Author Topic: Pinhole: Buying, Making, Using... (Read 15789 times)

mcduff · « **on:** February 11, 2014, 03:32:56 PM »

After seeing Ezzie's latest work and the awesome weekly pinhole shots, I have decided to give pinhole a try sometime this year. Hungry Mike is gonna lend me his to start the adventure.

The big question is whether is I should start with something off the shelf or build one. I do want to shoot 120 and I do want something that Is reliable and easy to use - so I can tell when I am screwing up vs the camera! I'm tending towards buying for this reason and leave DIY for later.

So comments from the pros? If I buy any suggestions for something in 120 that is good and cheap? Ondu looks good, are there other alternatives that I should consider? Functional, durable and compact are more important than pretty. ONDU is my upper limit as this will compete for my limited GAS funds.

Thanks.
Don

DonkeyDave · « **Reply #1 on:** February 11, 2014, 03:44:54 PM »

My favourite pinhole is one I made myself from a broken Holga, I wouldn't buy one, half the fun is making/recycling

Paul Mitchell · « **Reply #2 on:** February 11, 2014, 05:36:06 PM »

I was never the Blue Peter 'make your own' type so bought the Zero 2000. As Dave say's it's probably more fun to make your own but, for the price, you can't go wrong with an off the shelf Holga pinhole IMHO.

KevinAllan · « **Reply #3 on:** February 11, 2014, 06:32:04 PM »

I have the Holga WPC120 pinhole, which can shoot 6*12 or 6*9 using interchangeable masks. They currently sell for £26-£36 on eBay.

I did think about making one, but bearing in mind the Holga has a spirit level and tripod socket, is threaded for a cable release, and can take filters (push-on 52mm, not 100% secure) I decided it was worth the money.

On the down side, I now choose to tape up the camera after loading the film because the back fell off once.

Example images here - http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=pinhole&w=33186310@N03

Hungry Mike · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2014, 07:05:30 PM »

I wonder if we could expand this thread a bit from to buy or build and to the how. Like Don I've greatly admired the pinholes that are posted in the weekend collections and I'm wondering if some pinhole masters could offer advice on shooting with them.

If anyone is curious the one Don would be borrowing from me is one of these:
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Noon_Panoramic_Pinhole_Camera
Does 6x12, 6x6 and 6x9.

ManuelL · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2014, 07:25:39 PM »

If you have other cameras with removable lenses, a lens cap with built in pinhole could also be an option.
I bought a pinhole zone plate and zone sieve (just the holes) from Skink Pinhole. They are ok, but there are also other manufacturers which just sell a small plate with the hole.

mcduff · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2014, 07:35:19 PM »

Quote from: Hungry Mike on February 11, 2014, 07:05:30 PM

I wonder if we could expand this thread a bit from to buy or build and to the how. Like Don I've greatly admired the pinholes that are posted in the weekend collections and I'm wondering if some pinhole masters could offer advice on shooting with them.

Done! I just changed the title

Moiz · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2014, 09:07:23 PM »

Similar to Dave I converted a lubitel 166 to a pinhole. The good thing about it is that I have kept the viewfinder so it makes it easier to set up the shot.

The pinhole itself is just a bit of flattened coke tin with a pinhole in it.

02Pilot · « **Reply #8 on:** February 11, 2014, 09:15:26 PM »

In terms of DIY, making the pinhole and the enclosure are relatively simple; constructing the film transport can be tricky, depending on how picky you are about frame spacing, and shutters can range from super-simple to fairly complex, again depending on your preferences. Using a existing camera provides an easy solution to the transport and shutter issues, as well as providing a viewfinder of some sort. Tripod mounting is easy (1/4"-20 threaded insert), but if you want a cable release for the shutter you'll need to work that out.

Regardless of how you decide to proceed - buy or build - I think you need to consider what frame size you want to shoot and what focal length you want, along with how concerned you are with external dimensions and portability. Think about the sorts of things you might want to shoot and what you'd use with a conventional camera.

mcduff · « **Reply #9 on:** February 11, 2014, 09:49:30 PM »

Those are good points O2. I know a few parameters of what I am looking for: 1) 120, 2) 645 or 6x6 max, 3) and the holy trinity of light and rugged and compact

I do have a holga that I do not use, so I might consider beheading it as Moiz and Dave have suggested.

johnha · « **Reply #10 on:** February 11, 2014, 10:47:44 PM »

I was wanting to use either my Mamiya C330f or Pentax 6x7 as a pinhole by buying a lens cap and putting a pin hole in that (the C330f bellows and 6x7 extension tubes allowed variable focal lengths). In the end I bought a Holga 120-WPC instead, a 6x12 seemed an interesting prospect. Overall impression is good for the money.

