My 5x7 and 8x10 pinhole cameras, plus photo

Dick Sanders · Dec 21, 2008

Here's a photo I made with my 8x10 pinhole camera of the Albert Frey designed "Flying Wedge," which was a gas station in Palm Springs, CA for many years. Today, it's the Palm Springs Visitors Center. At the time I made this photo, it was an art gallery and the owner had a collection of Japanese fish-net floats he spaced around the grounds.

Here are the 8x10 and 5x7 pinhole cameras. Both are 4 3/4 inch focal length. Note the sight lines for framing. And also the orange filter that adds contrast, and lens cap for shutter (8x10).

Note the hinged back frame that drops away for 8x10 sheet filmholder insertion. When closed it's held firmly in place by two small tapered dowls that squeeze into latches on the sides. Just pull the slide, pull the cap, and expose. The 5x7 uses two big dowls that slide into an angled track and press on the filmholder. When no film is in use, the filmholder is replaced by a flat wooden pressure plate (shown here). My cabinet maker made these cameras for me. Both have tripod sockets (and sight lines) for vertical and horizontal orientation.

Here's the inside of the 5x7. The Flying Wedge photo is pretty sharp because the pinhole is the optimal size for 4 3/4 inch focal length. I have a 4 x 8 foot print in my living room and people can't believe it was made with just "a pinhole." I always have to drag the camera out and show them.

Thanks for looking. Comments welcome, questions gladly answered.

compur · Dec 22, 2008

Wow -- beautiful! Thanks for posting.

terri · Dec 22, 2008

That is awesome. I had to read it twice to make sure I understood that this is, indeed, a pinhole shot - very sharp, indeed. Wow! Beautiful cameras - I bet you have a lot of fun "proving" you used a pinhole.

Would love to see more of your work.

pm63 · Dec 22, 2008

I love the shot at the top. Very abstract. Lovley cameras too.

Dick Sanders · Dec 22, 2008

Thanks for the comments, guys. And Terri, here's another Flying Wedge photo made with the same 8x10 pinhole camera, from the other side of the yard. It's also black-and-white, but I did some selective coloring in PhotoShop here. By the way, I checked out your Beaten Path web site. Nice work. And I love your collection of older cameras and what you wrote about them. Very enjoyable presentation.

If you look closely in the middle-left rear of this picture, you can make out the balls (fishnet floats) that appear in the top picture. They look pretty tiny in this photo, and pretty big in the other one. Remember 4 3/4 inch on 8x10 is very wide angle -- about a 20mm lens on 35.

dxqcanada · Dec 22, 2008

Very nice shot.
Great composition.

Hmm ... and the rest of us are spending $$$'s on high quality optics ... to get something half as good.

Ah, I miss large format film.

compur · Dec 22, 2008

Another beautiful photo!

The idea that one needs the latest whiz bang camera and lens to create a
great photo is the height of ignorance! :lol:

Steph · Dec 23, 2008

Beautiful pictures. I once tried to make a 8x10 pinhole camera that would accept double dark slides out of an old wooden box. I used paper for my trials. The pictures came out OK (fairly sharp) but the camera suffered from severe light leaks. Your great pictures made me want to go back to the camera and fix those light leaks. It would be great to see a close up of the device you use to close the back on your 8x10 camera; that could help me to cure the problems on my camera.

terri · Dec 23, 2008

Steph: You have a great imagination - I'd love to see you overcome the light leak issues and see what you could do. :thumbup:

Dick - I really appreciate your comments on the site and my work. Thank you!

This colorized version now boasts a Polaroid look (which from me is meant to be high praise).

I love this building and imagine it gets photographed alot. So many possibilities!

Dick Sanders · Dec 23, 2008

These pics are for Steph and everyone else who would like to see in closer detail how the hinged back (and filmholder slot) on the 8x10 works. Please excuse the quality of these pics. They are snaps from my wife's digital P&S and are over bright deliberately to show detail.

In this first picture, showing the back of the camera, note the black foam weatherstripping that also serves as a cushion and light lock when the filmholder is pressed against it.

In this second photo, showing the hinged back pulled open, note the black photo tape around the perimeter, discouraging any miscellaneous light that might creep in. Also note how the back is built, with a pocket to precisely hold the 8x10 sheet filmholder.

This third pic shows the bottom of the camera, and the hinges that allow the back frame to drop open (for filmholder insertion).

The fourth pic shows the sheet filmholder being inserted and the back closing on it. Once closed it will press firmly on the foam weatherstripping. Note also the latch (one on each side) that will close it tight.

The last photo shows the latch being closed and a tapered dowl being inserted downward until it's squeezed in tight -- that holds the back frame tightly against the back of the camera. Low tech, but it works really well. This camera has no light leaks.

Hope these pics did the trick for you. Good luck with your own camera.

Steph · Dec 24, 2008

Thank you for the reply and pictures. They perfectly illustrate how the closing mechanism holds the DDS perfectly in place. I'll see if I can try something similar on my camera/wooden box. Hopefully, I'll find some time soon: so many things to do and so little time for photography at the moment...

windrivermaiden · Dec 25, 2008

Wow, what a thoural exploration of the subject/cameras.

Bring more photos.

compur · Dec 26, 2008

Yes, thanks for the detailed photos. I once made a 4x5 PH camera which
works but I thought the back could be designed better. I like how you've
done yours. Very neat.

Dick Sanders · Dec 26, 2008

Thanks, guys, for all the nice comments. I confess, I enjoy the "show and tell."

One last thing. Note the inlaid balsa wood framing lines that extend from the film edges at the rear of the camera to the front center, crossing at the position of the pinhole. If you stand behind the camera and sight down these lines -- and extend them out into the landscape -- everything between them will be in the frame. This is surprisingly accurate.

Horizontal:

Vertical:

Finally...yes, Terri, this Albert Frey designed Palm Springs CA building is photographed a lot, especially for commercial shoots and they charge plenty for it. A little more history: The original gas station (built I believe in 1963) fell into terrible disrepair and was eventually abandoned. Two guys bought it around 1998 and restored it (a huge undertaking), then opened an art gallery. In 2000 I showed up with my camera, and was walking around the yard when the owner came out and asked what I was doing. I told him, and he asked if I would give him prints, and I said, "Of course." He didn't know me from Adam, and probably thought it strange I was carrying this big wooden box camera. In any case, he said, "You can photograph the building, but you'll have to make an appointment." He suggested the following Tuesday at 2 pm." I didn't like the idea because I had no idea what the light would be next Tuesday at 2 pm, and it just happened to be good right then. But I had no choice; it was all very formal.

I was lucky that, on Tuesday at 2 pm, the sky was somewhat overcast and a little stormy looking (it had sprinkled a bit). This was a real break as Palm Springs is sunny and bright 340 out of 365 days. But here's where it gets interesting...

Later, when I gave the owner the prints (what you see up top), he told me this: When he got the building restored, he contacted the famous architectural photographer, Julius Schulman and asked him if he would like to photograph the Flying Wedge. This was a logical request because Schulman had done some important work in Palm Springs, and Palm Springs has several mid-century modern buildings of historical significance. But Schulman turned him down, said he wasn't interested. I think I showed up shortly thereafter. Later, when there was a great renewed interest in mid-century modern architecture, this building got a lot of press and notoriety and became very popular for commercial shoots. Then, Schulman came by to visit and, this time, told the owner he would like to photograph it. Can you guess what happened next? The owner turned him down.