Thank you! I didn't see many videos like mine out there about pinhole photography so I wanted to be a resource for people who wanted to get the best results.
Wow, you just rocked Pinhole Photography Day! Truly excellent experimental video, showing both the science and application behind focal length at once. This is like “smarter every day” for photography! Seems the focus difference becomes depth of field differences... and for a huge f-stop that is probably quite a distance.
Thank you very much! Photography is a lot of trial and error so developing tests like this is important and I'm happy to share the results if it might help someone else.
Excellent video ! I have been very satisfied using the bellows on my 4x5 view camera to obtain pinhole images of large subjects. However, I have not been satisfied using my small format cameras to obtain pinhole images of small subjects. Your video has inspired me to try using bellows and extension tubes to obtain better images of still life and smaller sized subjects.
Awesome experiment! It's really great to be able to see those side by side comparisons, and specially the difference between using pinhole and lens. It shows clearly how sharp you can get, and i've been wondering about that for some time. Of course this whole thing of pinhole photography is all about experimenting, but it's nice that someone's doing part of the hard work for you ;) Really really nice, thanks a lot for all the useful info and advices!
Thank you so much for the kind words. I totally agree, it's pretty magical how a small hole can produce an image. Glad I can help take some of the guesswork out of it.
Somewhere in between extension tubes and a bellows would be helicoid tubes. Tons of these things available in m42; just add an adapter for your particular lens mount.
I'm so happy for following the wonderful video, that describes in scientific and mathematical methods, of how to find the correct diameter of the pinhole, according to the distance and the diagonal of the square area of the sensitive film, and I admired so much for the amazing final results specially the comparison, between of the pinhole images and the other images of the camera lens, in comparison I see the two images may approaches, the long scale of gradations, light and shadows almost the same, really that's extremely wonderful experiences, I learned much, Thanking you so much for your efforts and awesome explanation.
Great experiment. I understand the math as well. But my experience has always been that diffraction creeps in way more slowly as a factor than what people claim. I have no fears of stopping down my enlarger to the smallest aperture opening or my large format camera.
Diffraction does play a role, but it is only in the modern era of pixel peeping that people seem to care about the mild softness that it causes. For most cases, and especially when viewing a print from a proper distance (not a screen) the impact is hard to notice. I also shoot large format and getting a large depth of field is often more important than diffraction caused by small apertures. Some of the masters were part of a group called f/64 because that is all that they photographed at to get the most in focus. Thanks for commenting.
If you did this with a large format camera, you could down to a very small “focal” length/angle of view. I actually use a pinhole turret in order to change to the optimal pinhole size. Anyway, love your channel for the maths and physics. Keep up the good work 😀
Around the 12:40 mark you will see the table of focal lengths I used. Using that focal length and the known pinhole size you can calculate the effective F-Stop. You can then use that to calculate exposure and I listed the exposure times. I was using Fuji Acros 100 which has no reciprocity failure for the first 120 seconds. From 120-1000 seconds you only need a half stop correction. The times in the table with the asterisk (*) have been adjusted for one additional half stop of exposure. Fuji made an amazing film, but sadly it is discontinued.
The Science of Photography I was just looking through your videos for a Exposure Calculation for bellows / extension tubes. I have seen the (bellows/focal len)^2 for exposure factor equation... though am not sure how to measure for extension tubes on a Hasselblad... and honestly was lazily looking for a short TH-cam video demo vs reading equations online ;) just a suggestion if you are looking for another video idea 💡😃
I have an RZ-67 and do agree that it naturally has this feature built in. However, the bellows extension for the RZ (not sure about RB) goes from 0mm to 45mm. With the macro bellows on the Hasselblad you get a wider range of 65mm-200mm. I'm sure they make a bellows for the RZ, but the weight savings of the Hasselblad is why I would prefer to use it. Both are great cameras and for the prices RB/RZ bodies are going for it would be a great way to get into medium format photography. Happy Photographing and thanks for your comment!
This channel is great! lots of pinhole vids don't get into the math and technical details which is crucial if you're going beyond the basics.
Thank you! I didn't see many videos like mine out there about pinhole photography so I wanted to be a resource for people who wanted to get the best results.
