A Pinhole Camera For Landscape And Portrait Photography?

[Soocom1]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Uhhhh......


I didn't know film was electronic..

here the whole time I thought it was silver hylaide crystals...


Silly me.

 

[limr]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Where did you get that information?

 

[Bluester]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

 

[Bluester]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Where did you get that information?

From the Web.

 

[Soocom1]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Uhhhh......


I didn't know film was electronic..

here the whole time I thought it was silver hilaide crystals...


Silly me.

....The camera film photo has an equivalent of 21 megapixels.

OK. I am not going to argue specific megapixel aspects, except to say that the comparison is like trying to compare a horse to a corvette.

The difference is specific in that there is the aspect of the number of pixles (rectangular nodes) to that of silver hilaide crystals.

In reality, the aspect is a bit non-sencicle insofar as saying that if I had 400 horses hooked up to a wagon it could pull the equivalent of a Dodge Ram 1500 with a 5.7 L (345 cid) in it.

 

[limr]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Where did you get that information?

From the Web.

Which website exactly?

 

[Bluester]

A 35 mm. ISO 100 color camera film has 21 megapixels.

Uhhhh......


I didn't know film was electronic..

here the whole time I thought it was silver hilaide crystals...


Silly me.

....The camera film photo has an equivalent of 21 megapixels.

OK. I am not going to argue specific megapixel aspects, except to say that the comparison is like trying to compare a horse to a corvette.

The difference is specific in that there is the aspect of the number of pixles (rectangular nodes) to that of silver hilaide crystals.

In reality, the aspect is a bit non-sencicle insofar as saying that if I had 400 horses hooked up to a wagon it could pull the equivalent of a Dodge Ram 1500 with a 5.7 L (345 cid) in it.

But those 400 horses could deliver the result as that Ram 1500, couldn't it? The same is the case with film versus image sensor. 35 mm. film photos could be compared with DSLR camera pictures. We don't have to be literal here.

 

[limr]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

 

[Soocom1]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

Its a debate.

 

[Bluester]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

What is there to question if my assumptions are right?

 

[limr]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

What is there to question if my assumptions are right?

For one, your assumption that a pinhole image is always going to be pin sharp corner to corner is not correct.

 

[limr]

The premise that sharper = better is also a matter of opinion, not fact, so the claim that pinholes are sharper and so therefore must be better for landscape and portrait photography is also a dubious one.

 

[Soocom1]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

What is there to question if my assumptions are right?

Lol...

the main point is two fold.

1, the edging being blurry is a direct result of the lack of optics and defraction of light from the pinhole itself.
It is physically impossible to get a perfectly sharp image with any system, but you can get extremely close.

2: The point of the zoom lens aspect is to point out that following only a small given set of rules does not make an entirely specific situation.
Ergo, that the rules set for the example given was only one possible situation.

 

[limr]

Joe also pointed out that a typical resolution for a 35mm film frame is more like 10-12 megapixels rather than the 20 that you keep claiming.

 

[Bluester]

OK...

Back in high school I had the opportunity in my photography class to make a pinhole camera.
Everyone made one that was the standard 4x5x2-1/2 inches.

I made a zoom.

I made a pinhole camera that had a total overall length of 14 inches with a front that slid back and forth by 6 inches.

I got an A++ for the project.

The Effective aperture size came out to approx F265 if I remember the math correctly.

The image however was also surprisingly sharp. The images were nearly as tack sharp as any 35mm and the edges were good because the image circle actually was larger than the back of the camera.

We used 50 sp. 2x3 film sheet and D76 when we finished up. The tone was spectacular!

I may still have the images and if so ill post them.


Oh and I forgot... The zoom range was approximate to a 600 mm.

Thanks Soocom 1! Your contribution to this thread is very much appreciated. Now we are seeing light at the end of the tunnel in this discussion and my assumptions are right. And we'd like to see some pictures of your pinhole camera if you find them.

So the point was just for someone to confirm that your assumptions were right and ignore anyone who questioned those assumptions?

What is there to question if my assumptions are right?

Lol...

the main point is two fold.

1, the edging being blurry is a direct result of the lack of optics and defraction of light from the pinhole itself.
It is physically impossible to get a perfectly sharp image with any system, but you can get extremely close.

2: The point of the zoom lens aspect is to point out that following only a small given set of rules does not make an entirely specific situation.
Ergo, that the rules set for the example given was only one possible situation.

These are close enough to my assumptions; if I were concerned I am satisfied with a "close enough" performance. I agree that a pinhole camera is a device also and no device or contraption is 100% efficient. If there's a problem with blurriness perhaps making the hole bigger would allay the problem.