Film to monitor.

[MattKing]

Sigh.
Why is a request that this useful thread be moved to where it belongs so upsetting to people?
It is an interesting thread idea, which could bring rise to all sorts of discussion about how both pinholes and digitization affect acutance, and how there are a bunch of digital techniques (along with a couple of analog ones) that can assist.

 

[Vaughn]

Actually -- the OP at most borderline...just a 'this is how I can get higher-quality images of this sub-forum posted here" post. Now we know how the OP posts his analog results. People often disclose how they reproduced their work for display on the forum...the OP just took it a little further and showed the improvement and why.

I think AgX was just being German... As in..."You will NOT cross the street on foot on a red light, even though the street has been blocked off for months and no vehicles can use it." (Yes, Germans will give you dirty looks if you do this.) It is not harsh, it is normal.

Now back to are regular programing...

 

[grat]

Why is a request that this useful thread be moved to where it belongs so upsetting to people?

It's not. But the way it was "requested" (and I'm sorry-- AgX did not make a "request"-- he made a complaint, and his english is very good) is akin to a policeman banging on your door at 10pm at night and shouting at you through a megaphone to turn the music down. He's probably got a good reason for doing it, but no one likes the police banging on their door.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Sigh.
Why is a request that this useful thread be moved to where it belongs so upsetting to people?

It wasn't what was asked, but the manner in which it was asked.

 

[MattKing]

It's not. But the way it was "requested" (and I'm sorry-- AgX did not make a "request"-- he made a complaint, and his english is very good) is akin to a policeman banging on your door at 10pm at night and shouting at you through a megaphone to turn the music down. He's probably got a good reason for doing it, but no one likes the police banging on their door.

I've read a lot of AgX's posts over the years, and he and I have corresponded several times as well using the "Conversation" utility.
One of our more common subjects of discussion is how different his understanding of jargon and word choice is from many of the native English speakers here.
But yes, he complained about the OP's choice of sub-forum for this thread.

 

[AgX]

AgX could have said what he said in a better way - "This thread belongs in the Misc. Hybrid Discussions sub-forum" comes to mind.

My reply was worded in neat reference to the wording of the OP, who explicetely stated his post being intended to enlighten our knowledge.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

My reply was worded in neat reference to the wording of the OP, who explicetely stated his post being intended to enlighten our knowledge.

Your reply was least of all neat. It was however riddled with self righteous, authoritative, assholism.

 

[AgX]

Exactly the same you then could say for the OP's remark.

And I did not say that my reply was neat, but I said that it was in neat reference.


(By the way, with my original comment above things got even and I did not want this to go further or to escalate. And on Christopher's reply I thus first responded by PM. I even did not understood his wording)

 

[BrianShaw]

I’m so glad that we now have all of these additions to our tribal knowledge!

 

[Chan Tran]

Well I don't blame AgX because the OP making a post trying to teach us something and not a question. If he had problem with scanning and post here in the wrong forum I wouldn't want to be harsh but he tried to teach us something we are not looking for in the forum.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Let me pose a question. So what?

What or who would truly be harmed if no one reacts to one thread being in the wrong place of the forum?

Rules are rules. They are there for a reason.

 

[Jim Jones]

Rules are rules. They are there for a reason.

Rules can be interpreted differently, which makes practicing law rewarding. Let us get back to discussing photography, not law.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

It is funny how no good deed goes unpunished.

First of let me state that I Googled this forum years ago to find other Pinholers. A click of the button and I was sent straight to this forum. It was several posts later that I finally discovered that Photrio had other forums; and this forum was for analog photos. Well that was to be expected.

Since this little dust up, I decided to review the rules. (Engineers like to do that).

