- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 9,304
- Format
- 4x5 Format
Some did. Before it was cool, Diana's were purchased by the carton for high school students. Source: Photography teacher friend of my dad's.
I now wonder why they didn't start the camera part with a plastic P&S so we would load some 100 iso film, shoot it in all light then bring em to the darkroom and realize what the affect of shooting in "good light" vs say an indoor night shot would have on the final product...
As far as pinhole lenses for your Nikon the easiest is to get a good solid black body cap and drill a 1/4 or 1/2 inch hole in it. Then get a brass shim or a piece of pop can and punch a needle (do not remember the best size) into the shim. Tape and or glue this onto the inside of the body cap so that the hole you drilled is totally covered by the shim. You now have a body cap. If you use the specified needle rather than one at random it is easy on line to find the f stop for it as the focal length would be around 45 or 46 mm.
.
Gerald- what, exactly, do you have against plastic cameras?
It has nothing to do with plastic cameras per se. I just don't understand lomography and the idea of purposely taking a bad photograph. Some of these plastic cameras were perfectly dreadful with all sorts of light leaks, lens distortions, etc. There are some older plastic cameras that take creditable photographs. But Lomo was to me a ripoff. I have a Brownie Hawkeye 620 that I occasionally use when I am feeling nostalgic.
I have a Holga. It wasn't crappy enough so I baked it in the oven a little bit. I also have a very nice 8x10 inch view camera with lenses that cost the GDP of some third world countries. I enjoy using them both. People who run down a particular method of photography generally don't know much about photography.
Hint... It ain't about cameras.
Perhaps you should look at a few issues of Light Leak to try to learn what others appreciate in low fi photography
Bad is in the eye of the beholder... Just because you don't see it, it doesn't mean that "art" can't be created with them.I just don't understand lomography and the idea of purposely taking a bad photograph.
... experimenting with (developing the film right now) a half-frame roll from a camera which I believe at least tries to form quality images....
I've tried shooting through shot glass's, thick glass ashtrays, colored vases, and bought cheap Cokin and no name screw in filters. If I destroyed them I just toss them. For me its just fun seeing what I get and a lot never make it to the stop bath. I develop C-41 color and black and white film in D-76. If you are enjoying it do not worry about what anyone else thinks. I get grief from my brother all the time because I still use film.
David
then there are the occasional serendipitous accidents in the developing tank of course.
I'm interested in abstraction, although this started out as just a simple snap of a landscape (it was on one of a few rolls shot quickly for the purpose of my trying out reversal) it ended up as something I like very much:
The frustrating thing is that though I have notes on the process that created this , I bet I could never reproduce it ...
It has nothing to do with plastic cameras per se. I just don't understand lomography and the idea of purposely taking a bad photograph. Some of these plastic cameras were perfectly dreadful with all sorts of light leaks, lens distortions, etc. There are some older plastic cameras that take creditable photographs. But Lomo was to me a ripoff. I have a Brownie Hawkeye 620 that I occasionally use when I am feeling nostalgic.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?