OK,
This has probably been discussed recently, but can anyone out there recommend
a good formula/rule of thumb for adjusting exposure for reciprocity in Ilford
films? The technical data on their webpage is merely a chart, and I am
hoping to get more specific information, based on the experienc
Hi:
standard narrow masking tape. I tape the ends of the negative together to
form a loop. It ends up obscuring the very edge of the
negative. I tried using a kind of reusable double-sided sticky tape, but
it didn't hold. Also thought of adding slots to hold the film, but they
would also end up
Measure the distance from the pinhole to the back. Multiply the distance (in
inches) by 55. The result is the square of the optimal diameter, in
thousandths of an inch. If an altoid can is 3/4 of an inch deep, the optimal
diamter is .0064 inches.
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Shapiro"
Shannon,
Don't forget about selenium intensification if your negative isn't up
to contrast. It works great and usually gives effective +1 contrast increase.
Mix it 1 part selenium toner to 2 parts hypo clear working strength. Tone for
up to 5 minutes...beyond that no extra contrast will b
There have been several optimum size formulas over the last century but this
one works fine if you're after maximum sharpness the pinhole can afford.
square root of (0.0016 x focal length)
Of course, focal length refers to the planned distance between the pinhole
and film in your camera/
I never got a definitive answer to my questioon about the best advisable
pinhole size for the sharp image with an Altoid can pinhole camera.
S
- Original Message -
From: "William Erickson"
To: "ppinhole discussion"
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 1:52 PM
Subject: [pinhole-discussion] pinhole
I misspoke this morning when i sent a comment about the relationship between
pinhole size and sharpness. I indicted that exposure doubles with every 40%
increase in diamter. It should have been the area of the aperture doubles,
and thus time halves.
Andrew Amundsen wrote:
From: "Gordon J. Holtslander"
Check out my web page http://cyano.usask.ca/pinhole/ - specifically the
1st and 2nd image. These were made with a 6 hole camera that
takes a 360 degree panoramic made from 6 images superimposed on one
piece of film. (a 4x10 negative)
A photo reference to the type of camera I'm looking for:
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=889017
--
>From: "Andrew Amundsen"
>To: pinhole-discussion@p at ???
>Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] 3-hole 4x5" pinhole cameras?
>Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2002, 9:22 AM
>
>>From: "Gordon
>From: "Gordon J. Holtslander"
> Check out my web page http://cyano.usask.ca/pinhole/ - specifically the
> 1st and 2nd image. These were made with a 6 hole camera that
> takes a 360 degree panoramic made from 6 images superimposed on one
> piece of film. (a 4x10 negative)
> Might be able to m
How do you hold the negative in the middle of this?
- Original Message -
From: "Gordon J. Holtslander"
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] 3-hole 4x5" pinhole cameras?
> Hi:
>
> Check out my web page http://cyano.usask.ca/pinhole/ - specifical
Hi:
Check out my web page http://cyano.usask.ca/pinhole/ - specifically the
1st and 2nd image. These were made with a 6 hole camera that
takes a 360 degree panoramic made from 6 images superimposed on one
piece of film. (a 4x10 negative)
There were printed on cyanotypes, shot with ortho film.
12 matches
Mail list logo