So we find,
* Analog Workflow Forums (100% Analog/Traditional) - My pinhole photos are 100 % Analogy.
* This area is ONLY for discussion of 100% Analog/Traditional photographic processes. No Hybrid discussion or Digital discussion should be posted. - This is where things get murky. My discussion was not about digitizing my photographic process, which is indeed 100% analog; It was about maintaining the fidelity of your hard won pinhole photo when posting to the forum.
* This includes off-topic suggestions that fall outside of '100% Analog' processes, for example,"Hey, you can do this in photoshop". - Once again the rules are stating the photographic process used to make the photo must not be modified by digital means.

It is clear that the intent of the above rules are to assure the analog pinhole photo was not modified or enhanced by digital means. It makes no mention of how you upload the image.

Now comes the point of this discussion, "Can you use digital to up load your picture"? Since you cannot even type a reply to this forum without digital interfacing, it is logical that the same interfacing (your laptop) can be used to upload your photo. Whether scanned with a modified cheap desk top scanner, a professional photo scanning service or a modern camera, the image is going to be digitally up loaded to this forum.

That is just the way it works in the digital age we live in.

Take care.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Grandpa Ron be like.

 

[BrianShaw]

Since this little dust up, I decided to review the rules. (Engineers like to do that).

God luv you!

(Generically using a common idiom and with no intent to be a religious posting, or stimulate the same.)

 

[MattKing]

The rub is that pinhole photography begs extra digitally related (or intervening darkroom step related) discussion, when it comes to talking about how best to upload it.
If you (Grandpa Ron) will give me permission to copy your initial post, I'll start a thread in an appropriate sub-forum about that subject, and about how the two methods you have tried aren't optimal.

 

[Donald Qualls]

For whatever it's worth, I agree with you -- there is no way to show our images, either for pride or troubleshooting, without digitizing them in some manner.

In the analog parts of the forum, however, we usually try to avoid discussing things like the difference between a flatbed scanner, a dedicated film scanner, and a DSLR with copy stand and light table.

Either way, good to see you getting good results with your pinhole camera(s) and finding a better-for-your method of getting them into a form you can share.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

MattKing

You may feel free to repost all or part for my comments.

We must all keep in mind that the comments posted on this board are simply opinions. There should be no expectation of complete agreement.

I would be a very dull world if we all thought exactly the same.

Take care

 

[removed account4]

Once I got reasonably happy with my PH techniques I wanted to share them. That meant they had to be digitized.

Putting a negative on a home scanner with an external light source shining down on it. This is a rather common technique. Unfortunately with 35 mm even the finest scan resolution available to me (2400 dpi), would show scan lines when enlarged to view on the monitor. I switched from 35 mm to 4x5 film which help considerably. Still, occasionally I still could detect some scan lines.

I watch a video on converting 35mm slides to digital with a light board and a digital camera with a close up lens. After making a light board I found I could buy and 9"x12" board used for artist tracing for $13.00, all I needed was a white sheet of plastic to defuse all the tiny little led lights. It is more uniform and brighter than my home made board.

This image is from the scanner.

View attachment 273680


This image is with the Light board. Using the digital camera has far better resolution and contrast.
View attachment 273681
This photo was taken in the woods on a sunny day, at with 200 ISO film and f360 for 60 sec.

I just thought I would add to the tribal knowledge of the board.

Have fun

hey grandpa Ron

do you use a cellphone might be easier than scanning as flat art without a light-lid
I saw someone post recently ( or maybe it was an ad I saw I can hardly tell anymore ) there is an app you can buy for the phone that directly converts a negative to a positive... basically what you do is you put your negative infront of a light source. ... maybe you tape a white piece of paper on a north facing window
and put your negative taped on that. .. then you take your phone and make a snapshot of the negative and .. it converts it automatically... ye olde camera scan.
come to think of it I think there is some sort of "system" holga or lomo or a kickstarter came up with that has the cellphone stand and light source all together to make it ez pz. personally I have been wanting to buy a ROC retouching stand
( open back mirror and milk glass ) to both retouch negatives ( paper and film ) and illuminate glass plates and film and paper for this same reason you are describing. much easier to deal with than my 15 year old contraption.

(but then again sometimes if my film is thin enough I put a sheet of copier paper between it and the lid and scan it like a print it works great! )

I hope this helps !
John

 

[MattKing]

MattKing

You may feel free to repost all or part for my comments.

Thanks - you will find my comments in the following thread: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...es-and-digitizing-issues.183923/#post-2418185
Note that you will only be able to access that thread if you have turned on access to the Hybrid sections of Photrio.

 

[MattKing]

In the hope that I might contribute to this subject, I started the above referred to thread in an appropriate hybrid sub-forum.
There are some comments though that are appropriate to this analog only side of the site.
One of the ways of digitizing a pinhole negative is to print the negative in a darkroom, and then scan that print.
There are, however, some darkroom tricks that are necessary/useful, and those tricks provide some indirect comment on the digitization methods that Grandpa Ron described at the start of all this.
My other thread talks in detail about Grandpa Ron's methods, but suffice it to say that both of them employ diffused, low contrast and acutance minimizing light. That is the exact opposite of what you want to do with pinhole negatives.
Copying/paraphrasing a bit from my other thread:
Pinhole Photography requires a different approach when it comes to printing a negative. Primarily, this is a result of the following factors:
1) most of what we see as "sharpness" is actually acutance, or contrast at the edge of details in the image (aka "edge contrast")*;
2) the pinhole process is disruptive of acutance, because it overlays image over image, and thus tends to minimize edge contrast.
For these reasons, when enlarging a pinhole negative, it is important to use light that is as contrasty and directional as you have available. A condensor enlarger with either high contrast paper or a high contrast filter helps. A point source would be even better. Reduction of potential sources of flare is very important.
You could apply the same approach to making a contact print of the negative, which would be even more effective. Contact prints from pinhole negatives actually are really nice.
There is another technique which, when combined with the forgoing, can help even more - unsharp masking. A carefully prepared unsharp mask sandwiched well with your pinhole negative can add significant edge effects, which can make a real difference with apparent sharpness.
Of course, there are also film development methods such as stand and semi-stand that can create edge effects, but I'm not a fan.
All of which can yield a pleasantly contrasty and apparently sharp print that is relatively easy to scan and therefore to create a nice digital file from.
All of which fits easily in a purely analog sub-forum .

 

[removed account4]

Your reply was least of all neat. It was however riddled with self righteous, authoritative, assholism.

dude
lighten up will you ?
AgX or anyone else is allowed to say " hey Bub wrong area" in any way they want
if anyone was rude im seeing it was you with name calling.. and harsh attack.

this site has 3 areas and if someone has the wrong box checked off
they won't be able to find the post. and the mod-squad and site owner are busy with life so why not
tell the OP his post was in the wrong spot.

Rules are rules. They are there for a reason.

+1

 

[Truzi]

Your reply was least of all neat. It was however riddled with self righteous, authoritative, assholism.

In English, the word "neat" can have a few different meanings depending on context. I believe his usage fit the meaning in-context.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

MattKing, that is a very interesting project. It may be a bit advanced, for all but the most dedicated pinhole enthusiast. Still it is certainly a lot of food for thought.

The thing I try to keep in mind is that a lot of Pinholers are new to film and have neither the equipment, nor expertise to ease the process. Therefore, I try to keep it simple.

Thanks for the tips,

 

[jeffreyg]

It seems to me that since you switched to 4x5 you should get good results regardless of how you reproduce the image. Be sure to have the camera on a sturdy tripod and with long exposures select stationery subject matter. Properly process the film. If a contact print on paper is sharp to your liking then your issues are with your scanning. I have been using an Ilford Titan with HP5 processed in Ilfotec DDX as well as some in PMK/Pyro. I've printed them as contact prints in platinum/palladium, enlarged silver gelatin as well as scanned and printed with digital ink. I don't try to enlarge beyond what appears appropriate for sharpness. The way I see it, each photographic technique is a different medium ie. pencil drawing, charcoal, water color and so on. Make you images the best you can for the particular way they are to be presented

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/