is it easy to breakdown the percentage of pinholers that use paper negatives?

[lloyd528]

I am new to this forum and have a simple question…...I am just about to use my newly fabricated pinhole camera using 4x5 sheet film, but I am curious….would anyone like to take a stab at the percentage of folks who shoot paper negatives as opposed to film negatives? thanks…lloyd

 

[BrianShaw]

I rarely do pinhole since the demise of Polaroid sheet product, but when I do it is film negative.

 

[DannL.]

I'm in the 5.37% that use paper negatives. I also looked around the other day and realized I no longer shoot film in my view cameras. Just paper negatives and homemade dry-plates. I thought that was neat. No wonder the film industry is in decline.

 

[lloyd528]

seriously, do you feel you are in the minority, that use paper negatives? Do you scan the paper negatives and print digitally or do you use another process?

 

[SMBooth]

Would that be people that use paper negatives a 100% of the time or only some time as that will change the ratio quite a bit. Then where do people that use X-ray film, are they seen as film or paper personal I think there somewhere in the middle. I think the answer is a friendly No.

 

[DannL.]

seriously, do you feel you are in the minority, that use paper negatives? Do you scan the paper negatives and print digitally or do you use another process?

The 5.37% remark was more tongue-in-cheek. I'm of the opinion that most pinholers use 35mm or 120 film.

As for myself, I contact-print my paper negatives.

Of course I could be completely wrong about all of this. I could have been in a majority all of this time, and not have known it.

 

[edcculus]

I've built a pinhole camera (yet to use it) and plan on using paper negatives. I don't forsee using sheet film

 

[Dr Croubie]

I'm in the same boat, I've built a camera and wondering what to put in it. I've done the first few shots with Kodalith, but I've only got so much of that to go around, and op is op.

With the demise (but hopefully the resurrection later) of Harman DPP it's negatives and contact prints all the way for me, my scanner can only take 8x10/A4 and my pinhole cameras go a lot bigger than that.

But I feel it's a bit of a waste to use real film, especially with the expense, there's no need for such high-resolution films when it's only contact printed and pinholes diffract the hell out of it anyway.

The only reason I can see to use film is for the speed. I keep seeing the same guy selling 320TXP in 5x7" for $1.50 a sheet on fleabay (it hasn't even expired yet) and contemplating whether to bite, until I compare that to MGiv at 40c a sheet in 5x7". Plus paper goes a lot bigger and stays relatively cheap (even 11x14" MGiv is only $1.70 a sheet).

Paper (esp contact-printed to paper positive) also gives a bit more 'rusticness' to the image imho, and isn't that what pinhole should be?

 

[MartinP]

Don't forget to try Harman Direct-Positive as well. The result is then a unique one-off print, rather than a negative (paper or film) which can be contact-printed.

If you find it necessary, the Direct Positive paper can be easily flashed in advance of use for coping with contrasty lighting, assuming that you have some sort of darkened room available. Do it in the same way as for flashing a normal print - choose some level of flashing-exposure below that which gives the first visible grey.

 

[NedL]

From the pinhole groups at Ipernity, my impression is that most pinholers use film. I use paper negatives and color instant film. I've never used normal film in a pinhole camera... although I've seen some color film results that tempt me to try it! I make contact prints and also scan/invert with paper negatives. And by the way I love paper negatives and honestly believe that they are a very legitimate and beautiful form of photography, and are not just for testing cameras or being cheap.

Edit to add: also I have no intention of stopping use of paper negatives and have never thought of them as a stepping stone to film or that I'd "graduate" to film or anything like that. If anything, just the opposite and they have sparked an interest in calotypes and other paper-based photography!

Edited again to add: Also there is a paper negatives group here at APUG:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

It would be fun if it got some activity!

 

[Sirius Glass]

I rarely take pinhole photographs, but when I did I used color and black & white film. So as far a paper, that is a negative.

 

[lloyd528]

Don't forget to try Harman Direct-Positive as well. The result is then a unique one-off print, rather than a negative (paper or film) which can be contact-printed.

If you find it necessary, the Direct Positive paper can be easily flashed in advance of use for coping with contrasty lighting, assuming that you have some sort of darkened room available. Do it in the same way as for flashing a normal print - choose some level of flashing-exposure below that which gives the first visible grey.[/QUOTE]

Than

I better google Harman DPP right now. This may be the answer to my issue. I never heard of it. All the info you guys gave me is great and I am going to rethink the film vs paper issue. Glad I got the 25 sheets of 4x5 film though. I never worked with anything over 120. Thank you all.

 

[NedL]

Welcome to APUG and have fun!

 

[Dr Croubie]

I better google Harman DPP right now. This may be the answer to my issue. I never heard of it. All the info you guys gave me is great and I am going to rethink the film vs paper issue. Glad I got the 25 sheets of 4x5 film though. I never worked with anything over 120. Thank you all.

While you're googling, don't forget to read (there was a url link here which no longer exists) before you get your hopes up. Although they have promised to be trying to bring it back, we can only hope they succeed...

 

[SMBooth]

If you find it necessary, the Direct Positive paper can be easily flashed in advance of use for coping with contrasty lighting, assuming that you have some sort of darkened room available. Do it in the same way as for flashing a normal print - choose some level of flashing-exposure below that which gives the first visible grey.

[/QUOTE]

Actually direct positive is reversed so when pre flashing your looking for the first sign of the change from black to less than black. Not white to grey.
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2013930125691588.pdf

 

[DWThomas]

Most of my pinhole activity occurs on WPPD at the end of April each year, with maybe a few preliminary tests leading up to it. The last three years I have shot a few paper negatives, last year being the best so far. But my most reliable results have been with film. The latest toy is 8x10, with which I shot paper negs last year, as film is alarmingly pricey. I have since picked up some Fuji Green x-ray film I hope to work minor miracles with this April, we shall see. April seems to be an alarmingly busy time of year for some reason.

Breakdown? Well, yeah, I'm a little broken down , but I'd say I probably have shot 85% (or higher) film to date, though I still plan to experiment again with paper negatives.

 

[Joe VanCleave]

Over the years I've used color film, B&W film, lith film, paper negatives and Harman DPP. But I'm mostly a paper negative shooter with pinhole. I both scan and convert to a positive image in PS and also contact print onto silver paper. I preflash the paper negatives and use grade 2 RC to control contrast, while other people use yellow filters with MG paper.

I don't do much Harman DPP in pinhole these days, mainly due to the extremely slow speed and resulting long exposures. I prefer to shoot Harman with glass lenses. However, I do have an 8x10 box camera that I "optimized" for Harman DPP by using a larger-than-optimal sized pinhole, to gain a bit of speed at the expense of overall sharpness.

~Joe