I haven't had a chance to use it yet though as I haven't found a cable release with enough 'extension' to fully open the shutter.

mcduff · « **Reply #11 on:** February 12, 2014, 12:49:17 AM »

I like the ONDU 6x6. I like the idea of a square pinhole, and it looks like it would be good to take on adventures -- compact and hopefully durable. But I think I will start (after playing with Hungry Mike's camera) with popping the lens off my Holga 120 and starting from there. Is it worth spending $10 on a laser cut pinhole disc or is the "make a bump in a piece of popcan with a needle and sand the top off of it" technique good?

I was thinking of starting with info from these sites (unless one of you buys me that ONDU

)

02Pilot · « **Reply #12 on:** February 12, 2014, 01:08:58 AM »

The Mr. Pinhole site is what I used to calculate the pinhole for my converted Brownie Six-20. Works as designed. I used a pin vise - basically a tiny hand drill - to make the hole, but there's no reason why a pin couldn't do it as well; the pin vise is just a bit more precise.

I have the ONDU 6x6. I see no reason why it shouldn't be durable, though I have found the shutter prone to opening if you put it in a bag where it might shift. Bear in mind that it is a super wide angle, so the perspective will be somewhat distorted. By contrast, my 6x9 Brownie, with a more normal focal length equivalent and curved film plane, produces a very natural perspective.

Ezzie · « **Reply #13 on:** February 12, 2014, 07:59:38 AM »

I too use Mr Pinhole to help make decisions on focal length vs frame size (FL will impact image circle and how much vignetting you want, not just field/angle of view) vs pin hole size (afflicts circle of confusion or sharpness if you will, and of course f-stop).

Once you have your basic design it is not that difficult. A film transport can be tricky. The hard part is aligning the axis of the holdes top and bottom, so you don't get wonky and uneven spooling. The other tricky bit is a mechanism that allows you to insert and remove the spools. I have solved this by using machine screws 5-6mm. I file down the head to a T-shape, the head goes down into the spool, the other end screwed up into the knobs. Inside the body I have two washers with a little spring between them.

I've tried to describe it here:

LT · « **Reply #14 on:** February 12, 2014, 07:15:01 PM »

I've only ever used harman titans, and I've never built one ...i just follow all the advice that is around on the interwebs and places like f295.com and have some fun.

FWIIW ... all i would suggest is that you make sure you have a successful and reliable development routine in order to get the best out of your negs. But, of course, that applies to all types of camera types.

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #15 on:** February 13, 2014, 09:52:52 PM »

Never can decide if I like making pinhole cameras more or the end result! Put a hole in a lens cap for a favorite camera and go for it..it's a good first step. You could do that with a holga or somehing more sophisticated but why? The results should be close to the same since your really only wanting the results of a pinhole. I like my tin cylinders prolly the best..so much diversity...I have more pinhole cameras and body caps than I can count so it must be about the creating.

Adam Doe · « **Reply #16 on:** February 13, 2014, 11:25:54 PM »

My first pinhole camera was an extremely generous gift from a friend of a Zero Image 4x5. It's a fantastic pinhole camera and I can use all of the same holders that fit my Crown Graphic, so I can shoot sheet film, Instant and 120. I've made few pinhole cameras using boxes, mint tins and my favorite, the Squidhole http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=6269.msg77241#msg77241 out of a cylindrical metal snack can. All of the cameras that I have made take a single shot using sheet film. For my next, I'd like to get more ambitious and build a panoramic pinhole that uses 120 film. Something along the lines of Eirik's pinhole camera. I think there is merit in both handmade and store bought.

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #17 on:** February 14, 2014, 05:48:26 PM »

my latest medium format pinhole creation

Kayos · « **Reply #18 on:** February 15, 2014, 02:44:23 PM »

The first camera i ever used was a pinhole made from a cardboard box, using direct positive paper, i was about 7 at the time and i still remember doing it.

