cabbage patch

OK, so I don't get out enough, I know. But anyway, the sun was

shining and I'd just fitted an empty 49mm filter ring to the back of

the pinhole mount - so this is using a yellow filter on Ortho film,

and then toned.

<p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3542123-lg.jpg">

<p>

4"x5" full frame, developed in Rodinal.

Great photo, superb tonalities.

 

The world is moving to 4x5. This is what I see in the forum and this is what I did.

 

4x5 is totally magic. Unwieldy, but magic.

 

Could you please specify the film and exposure times. These are of interest to me because I want to do the same thing as you did here. Thanks.

It certainly is inspiring to see such nice images come from a pinhole. I guess I need to work on getting some kind of filter holder on mine as a next step. I'm assuming you go to the back side to avoid focusing on the glass? Do you see any enhancement in focus from excluding some of the color?<br>     I appreciate the improvement in depth of tonality in the toned prints, but I need a more structured approach to using duotoning in Photoshop. I tend to work my way through the whole list of possibilities on every photo, and I end up getting less and less certain about which I think best. Here is my last duotone effort out of the Zed 2000: <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3536492">http://www.photo.net/photo/3536492</a>.

Sandeha, that's very nice. Any chance you could post a full-resolution crop, just to make me a little more jealous? :-)

 

Mike, if you're having trouble with duotones, you might want to try using the Sample Colorize feature in GIMP (free under the GPL, http://www.gimp.org, Windows distro available at http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html). I use GIMP, although I haven't used this feature yet, but it looks like a very nice way to do things. Essentially, you create a gradient bitmap (easy to do) that contains all of your tones, and then just apply it to a grayscale image.

 

The user manual on the site describes how to do it, but for good practical examples, try this site: http://www.gimpguru.org/Tutorials/SampleToning/

 

BJ

Diwan - I agree. One of the advantages comes with a shot like this - an experimental one-off. It's only one step from shot to dev with the single sheet. <p>

The film is Ilford Ortho Plus, which most people suggest needs a yellow filter for non-technical, pictorial purposes with smooth tonality. (It can also be used as a high contrast film.) I shot this at EI 40 under fairly bright, but shielded window light with a yellow filter mounted. The pinhole is 0.36mm so, using a spotmeter, the final exposure was 1m 50 secs - that was including a reciprocity factor from Mike C's chart on the basis that the Ortho film requires approximately double the extension of HP5. Dev'd in Rodinal 1+100 for 10 mins at 20C degrees.

<p>

Mike, I used to feel like a kid in a candy store with the duotone options, but now I settle on a few that I consider 'proven' with only slight adjustments above or below depending on the tonal range of the neg.

<p>

Here's a shot of the filter mount I've just put into my folder.<p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3542955-lg.jpg"><p>

Purely practical reasons for the position as you'll see if you check the other shot in the folder. You'll notice also the line across the rear - that's part of the cotton thread 'cross-hair' across the rear frame - allows me to use the entire box for viewfinding.<div></div>

Dear Sandeha:

 

Thank you for the info. I have been doing some paper negatives with the 4x5, but I guess, a better quality is the pinhole system.

 

Thanks for posting the data on this photo. It is quite stunning. I could never achieve any tonality that I liked until I tried 4x5, that is why I thought that film photography will be more and more of this format ( and medium also ). Do you think that you could have obtained the same quality as you have in the posted cabbage photo in some other format ? I am curious regarding your answer.

 

I did some 35mm and gave it up, since I felt that I could never get any photo that I liked. Finally, med. format did it for me and even more, 4x5.

 

Please post others of this type. Always pleasant and informative on seeing what others are doing, more correctly stated, on what one is not doing.

 

Congratulations on your pinholes.

Thanks Diwan, isn't it one of the great things about these forums that you can exchange ideas! I tried paper negs with pinhole a couple of years ago but I'd need more patience if I go back to that. I prefer film, but there's quite a range of film available, so when I found some Ortho (old stock, cheap on eBay) I just had to try it.

<p>

If I compare the best lens I've got on my 4x5 field camera and this pinhole system, then I have to say that the pinhole is a bit of light relief for me. But the pinhole shots cannot be enlarged by much at all if you're after fine detail, whereas the 4x5 lens shots can be enlarged enormously. <p>

120 film works very well too, but anything smaller might be quite frustrating. A pinhole shot like the cabbage leaf works quite well partly because the neg is scanned at 1200dpi (usually), and then reduced in size. The reduction itself has a sharpening effect.

<p>

But anyway, given your encouragement, I probably will do some more.

Dear Sandeha:

 

I did some pinholes before with the body of an old 35mm camera and a hole that I manufactured myself.

 

...It was a total disappointment. Given that the pinhole was the correct size for the focal lenght (24mm)... something like 0.3mm or so, if I remember correctly, the photos were a total disappointment. Too grainy and lack of contrast. I gave up that experiment.

 

What you did in 4x5 and with film, is a total revelation of the possibilities of this technique. Yours is far better than the paper negatives. I was totally impressed by the tones of the "cabbage leaf" and in the beginning, to tell you the truth, I was convinced that it was 4x5 with a lens.

 

Again, please do not refrain from posting more pinhole photos in this forum, sometimes one is quite inspired by the achievements of others.

 

Best,

I always keep on forgetting to resize and to change formats...

 

The big photo shows the quality in more detail.

 

This one has been given added contrast in Photoshop and one can see in the lettering of the glue bottle that the resolution is not that great.

 

Also, the "sculpture", which is 2in high, seems not to be in focus. Theoretically, it should be! This is one of the amazing properties of the pinhole.

 

Overall fuzzy and uninspiring. Definitely, Sandeha's work is a major advancement in this realm.<div></div>

Another one of my pinholes. 35mm with 28mm or so focal lenght. Kodak 400 Chromogenic film developed in C-41 in the one hour shop. This one has been enlarged. Definitely not in the quality realm as Sandeha's work.

 

The clerk asked me what happened to my photos, that they came out -really fuzzy -.

 

- I responded that it was an "experimental camera". Got a big smile !<div></div>

Cool torso, Diwan. Yes, I guess 35mm is too small for most purposes. We've seen from Mike C's shots what you can get out of 120 film, so I hope you keep at it.

Dear Sandeha:

 

Thank you for the encouragement. Yes, I agree with your remark that 35mm is too small for most purposes.

 

Nevertheless, I am not yet in your league.

 

Best regards,