Ken Norton wrote:
> ...
>
> I've got the hankering to finally get into pinhole photography and I've spent
> far too much time hanging out on the "Zero Image" website as well as f295.
> As usual, I'm thinking in terms of "how can I make a dime while playing", so
> the decision of what to get is somewhat altered by the profit motive. Sorry,
> Moose, but that's my life and the only way I can get stuff without massively
> gutting out my kit on eboy. Yet, I am looking to have
> tons of fun with it too.
>
As I recall, I made my comments on the subject at a time when you were
expressing serious angst. Something about everything you were doing
photographically was derivative crap, you would never do anything really
worthwhile, life was a dreary trudge hardly worth living, and such rot.
I suggested that looking at separating some aspects of photography from
the chains of rigid P&L analysis for each piece of equipment and shot
taken might allow a little breathing room for simple creativity
motivated by inner spirit to revive your photographic life, including
the for profit part. The great artists never have done it for the money.
They do it because it's what they love and who they are. The money follows.
Perhaps your deepest joy is in expressing yourself through an unending
balancing between desire for creative expression and the desire for
everything to have a value measurable in $. No judgment here. I was just
trying to help back then by offering alternatives that you may not have
considered to alleviate your then condition.
> Here are my options:
> 1. Get an OM-body Pinhole Cap. These are dirt-cheep--I can get one delivered
> for under $50. But I'm not all that excited about 35mm pinhole photography
> because the images are just too soft for my blood.
I'm with Dawid on this one. When considering a pinhole body cap for FF
digital, I didn't want to recreate my experience with a Holga bodycap.
So I spent too much time cruising flickr and others, looking at many
pinhole images. It didn't really take long for a pattern to emerge. The
images taken on 35m film or digital just didn't have the creamy,
sometimes dreamy quality of those taken on 120 or larger film. Mostly,
they just looked like failed conventional photography. At least to me,
the difference was striking. No 35mm pinhole bodycaps here.
I'm pretty sure it has to do with the distance from pinhole to
film/sensor. 50mm or so is just too short for the blending that brings
the magic.
> Also, I'm looking for WIDE angle pinhole photography. However, I'm fully
> equipped for scanning 35mm and film and development options are much wider.
>
I'm not sure, but I don't see why one couldn't blend multiple pinhole
images for panoramas?
> 2. Get a 6x6 pinhole camera from Zero Image.
It seems to me that Zero Image is not a straightforward product. It's
only partly about pinhole imaging. The other part is about the
attraction of beautifully made mechanical things. As Carol would put it
"Oooh, pretty!" It surely doesn't take anything that fancy to hold a
pinhole and some film.
> I like square and the image quality is very decent. There are Zone-Plate
> options for the Zero Image cameras too, if I'm so inclined (and I probably
> will be). The big advantage to 6x6 is that my good enlarger is ideally setup
> for 35mm or 6x6.
>
Another thing that came out of my odyssey through the imaging web sites
was the conclusion that the Diana F+ makes lots of really nice images.
$45 or so delivered for a nice, simple 6x6 pinhole camera that really
works.
<http://www.amazon.com/Lomography-Diana-Medium-Format-Camera/dp/B001BPEQDK/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1234825277&sr=8-2>
In fact, it's really a triple threat Krappy Kamera. With lens on and
ordinary f-stops, it does the Holga/original Diana/Lomo sort of imagery
very well. With lens removed and aperture set to pinhole, it makes good
pinhole images, some really lovely. Then there's the intermediate option
of pinhole combined with lens mounted, which adds a little definition to
what's still a pinhole sort of image.
What about buying a Diana F+ and a piece of wood and/or brass art
separately? One to use and one to sit in the living room to be admired.
> Unfortunately, the 6x6 Zero Image doesn't quite go wide enough for what I'm
> wanting to do, but the deluxe version is only $172.
>
> 3. Get the Zero 612B which will do multi-format on the roll film which will
> give me extremely wide angles and still has the advantage of roll-film film
> and development options. Unfortunately, my primary enlarger isn't setup for
> it and I can't scan larger than 35mm. The dumbed down 612B is only $198.
>
I love it! "Dumbed down." What in heavens name does one need for pinhole?
> 4. Get the Zero 4x5 Multi-Format System. The full-tilt, fully-loaded system
> is only $230 and gives me focal lengths of 25, 50 and 75mm in 4x5 format!!!
> Now THAT would satisfy my wide-angle needs. The disadvantages are less film
> and development options, can't scan and then just plain size (which is still
> quite small). But the image-quality is amazing!
>
Again, think this through and look at examples. This is not
conventional, lens based photography. The imperfectly diffracted rays of
light are diverging and merging in complex, subtle ways on the way from
pinhole to imager. The "quality", and here I mean artistic look, not
sharpness, etc., of the image is quite sensitive to focal distance.
Another contributer to this is that the "correct" pinhole size for
different imager sizes is different, and that also changes the quality
of the resulting image.
Take images taken with the same AOV lenses on 35mm, MF and 4x5 with
excellent technique, print them all at 4x5 and the differences will be
subtle. Sure, they are different, but more similar than different to the
average viewer. Do the same thing with pinhole and the differences,
while perhaps hard to describe, will be much greater and more obvious.
So I suggest not assuming that 4x5 will be "better" than MF. Pinhole is
a different game, with different rules. Which focal distance will give
results you prefer is hard to predict. It's very clear to me that I much
prefer MF to 35mm for pinhole. I didn't look into larger format.
> ....
>
> I guess, what I'm asking is this:
> 1. Am I nuts for being bored with my photography and wanting to really shake
> things up a bit?
>
I would hope so, because I think "nuts" is a prerequisite for releasing
creativity. :-)
> 2. Can I satisfactorily achieve at least a modicum of my desires with just a
> pinhole cap for the OM system?
>
No. First, you have your heart set on something else, and are just
trying to talk yourself into something "more sensible". Second, 35mm
size pinhole just isn't very good.
> 3. 6x6, 612B or 4x5?
>
Get a Diana F+ and find out if you actually like working with pinhole
and the results you get with it. Just because Bill loves it doesn't mean
it will make your heart sing. The Diana is compact, weighs nothing and
costs very little, so it can go anywhere with you without trouble or
concern. If you like pinhole, and still want WA, you can add a 612 to
the kit and the Diana is still good for more casual use. Apropos a
recent post of yours, the Diana is moch less likely to be damages by
weather.
> 4. How can I sell the idea to SWMBO that I need this handbuilt wood box with
> pretty brass fittings?
>
Not my department.
> 5. This really is a disease, isn't it?
>
As Carol said when I bought and brought more books into a house with
what may already be awash in too many, "At least it's not Crack."
Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|