Ive just had a Canon A1 in bits and found the tripod mount to be a large flanged nut with 3 screw holes, probably much easier to mount on the bottom of a diy pinhole than just a nut

irv_b · « **Reply #19 on:** February 15, 2014, 03:20:45 PM »

I made a pinhole camera that I gave to a work solleague from a Coronet 020. The sight glasses(?) were far to crappy to see out of so I stripped the front cover off, but kept the original shutter lever and used the lever for the bulb mode to hold it open, then made a pinhole from a piece of a coke can. It's good for 10 shots on a roll of 120.

charles binns · « **Reply #20 on:** February 15, 2014, 03:58:44 PM »

The first pinhole I made was a paper Lomo LCA cut out. Made a few out of various biscuit tins, but I never really got into the whole home made pinhole game - the results were too patchy. I like the Holga pinhole - though not the 120 wpc so much.

AJShepherd · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2014, 02:07:57 PM »

Quote from: Moiz on February 11, 2014, 09:07:23 PM

Similar to Dave I converted a lubitel 166 to a pinhole. The good thing about it is that I have kept the viewfinder so it makes it easier to set up the shot.

The pinhole itself is just a bit of flattened coke tin with a pinhole in it.

I've got a Lubitel where the lens gears slipped so the focus is off. It's been sitting in the cupboard for months as I could never quite be bothered to try and realign them, and if I did, they'd probably slip again at some time.
Converting it to a pinhole sounds like it might be worth doing, though! Any tips?

astrobeck · « **Reply #22 on:** February 18, 2014, 10:52:16 PM »

If you just want quick and easy, go for a Holga pinhole.

I have a Holga that I converted and it's one of my favorites to use because it "almost" fits in a pocket, uses roll film which is easy as cake, and is the camera I made the train shots with.

Holgas are cheap and will get you in the pinhole game fast. Using one will also give you a sense of exposure length after time with it and before long you won't think twice about using it without a meter.

So my short answer is to buy one first, use it and see what you think of pinhole.

I also like and use the Holga wide pinhole, but the most shots you will get out of it on a roll is 8, so it eats film quick.

There's always time to build and delve deeper into little blackened boxes....

Francois · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2014, 04:20:42 PM »

And if you don't feel like building, there's the Diana Multi-Pinhole Operator. It's quite nice for a piece of plastic. It's got a pod socket and a viewfinder and can take 12 or 16 shots on a roll. It's also very wide angle.

jojonas~ · « **Reply #24 on:** March 03, 2014, 10:23:48 PM »

finally got my half frame olympus pen ee-s converted to pinhole!

here's a test shot I did on old paper I had in the closet that was cut up for other pinhole cameras I used to use (where'd they go anyway??)

mcduff · « **Reply #25 on:** March 11, 2014, 02:51:46 AM »

So with a lot of help from Diane -- who really went out of her way by donating a custom drilled pinhole -- I have got my first negs from my M645 in pinhole mode. This roll was kind of blasted off just to see if things were working OK, but I am pretty happy with the results (well for my first roll).

pinhole 1 by mcduff!, on Flickr

pinhole 2 by mcduff!, on Flickr

pinhole 3 by mcduff!, on Flickr

I think I need to play with the depth of field a bit more, I don't think I pushed that far enough. The first pic is probably the closest one to really playing with it. It was stinking cold (even for someone that loves winter) so as spring comes I think I will have some easier weather for learning pinhole

I was using the "pinhole assist" app (for iOS) and it worked quite well. It has a cool section for letting you add a bunch of reciprocity curves so I decided to give that a try loading in one of the ilford curves. They exposures came out quite well.

Thanks again, Diane!

Francois · « **Reply #26 on:** March 11, 2014, 02:46:45 PM »

And your last shot is quite lovely.

