, I thought my first efforts would be with my 35mm cam. Here is the plan: I am trying to make a body cap pinhole cover for my minolta xg-7. Wonder if I could vet a couple of ideas here? I am using a body cap with a larger hole cut out, about 5mm or 6mm and then I am applying soda can aluminum to it. Thin enough? I will be using a 30 gauge syringe needle. Which is smaller than a pin. I called BD (manufacturers) and found the external diameter is 0.012mm. I have access to the needles, thinking they were pretty small. Perhaps another pinhole source is better? So any ideas if this is workable? Is there anyone who can give me a concept of focal length for this? Exposure times? I am using this size film to start out with because it's portable - well heck anything is portable :) - and I am going down to Portland in July, by train and am anxious to do a test run before my trip. Thanks in advance, and I look forward to learning a lot on this list! Johanna Zamora __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Digital pinhole?
-Original Message- From: pinhol...@aol.com [mailto:pinhol...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 7:20 PM To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Digital pinhole? Is it possible to make a pinhole photo using a digital camera? This may not be the kind of digital image you are interested in, but I have 3 pinhole images made with a Barbie digital camera at: http://www.???/pinholer/exhibits/ Select Gregg D. Kemp under year 2000. :) Gregg
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Pintoids
John Yeo wrote: I played around with altoid boxes a while ago with paper negatives. The wide angle is fun. I had trouble figuring out how to keep them still. I usually ended up holding them hard against the ground. Your idea of magnets would have made it much easier. John; I've been having this problem also. I tried gluing a tripod nut to the Altoid tins, but it simply broke off the first time I attempted to use it. I've been using broccoli rubber bands. This is kind of a hassle. I've also got to figure out a better shutter than black tape, which tends to cause the Pintoid to move during the process of peeling. Someone suggested those flexible magnet strips. Tried them. They want to stick to everything but the camera and, if I attach them to the camera with tape, I end up with the same problem as if I'd simply used tape. Anyway, I'll figure out some sort of sliding shutter, or something. Meanwhile, I'm having a great time with the stereo Pintoid and will post images, maybe tomorrow. -MM http://www.merrillphoto.com/pintoids.htm Marcy Merrill Photographer www.merrillphoto.com
