Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
Pinhole photography is not about sharpness, it is about pinhole photography. To put it another way (perhaps more clearly, perhaps not), it is not about how sharp the photo is and it is not about how unsharp the photo is. What it IS about is what the photo looks like. Sometimes being as sharp as possible helps, sometimes being blurry helps. It is certainly true that the optimal size pinhole is a good starting point, but the photographer may need to use a different size to get the photo they want. Serendipity can be a great creative tool, but using the scientific tools that are available (such as the formulas) can work jus as well from a creative standpoint. Note that I said pinhole photography above. Pinhole camera making is not always the same thing. Often, that IS about getting the sharpest photo possible. That is more of an engineering issue than a creative one. The best answer that I can think of to the question What size pinhole should I put in my camera? is: Use the size that will produce the type of photo that you want. In other words, the answer is That depends... Mike Vande Bunt (WPPD2 #97)
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
Optical resolution is only one of many formal categories that one can have 'disagreement' over. We can prefer and promote the circular to the rectilinear, the completely digital free to the photoshop enhanced, the laser drilled to a #12 sewing needle or a tin can to a handsomely crafted commercial model. What counts most is the continuing 'discussion' going on in the WWPD gallery. Such a global conversation. SO much good work. Keep talking and shooting. Zarkov No pixels were injured in the production of this work _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ---BeginMessage--- Great image Jeff! Personally I try my best to get sharpness..Here's a couple I took with a SnapDragon 4x5 pinhole camera One of my customers traded meit for one of my modified Holgas.I'm sure I got the better end of the deal.. http://www.holgamods.com/snapdragon/gallery/canal/canal.htmlhttp://www.holgamods.com/snapdragon/gallery/mill/mill.html Randy www.holgamods.comModified Holgas and PinHolgas Original Message Follows From: "Scott Guthrie" <wyomi...@hotmail.com> Reply-To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about "sharpness"? Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 11:46:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [65.121.97.211] Received: from [216.92.1.92] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBEA2AFB900C84004376AD85C015C0AE80; Wed, 08 May 2002 10:47:54 -0700 Received: from pairlist.net (localhost.pair.com [127.0.0.1])by pairlist.net (Postfix) with ESMTPid 3AEEA53688; Wed, 8 May 2002 13:44:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vala.pair.com (vala.pair.com [209.68.1.127])by pairlist.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 80C4053688for <pinhole-discuss...@lists.pinhole.com>; Wed, 8 May 2002 13:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 90868 invoked by uid 59120); 8 May 2002 17:46:46 - Received: (qmail 90865 invoked from network); 8 May 2002 17:46:45 - Received: from law2-f55.hotmail.com (HELO hotmail.com) (216.32.181.55) by vala.pair.com with SMTP; 8 May 2002 17:46:45 - Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 8 May 2002 10:46:15 -0700 Received: from 65.121.97.211 by lw2fd.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 08 May 2002 17:46:14 GMT From pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? Wed, 08 May 2002 10:49:02 -0700 Delivered-To: pinhole-discuss...@pairlist.net Delivered-To: pinhole-p at ???-pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Message-ID: <law2-f55uzmrf6ci6nx0...@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2002 17:46:15.0015 (UTC) FILETIME=[3FEF5770:01C1F6B8] Sender: pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? Errors-To: pinhole-discussion-admin@p at ??? X-BeenThere: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? X-Mailman-Version: 2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:pinhole-discussion-request@p at subject=help> List-Post: <mailto:pinhole-discussion@p at ???> List-Subscribe: ,<mailto:pinhole-discussion-request@p at subject=subscribe> List-Id: Pinhole Photography Discussion List-Unsubscribe: ,<mailto:pinhole-discussion-request@p at subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 11:46:14 -0600 That is a heck of a good image, my idea of an ideal pinhole image, well executed no matter what the apeture. Mitch Guthrie From: ragowaring <ragowar...@btinternet.com> Reply-To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? To: <PINHOLE-DISCUSSION@PINHOLE.COM> Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about "sharpness"? Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 16:35:01 +0100 On Tuesday 07 May 2002 09:51 pm, michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. I have had people who couldn't believe that some Finney pics I made were actually pinhole, due to sharpness. Using the "correct" focal length and aperature, I was able to get this amount of detail: http://hiddenworld.net:81/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=blackbeard.jpg I don't mind not having "razor" sharpness, but I like a certain level of clarity... I like you picture Jeff Alexis ___ 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/ _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ___ Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT o
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
That is a heck of a good image, my idea of an ideal pinhole image, well executed no matter what the apeture. Mitch Guthrie From: ragowaring ragowar...@btinternet.com Reply-To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? To: pinhole-discussion@p at ??? Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness? Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 16:35:01 +0100 On Tuesday 07 May 2002 09:51 pm, michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. I have had people who couldn't believe that some Finney pics I made were actually pinhole, due to sharpness. Using the correct focal length and aperature, I was able to get this amount of detail: http://hiddenworld.net:81/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=blackbeard.jpg I don't mind not having razor sharpness, but I like a certain level of clarity... I like you picture Jeff Alexis ___ 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/ _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