Ezzie · « **Reply #27 on:** March 11, 2014, 04:52:20 PM »

And none of that nasty pinhole vignetting stuff

Seriously though, 80mm focal length on 645? Should give good coverage.

mcduff · « **Reply #28 on:** March 11, 2014, 05:44:03 PM »

Quote from: Ezzie on March 11, 2014, 04:52:20 PM

And none of that nasty pinhole vignetting stuff

Haha Eirik, I am still not sure but I think I wanted a little bit of that nasty vignetting stuff

Here are a couple more of the shots, including a self-portrait -- the ghostly apparition as I ran into the scene after firing an 8 second exposure. I want to do more of these but I will use the M645 I have that has a timer as I want to have the portraits to have a bit more opacity.

pinhole 4 by mcduff!, on Flickr

If nothing else, I have already gained a bit more insight into how of frequently shoot. Some images you have not seen from this roll, are closeups of things (pine cones in trees etc) and those images really sucked! I like to shoot close ups of stuff wide open using tight DOF to create a foreground/background. This can work, even if the nature of the material in the foreground/background is fairly similar (eg branches). But when you are taking pics like that (where there is not a lot of diff between the material in the forground and background) and everything is in focus, you have nothing to help you create any distinction between foreground and background. So it is good to go down this path.

I think this closeup of the handrail or the earlier shots with the ladder, are 'somewhat' effective in forground/background, because at least there is a significant visual quality to the things close up (texture, geometry, etc) compared to the stuff in the background.

pinhole 6 by mcduff!, on Flickr

Shooting where I cannot rely on my somewhat overused tight DOF is probably a good thing to do if for no other reason to make me think about other visual cues I can use to create my foreground/midground/background separation.

Francois · « **Reply #29 on:** March 11, 2014, 09:14:50 PM »

Quote from: Ezzie on March 11, 2014, 04:52:20 PM

And none of that nasty pinhole vignetting stuff

Seriously though, 80mm focal length on 645? Should give good coverage.

That's about 50° of view... or about the same as a 50mm lens on 35mm film

Ezzie · « **Reply #30 on:** March 11, 2014, 10:43:11 PM »

I was thinking image circle. Too short a focal length and you get vignetting. I rather think a pinhole should have some, but not too much.

Hungry Mike · « **Reply #31 on:** March 11, 2014, 10:47:32 PM »

Pretty good first tries Don!

mcduff · « **Reply #32 on:** March 12, 2014, 01:19:24 AM »

Thanks Mike! Ya Eirik I agree that a bit of vignetting is nice for pinhole. Tho part of me feels it is 'cheating' to engineer in the vignette, I think that is the way to go. I guess we are talking smaller hole eh? Given that I cannot move the hole that much closer (it is in a body cap of an slr so not a lot of room in front of the mirror).

SLVR · « **Reply #33 on:** March 12, 2014, 01:43:30 PM »

thats what MLU is for

Francois · « **Reply #34 on:** March 12, 2014, 02:18:46 PM »

Quote from: mcduff on March 12, 2014, 01:19:24 AM

I guess we are talking smaller hole eh?

Smaller hole will just give you a sharper image at the same film to hole distance.

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #35 on:** March 12, 2014, 03:12:42 PM »

Don and I were "talking" yesterday regarding the pinhole I made for his pinhole project..I really like the results..I was thinking along the same lines that it would need to be focal length difference in order for him to get a big of the vignetting..so is that true? I see now of course that he doesn't really have that option with that camera however..wondering how else he could get that look..maybe in Don"s case by adding an extention tube.??

mcduff · « **Reply #36 on:** March 12, 2014, 04:02:43 PM »

Firstly thanks for the comments and help Diane! OK to not have this turn into too much of a physics talk haha, but if I want some vignetting I would guess that one should calculate a pinhole to fit slightly smaller negative, right? This pinhole is 'perfect ' in that it behaves how we normally want a lens to do - ie minimal vignetting. I would guess that instead of using the real width if the neg for calculating the pinhole (6*4.5 or whatever the real size is for that) that the film area should be calculated to be a bit smaller so there would be a bit of a falloff. Is that right or am I backwards (it happens). If this is so I wonder how much smaller the pinhole should be calculated for?

It was I who suggested to Diane that I should try an extension tube but I am now thinking this was one of the cases where I got it backwards. If anything I need to get the pinhole closer to the neg (hard to do in my case with a slr ) so I would guess a smaller pinhole would do. Have I got this right or backwards??

astrobeck · « **Reply #37 on:** March 12, 2014, 05:13:35 PM »

No physics involved, but as Francois' excellent diagram indicates a smaller hole will just make the image sharper.
Each pinhole focal length has a "sweet" spot for focus and depending upon the hole size it will be sharp or not sharp.

