Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,497   Posts: 1,571,465   Online: 1139
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #11
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,261
    Images
    67
    In theory, narrowing the spectral bandwidth for B&W could improve the sharpness, can't say I've ever tried it. The light wavelength enters into the equation for pinhole optimization.

    A couple of years back I crudely taped an 80B filter over my SQ-A pinhole adapter to try an outdoor shot and finish off a roll of tungsten transparency film; it worked!

  2. #12
    SMBooth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, North/West
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,015
    Images
    7
    Yes I just bluetac my filter behind the pinhole

  3. #13
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Quote Originally Posted by DWThomas View Post
    In theory, narrowing the spectral bandwidth for B&W could improve the sharpness, can't say I've ever tried it. The light wavelength enters into the equation for pinhole optimization. . . .
    Long ago I did some experimenting with films and filters from blue sensitive to IR, and found that it does make a slight difference. Fine-tuning pinholes and spectral response for optimum results makes insignificant improvement in almost all pinhole photography.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    848
    Images
    131
    I do exactly as tokengirl does. I have little chips of R25 gel behind the hole. I got nine pieces of filter from one gel, which is fairly economical.

    Acros has already been mentioned, but also worth a try is Tmax 100, as far as avoiding great compensation for reciprocity failure.

  5. #15
    Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,493
    Images
    30
    Found this thread again. I've thought up another option:

    I have a full set of 77mm filters I would like to utilize for my pinhole camera. In order to do this, I ordered a threaded step up ring which will be glued to the camera to mount these to. Now, the real question is, of course, behind or in front of the lens? Much easier to change on front, but the concern about extreme DOF is legit. Maybe behind and reaching in, who knows...
    K.S. Klain

  6. #16
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,261
    Images
    67
    Yeah, I'm not sure how much it would matter. Since it's a sort of ray tracing exercise to begin with, I might think front or back would potentially have the same problems. Maybe the inside mount would have less opportunity to gather additional dust in field use. I have a pinhole body cap adapter I made for my Bronica which has the flap shutter behind a circular plate and a sunshade (made from a black spray paint can lid!) that would allow me to easily put a filter adapter on the front. I considered it, but have never gotten around to it.

    My later cameras have a pivoting flap shutter on the front and would more or less have to put the filter inside. Being that they are LF, with standard filmholders, that wouldn't be all that inconvenient. (No problem at all reaching inside the 8x10 version! )

    Dang, now the wheels in my brain are spinning for rev. 2 for the next WPPD!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin