Can Moving image be captured on a pinhole?

[AHiggz]

Hello!
I recently got given a pinhole play set from the 60s that I’ve been experimenting with.
after many trial and error I have managed to figure it out and honestly just started developing it with caffenol instead of the 60 years out of date developer given in the set And I’ve gotten comfortable with how it works.
However I always have to make things difficult for myself, I am pretty new to all this pinhole stuff but I was hoping to do a project that would require multiple pinholes capturing a moving projection. I know the results would not be a clean crisp image and that’s totally fine as I’m looking for more unusual results but I was wondering if it even possible.
I've tried exposing it to the 8mm projection for about 20 minutes but didn’t get anything at all, is this because it’s just not possible or do you think if I left it long enough, it would have some type of image?
I know the projection is a lot darker than natural light so it would take a while but I’m not sure how long I should try exposing it to the video before I admit defeat.
would changing the pinhole size help in anyway?
or maybe using film rather than light sensitive paper? As they have different light sensitivities?

Honestly I have no clue, and I’m a fine art student trying stupid things but just looking for some answers if anyone has any

 

[Ivo Stunga]

You'd get a smeared overblown smudge with sufficiently long exposures.

Doing multiple exposures with static projection - to overlay as many images as you wish - would get you somewhere.

Maybe it's possible to disengage movement for a while, risking overheating the film at the gate...

 

[loccdor]

Check the color temperature of the projector bulb and if the paper has red sensitivity.

 

[DWThomas]

I hope you are projecting the image onto a surface ("screen") and not AT the pinhole? The latter would be unworkable.

As noted above, long exposures are required. Even with relatively fast film, exposures of a second or so are fairly normal. That would make it difficult with moving images. Ivo's suggestion of overlaying static frames sounds to be the most likely approach. Most of my pinhole work has me looking for bold and static scenes -- bridges, buildings, landscapes, statues -- things that don't move. I recall one shot of buildings across an expressway in the foreground where the highway looks empty. Even though it was a busy road, the exposure was 14 seconds long and the moving vehicles didn't register.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The moving object will be blurred or it is a long exposure and the object moves quickly, it may not appear at all or as a ghost.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I've done pinhole as fast as 1/4 second, hand held, at EI 3000 -- but that was either super-pushed Tri-X or Polaroid 667/Fuji FP3000b -- and it still needed bright sun. I've also done pinhole on that speed film with flash, and that works fine with the correct guide number calculation (AG-1B at about arm's length with the pinhole converted Polaroid 210 and FP3000b).

Either of those methods will record something from even a moving subject. The problems with 8 mm movie film as a subject are that, first, the negative area means the screen isn't very bright, and second, it's only illuminated about 1/3 to 1/2 the time (the rest the projector's shutter is closed while the film is moved to the next frame). Indoor lighting for pinhole typically results in exposed of 30-60 minutes with ISO 100-400 film; with printing paper (effecive ISO around 6) you're looking at literally hours (if you have your film on a loop and the projector doesn't eat it before then).

You could (in theory, at least) use a pinhole to project a single frame or even a running film onto your paper, effectively making a pinhole enlarger. With a light source that won't melt or burn your film, however, that's also likely to run to hours of exposure.

 

[grahamp]

I think the only pinhole movement image I've made is Boat leaving Richmond marina. There are two basic options for multiple image combination - long exposure, or a long exposure built up from shorter ones. Since pinhole exposures (on film) are something like 7 - 10 stops longer than a lens camera with the same light and film, I am far from sure you will get an image that is recognisable, but I may be missing the intent here.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello!
I recently got given a pinhole play set from the 60s that I’ve been experimenting with.
after many trial and error I have managed to figure it out and honestly just started developing it with caffenol instead of the 60 years out of date developer given in the set And I’ve gotten comfortable with how it works.
However I always have to make things difficult for myself, I am pretty new to all this pinhole stuff but I was hoping to do a project that would require multiple pinholes capturing a moving projection. I know the results would not be a clean crisp image and that’s totally fine as I’m looking for more unusual results but I was wondering if it even possible.
I've tried exposing it to the 8mm projection for about 20 minutes but didn’t get anything at all, is this because it’s just not possible or do you think if I left it long enough, it would have some type of image?
I know the projection is a lot darker than natural light so it would take a while but I’m not sure how long I should try exposing it to the video before I admit defeat.
would changing the pinhole size help in anyway?
or maybe using film rather than light sensitive paper? As they have different light sensitivities?

Honestly I have no clue, and I’m a fine art student trying stupid things but just looking for some answers if anyone has any

film ia a lot more sensitive to light than paper.changing the hole size is not recommended because going to a larger hole will make the image fuzzier. A hole size giving you around f/256 will give you optimum sharpness, but will need very long exposure times. you can calculate those using a light meter and assuming f/256. One option might be using one or several strong electronic flashes.However synchronisation may bean issue.