You will need to shorten the distance to make a vignette which in your case is not happening.
Your 80 mm focal length gives you about 154 mm image coverage, so your image is running off the edge and there is no vignette.

If I was going to try to make a vignette without doing it digitally, I would just put some type of washer around the pinhole on the _outside_ of the camera that blocks the light from entering from the edges. Not an extension tube as this will make the vignette too severe and you'll get harsh edges.
But something somewhat shallow...like a fender washer http://www.amazon.com/Fender-Washer-100-pieces/dp/B003QZNBVQ
and you may have to stack a couple to get the effect you like.

And paint the washer black so you will cut down on Sun glints..unless you want that effect when aiming toward el Sol.

Francois · « **Reply #38 on:** March 12, 2014, 08:50:41 PM »

Physics side, when the pinhole projects the image on the film, it makes some sort of sphere... I might have to draw this one...
The exposure is fixed by the distance between the imaginary sphere and the film plane (lets just use focal length FL for the sake of simplicity).

Lets say that the correct exposure point is where the sphere contacts the film. The sphere's diameter is fixed by the FL distance with the pinhole at the center of the sphere.

A small negative would vignette less than a large one for any given FL distance simply because there is less variation at the middle of a ball than at its side.

For increasing vignetting, the only "natural" way is to make it a shorter FL. The other way would be to use either washers to make a sort of tube and prevent light from reaching the film, but I'm not sure the vignetting wouldn't be too sharp. Other way would be to add in the light path some ND film with holes cut in them.
Then, you could use some washers and locking star washers to make some sort of tunnel with a progressively larger bore...

With pinholes it's really hard since there is no focus...

Ezzie · « **Reply #39 on:** March 13, 2014, 11:33:51 AM »

Which is what I rather clumsily have tried to convey in my thread on the 6x24 build. Since I had a relatively short focal length to contend with, curving the film plane was the only option to limit dramatic edge fall-off. I still have vignetting (as I would like it) but not as much as would be the case with a flat film plane.

In your picture Don's Mamiya film area is in the sweet spot in the middle, and does not stretch out to the corners where fall-off starts to become evident. Had the film been 6x9, it may start to show very slight vignetting, given the same focal length.

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #40 on:** March 13, 2014, 02:38:10 PM »

Essie, thank you for pointing this out. Trying to find the thread where you showed the inside view of your curved film plane ... Could you post a link to that information?

Ezzie · « **Reply #41 on:** March 13, 2014, 08:05:28 PM »

Certainly Diane

Here: http://on-your-kitchen-worktop.blogspot.no/2014/02/6x24-pinhole-camera.html?m=1

And here: http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=6870.0

Diane Peterson · « **Reply #42 on:** March 14, 2014, 06:56:31 PM »

Thank you so much Ezzie...I am sure I can't make anything as wonderful but I am always up fir a challenge.

mcduff · « **Reply #43 on:** March 16, 2014, 10:00:18 PM »

Thanks for all this info gang. I did not respond sooner as I was "up north" in USA snowboarding. (OK it is just slightly north of my part of canada but it is still fun to think of lake placid as a higher latitude than Southern ontario haha)

Anyhow this has been a great thread. Thanks for the illustrations Francois they helped and prompted me to read a bit so now I can hopefully work 'circle of confusion' into everyday conversation haha.

Don

Francois · « **Reply #44 on:** March 17, 2014, 02:02:35 PM »

Lake Placid... nice place.
I must admit it's slightly more "hilly" than Toronto

mcduff · « **Reply #45 on:** March 17, 2014, 04:07:05 PM »

Haha yes I guess it is a bit higher both in latitude and in altitude than Toronto (or Kitchener/Waterloo to be specific). Although clearly the altitude difference is the more significant one, haha. The only downside from those trips is I bring lots of cameras and am too tired by the end of the day to use them.

But I am back and will spring into some more pinhole action!

Francois · « **Reply #46 on:** March 17, 2014, 08:18:07 PM »

Ever thought of modifying a gopro mount and stick it to the board? Perfect for a half frame like a Yashica Samurai or something