On Tuesday 07 May 2002 09:51 pm, michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. I have had people who couldn't believe that some Finney pics I made were actually pinhole, due to sharpness. Using the correct focal length and aperature, I was able to get this amount of detail: http://hiddenworld.net:81/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=blackbeard.jpg I don't mind not having razor sharpness, but I like a certain level of clarity... I like you picture Jeff Alexis
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
Good luck with the slit images, I just did a series with the same process - beautiful images result from the process - not quite pinhole, not quite anything else, just remember to keep the slits clean - if not you get a horrible banding across the image - sorry but the run on sentences are kinda catching... Well, they are sharp like a good ax, if not a razor. How did you choose a hole size? (speaking of razors, I built a crossed slit lens with razor blade fragments into a Pentax body cap. That would be a slit made by making a slit with the sharp ends of 2 razor blade fragments in the body cap, glued a washer over the slit for a little separation, and added another slit 90 deg.. from the first slit. Will see how it works with film behind it soon...)(yea, i know, run-on sentences, good thing you aren't reading this out loud) Cheers Mike -- Gravity is a harsh mistress The Tick- 1996 Mike Beacom ___ 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/ - Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
Jeff Dilcher wrote: On Tuesday 07 May 2002 09:51 pm, michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. I have had people who couldn't believe that some Finney pics I made were actually pinhole, due to sharpness. Using the correct focal length and aperature, I was able to get this amount of detail: http://hiddenworld.net:81/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=blackbeard.jpg I don't mind not having razor sharpness, but I like a certain level of clarity... ___ 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/ Well, they are sharp like a good ax, if not a razor. How did you choose a hole size? (speaking of razors, I built a crossed slit lens with razor blade fragments into a Pentax body cap. That would be a slit made by making a slit with the sharp ends of 2 razor blade fragments in the body cap, glued a washer over the slit for a little separation, and added another slit 90 deg.. from the first slit. Will see how it works with film behind it soon...)(yea, i know, run-on sentences, good thing you aren't reading this out loud) Cheers Mike -- Gravity is a harsh mistress The Tick- 1996 Mike Beacom
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
- Original Message - From: michael_georg...@trendmicro.com Pinhole can be about sharpness, as well as softness... it's also about time, and light, perspective, art, science, chance and fun! In the very far past I've been nailed in this list because of my interest on the scientific and mathematical approach to it, which has included the use of the so called OPTIMUM formula that is supposed to give us maximum sharpness, and the measuring of pinholes using microscopes. Now, you are nailing me because a statement I made was perceived as meaning I reject (for lack of a more suitable word) sharpness.Common, cut me some slack, will ya Michael !! :-) No pinhole image will ever be sharp, in the lens photography sense of the word. In that respect, the reason we practice pinhole obeys to higher causes, higher than sharpness. Your reasons may or may not be the same as my reasons and even if they were the same, their order of importance could be different between yours and mine. Now, the above does not limit some of us (yes, I am one of those, believe it or not!) to want to get as sharp pinhole images as we can get, either sometimes or all the time. Science has never failed me, hence my advice to use the scientific formulation as the point from which deviate (or not!). Guillermo
Re: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
On Tuesday 07 May 2002 09:51 pm, michael_georg...@trendmicro.com wrote: Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. I have had people who couldn't believe that some Finney pics I made were actually pinhole, due to sharpness. Using the correct focal length and aperature, I was able to get this amount of detail: http://hiddenworld.net:81/pinhole/?cmd=maxstart=pic=blackbeard.jpg I don't mind not having razor sharpness, but I like a certain level of clarity...
[pinhole-discussion] pinhole is not about sharpness?
Guillermo, in the course of explaining optimum pinhole formulas to Tom Harvey, said Since pinhole is not about sharpness, use any pinhole size for a particular distance pinhole-film, but I suggest you use what I call the scientific formulation as the starting point from which deviate. With considerable respect to the Guillermo, to whom I owe a vast debt of personal gratitude, I beg to differ. Perhaps the majority of pinhole is not at all concerned with sharpness. There are many, many of what I consider Pictorial shooters, achieving great soft images, some very dreamlike. Very nice stuff! (eg: Davison's The Onion Field, etc, etc). The WWPD gallery is full of great, soft pinhole images. HOWEVER, there are among us certain high-res knuckleheads who explore pinhole not [exclusively] for painterly effect, but also for maximum sharpness and depth of focus, especially for very close objects, and for this sort of stuff, pinhole is very definitely about sharpness. Consider it the f.64: Seeing Straight counterpoint to the soft-focus Pictorialists. If pinhole is not about sharpness then why are there so many formulas for optimum resolution, a Holy Grail of lensless? Why do I ponder so deeply the differences between Petval, Rayleigh, Renner, Young, Patton, Bullis, Fratkin, and even Penate himself? The Sharpness Formula God is apparently something we must each discover on our own. In the context of Harvey's query, it's right to provide beginning guidance (so as to not start with nail holes and fail to get good image formation on a 35mm format) so that one has a starting point. Then wander off into larger and smaller holes. Admittedly, much here is about experimentation. And, image type and quality is a highly personal thing. But, you can't dismiss sharpness as an ojbective. Pinhole can be about sharpness, as well as softness... it's also about time, and light, perspective, art, science, chance and fun! Michael Georgoff San Jose, CA (PS: Once again, the WWPD gallery is great: I look forward to seeing new images, there are many, many great and inspiring images up there! Huge thanks to all who worked to make it so!)
