In a message dated 10/24/2005 9:25:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
danmitchell@xxxxxxxx writes:
Could someone explain this again? I've tried the painting-with-light
thing by opening the shutter of a camera and waving a flashlight around
to illuminate the scene -- that worked fine, but there was still the
back on a camera and film in it.
What's the advantage of having no back on the camera? The only way I
can see this making sense is if there's a second camera around to take
the shot, and the first (backless) one is somehow being used as a way of
redirecting the light through the lens, but I'm not seeing how that
would be a good thing.
I guess this would let you see 'from the outside' which bits of light
would go into the (backless) camera or something? But having just tried
it, I can't work out how to get the geometry set up so that the
taking-the-photo camera can see both the light-through-it camera and the
scene that's being illuminated by the light-through-it camera.
Well the project is done and what follows is how it was accomplished.
1) Took the back off the camera.
2) Put mylar material on the front of two flashlight (one little mag-lite
and one that takes three of the c cells).
3) set shutter for B, aperture at 1.4 and use a cable release to lock the
shutter open.
4) place black paper snout on front of both lights and shine small light
thru the lens from the back side.
5) Use large light to "paint" the front area I wanted illuminated,
Results were pretty good, although I would have preferred not using the
cable release.
Bill Barber
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|