[pinhole-discussion] new polaroid question
Hi all, Due to the cost difference of type 55, I am considering the use of polaroid type 665 for a project. Has anyone tried the polaroid neg's with printing platinum? This will be my first attempt with the medium and any information will be appreciated. My worry is that the neg will not have a strong enough density to print acceptable images. Thanks, Don __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Polaroid Negatives
Antonio Hypo Clearing Agent is the Kodak brand of Permawash... Its what you use to remove fixer shorten wash times. andy ... If you are using Polaroid Type 55 film(BW) , you can do a couple of things, if you overexpose by one stop , you will get a lighter print, but get a bit more dense negative . If you are in the field , you can put the neg into a zip lock baggie filled with water, and clear the negative with Hypo Clear once you get home . I was thinking in trying type 55, but I was going to the sodium sulfite. What exactly is the Hypo Clear?? Thanks António Vieira http://www.livinginabox.net http://www.???/discussion/ _
[pinhole-discussion] Re: Antonio's photos
I answered my own question about more frames of Antonio's work. Check out his site: www.livinginabox.net under Forest. Really great stuff!! Tell us more about your working methods! Andrew -- From: Andrew Amundsen a...@tcinternet.net Very nice Antonio! I like the photoshop work. Did you hand hold the shot? Do you have more frames from this series to share? Yours truly, Andrew Amundsen -- From: António Vieira antonio.vie...@siemens.com Hello I have uploaded a picture to the gallery: http://www.???/discussion/upload/gallery2002.php?cmd=maxstar t=pic=an toniovieira_1.jpg Made with a cardboard 6x6 camera (kit from OlpeBussiek) with Fuji NPH400. I have left only the red Green channels in photoshop.
[pinhole-discussion] Re:Antonio's photo
Very nice Antonio! I like the photoshop work. Did you hand hold the shot? Do you have more frames from this series to share? Yours truly, Andrew Amundsen -- From: António Vieira antonio.vie...@siemens.com Hello I have uploaded a picture to the gallery: http://www.???/discussion/upload/gallery2002.php?cmd=maxstar t=pic=an toniovieira_1.jpg Made with a cardboard 6x6 camera (kit from OlpeBussiek) with Fuji NPH400. I have left only the red Green channels in photoshop.
Re: [pinhole-discussion] RE: pinhole size
- Original Message - From: Paul Prober pro...@silcom.com The problem experimenting with different pinhole sizes is that unless we are making exposures of resolution targets http://www.???/resources/articles/Young/images/fig5.jpg the results will be always subjective to each viewer, scene, image contrast, whether subject is at close or far from the camera, angle of view, etc, and/or a combination of the above. I have not experimented to find the optimum pinhole size. Chris Patton has, and his conclusion was that the Prober-Wellman Formula is a practical values to use for f/stop to pinhole size for reasonable Circles of Confusion. See http://www.stanford.edu/~cpatton/phcalc3.htm which uses the Prober-Wellman Formula. Patton actually uses a different formula or maybe I should say different constant as all formulas since Lord Rayleigh (1890's) are basically the same. Patton actually has found that bigger pinholes than what most of the rest of us consider optimum, gives him sharper images. OTOH, you have Larry Bullis going the oposite way, that is, he finds that smaller pinholes give him sharper results. Myself, my eyes, rather, are more inclined to align with Larry than with Patton. or http://www.huecandela.com/hue-x/pin-pdf/Prober-%20Wellman.pdf for the white paper study. Also the formula can correct for pinhole to subject distances, for Close-up and Micro pinhole pictures. The Prober-Wellman Formula is exactly what science has been telling us the optimal pinhole formula should be D= SQRT (2.44 * Lambda * F) , the SQRT(1 / M+1 ) factor is a sort of bellows factor as I explained it in a post back in Oct last year: http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/private/pinhole-discussion/2001-October/0042 23.html Guillermo
RE: [pinhole-discussion] Polaroid Negatives
-Original Message- From: dalf...@aol.com [mailto:dalf...@aol.com] Sent: Sábado, 16 de Novembro de 2002 20:41 To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Polaroid Negatives In a message dated 11/16/2002 10:35:06 AM Central Standard Time, jruss...@wishtv.com writes: 've been shooting with a Polaroid 545 back for a couple months now. I've been tossing my negatives in the trash after development. I was wondering if there was a way to fix the negatives so that I can keep them for future use. I remember seeing something about this, but I can't remember where I saw it or how I go about doing it. Whatever the process is, is it the same for both BW and color negatives? If you are using Polaroid Type 55 film(BW) , you can do a couple of things, if you overexpose by one stop , you will get a lighter print, but get a bit more dense negative . If you are in the field , you can put the neg into a zip lock baggie filled with water, and clear the negative with Hypo Clear once you get home . I was thinking in trying type 55, but I was going to the sodium sulfite. What exactly is the Hypo Clear?? Thanks António Vieira http://www.livinginabox.net Polaroid instructions say you use Sodium Sulfite, but I once posted the same question on this list and couple others , and the consensus was to use Hypo Clear , wash, and hang to dry . If you are just looking to expose Type 55 to get a good print, that is usable for scanning and Photoshop , then stick to the EI 50 indicated by Polaroid, if you want a denser neg for printing , then use an EI of 25 . I use Type 55 a lot with my Santa Barbara Lensless 4X5 wide angle (2-1/2 inch fl ) and use exposures of about the 3-4 second range as a starting point , fine tuning if need be from there . ___ 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/
[pinhole-discussion] picture uploaded
Hello I have uploaded a picture to the gallery: http://www.???/discussion/upload/gallery2002.php?cmd=maxstart=pic=antoniovieira_1.jpg Made with a cardboard 6x6 camera (kit from OlpeBussiek) with Fuji NPH400. I have left only the red Green channels in photoshop. António Vieira http://www.livinginabox.net
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Experiments with pinhole diameter
A few years ago I helped a friend do a science project regarding pinhole size. We photographed a pattern of lines with pinholes taped over a 35mm camera body, and the smaller than optimal pinhole did produce less sharp images than those produced with the optimal pinhole size. The experiment was not set up accurately enough to measure how unsharp the images were or how much sharpness decreased, but the sharpness degradation was obvious in 4x6 prints. John There's a set of llustrations somewhere around page 120 in Eric renner's book that illustrates the effevct of different pinhole size at the same distance from the image. Very few people so far as I know have deliberately ventured toward the too small size.
Re: [pinhole-discussion] Experiments with pinhole diameter
I would assume that, like traditional photography with a lens, as exposure time increases sharpness decreases, all factors being equal. So using a smaller hole than the optimal may lead to decreased sharpness, but on the other hand, the decrease in sharpness may not be visible anyway. Great discussion! R.J. R.J.