Wow, you just rocked Pinhole Photography Day! Truly excellent experimental video, showing both the science and application behind focal length at once. This is like “smarter every day” for photography! Seems the focus difference becomes depth of field differences... and for a huge f-stop that is probably quite a distance.
Thank you very much! Photography is a lot of trial and error so developing tests like this is important and I'm happy to share the results if it might help someone else.
Excellent video !
I have been very satisfied using the bellows on my 4x5 view camera to obtain pinhole images of large subjects. However, I have not been satisfied using my small format cameras to obtain pinhole images of small subjects. Your video has inspired me to try using bellows and extension tubes to obtain better images of still life and smaller sized subjects.
Gem of a video 💚
Awesome experiment! It's really great to be able to see those side by side comparisons, and specially the difference between using pinhole and lens. It shows clearly how sharp you can get, and i've been wondering about that for some time. Of course this whole thing of pinhole photography is all about experimenting, but it's nice that someone's doing part of the hard work for you ;)
Really really nice, thanks a lot for all the useful info and advices!
Thank you so much for the kind words. I totally agree, it's pretty magical how a small hole can produce an image. Glad I can help take some of the guesswork out of it.
Somewhere in between extension tubes and a bellows would be helicoid tubes. Tons of these things available in m42; just add an adapter for your particular lens mount.
I'm so happy for following the wonderful video, that describes in scientific and mathematical methods, of how to find the correct diameter of the pinhole, according to the distance and the diagonal of the square area of the sensitive film, and I admired so much for the amazing final results specially the comparison, between of the pinhole images and the other images of the camera lens, in comparison I see the two images may approaches, the long scale of gradations, light and shadows almost the same, really that's extremely wonderful experiences, I learned much, Thanking you so much for your efforts and awesome explanation.
You are very welcome. Thank you for commenting.
Great experiment. I understand the math as well. But my experience has always been that diffraction creeps in way more slowly as a factor than what people claim. I have no fears of stopping down my enlarger to the smallest aperture opening or my large format camera.
Diffraction does play a role, but it is only in the modern era of pixel peeping that people seem to care about the mild softness that it causes. For most cases, and especially when viewing a print from a proper distance (not a screen) the impact is hard to notice. I also shoot large format and getting a large depth of field is often more important than diffraction caused by small apertures. Some of the masters were part of a group called f/64 because that is all that they photographed at to get the most in focus. Thanks for commenting.
If you did this with a large format camera, you could down to a very small “focal” length/angle of view. I actually use a pinhole turret in order to change to the optimal pinhole size. Anyway, love your channel for the maths and physics. Keep up the good work 😀
I know this is an "old" video, but its still very inspiring!
Assume you considered reciprocity failure with various extension tube adjustments.
Around the 12:40 mark you will see the table of focal lengths I used. Using that focal length and the known pinhole size you can calculate the effective F-Stop. You can then use that to calculate exposure and I listed the exposure times. I was using Fuji Acros 100 which has no reciprocity failure for the first 120 seconds. From 120-1000 seconds you only need a half stop correction. The times in the table with the asterisk (*) have been adjusted for one additional half stop of exposure. Fuji made an amazing film, but sadly it is discontinued.
The Science of Photography I was just looking through your videos for a Exposure Calculation for bellows / extension tubes. I have seen the (bellows/focal len)^2 for exposure factor equation... though am not sure how to measure for extension tubes on a Hasselblad... and honestly was lazily looking for a short TH-cam video demo vs reading equations online ;) just a suggestion if you are looking for another video idea 💡😃
The camera that would be a natural for this is a Mamiya RB-67... and I have one!
You can buy a body from eBay sellers for under USD $200.
I have an RZ-67 and do agree that it naturally has this feature built in. However, the bellows extension for the RZ (not sure about RB) goes from 0mm to 45mm. With the macro bellows on the Hasselblad you get a wider range of 65mm-200mm. I'm sure they make a bellows for the RZ, but the weight savings of the Hasselblad is why I would prefer to use it. Both are great cameras and for the prices RB/RZ bodies are going for it would be a great way to get into medium format photography. Happy Photographing and thanks for your comment!