Renner's Pinhole book

[Papercut]

So, I have the first edition of Renner's Pinhole Photography (1995) which I've enjoyed thoroughly. So, I'm curious whether the most recent fourth edition (2016) is worth purchasing. FWIW, I'm 100% uninterested in the "digital application" part of the subtitle, so I'm really asking whether there is any analog content that is significantly better / different than the first edition. The third edition (2004) doesn't have the reference to digital in the subtitle, so I guess the same question applies for that too. Anyone who has the first and third or first and fourth editions care to weigh in?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

So, I have the first edition of Renner's Pinhole Photography (1995) which I've enjoyed thoroughly. So, I'm curious whether the most recent fourth edition (2016) is worth purchasing. FWIW, I'm 100% uninterested in the "digital application" part of the subtitle, so I'm really asking whether there is any analog content that is significantly better / different than the first edition. The third edition (2004) doesn't have the reference to digital in the subtitle, so I guess the same question applies for that too. Anyone who has the first and third or first and fourth editions care to weigh in?

I was a bit underwhelmed myself;expected more science

 

[Jim Jones]

In pinhole photography the larger the film, the more information can be recorded. As some digital sensors get smaller and smaller, this can be an important consideration. It is a matter of pinhole optics science, not the sensor size. However, in practical photography, for an optimum pinhole focal length, the film or sensor can record more detail than the pinhole can resolve. An optimum pinhole can resolve somewhat more than one line/pair per millimeter for every millimeter of pinhole diameter.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I have the second edition and I was a bit disappointed. As mentioned I was expecting more technical and less art.

As also pointed out, I switched to a 4x5 view camera, to eliminate the increase in fuzziness when enlarging a 35 mm pinhole image but many of the photos shown in the book, were taken with an 8"x10" or 16"x20" or other large formats.

It is an interesting book if you like viewing various artistic approaches but I was expecting a more technical approach, I would have liked to have seen the exposure times, f stop values, types of film, light levels etc. for each photo.

 

[Papercut]

Thanks for the replies fellas. To be clear, I already own and enjoy the first edition, so I'm mainly looking for a comparison between that edition and later ones. I'm not a "completionist" by nature, so if the later editions are just slightly updated then I'm not really interested, but if any of them include substantially more information or substantially more or different art than the first edition then I'm tempted to add a later edition to my library.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have the second edition and I was a bit disappointed. As mentioned I was expecting more technical and less art.

As also pointed out, I switched to a 4x5 view camera, to eliminate the increase in fuzziness when enlarging a 35 mm pinhole image but many of the photos shown in the book, were taken with an 8"x10" or 16"x20" or other large formats.

It is an interesting book if you like viewing various artistic approaches but I was expecting a more technical approach, I would have liked to have seen the exposure times, f stop values, types of film, light levels etc. for each photo.

this reflects my view of the book as well. I have now seen negatives made by an 11x14 camera and the results are stunningly rich in detail,easily recording 7 lp/mm and thereby competing with an enlarged MF negative.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

So, I have the first edition of Renner's Pinhole Photography (1995) which I've enjoyed thoroughly. So, I'm curious whether the most recent fourth edition (2016) is worth purchasing. FWIW, I'm 100% uninterested in the "digital application" part of the subtitle, so I'm really asking whether there is any analog content that is significantly better / different than the first edition. The third edition (2004) doesn't have the reference to digital in the subtitle, so I guess the same question applies for that too. Anyone who has the first and third or first and fourth editions care to weigh in?

If you are indeed enjoying the first book, kudos to you. Not sure how, but that's fine. If you are into pinhole, then there is no better way to dig in than internet. Theory is quite interesting and has some great historical facts, all can be found on the net. If you want to see what pinhole is capable of ... net is THE place to see. If you are into pinhole because some people think of it as box made of anything that can be loaded with film and deliver an image, then again, net is the place. There are few books on pinhole out there, none covers the subject remotely close enough to its intricacies. I'd put Renner's book dead last though in any department, and when it comes to technical aspects ... it has close to none required. Mr. Renner either deliberately makes pinhole some sort of guess work, or he actually does not understand the behinds of the subject.

I also never look into pinhole as a resolution target, even if making quite sharp pinhole images is possible, but takes a bit more than matchbox with film in it.

Bottom line, to expand your pinhole knowledge it is nothing but net, net, net. Including any and many dedicated pinhole groups, flicker and similar on line galleries etc.

 

[Papercut]

If you are indeed enjoying the first book, kudos to you. Not sure how, but that's fine. If you are into pinhole, then there is no better way to dig in than internet. Theory is quite interesting and has some great historical facts, all can be found on the net. If you want to see what pinhole is capable of ... net is THE place to see. If you are into pinhole because some people think of it as box made of anything that can be loaded with film and deliver an image, then again, net is the place. There are few books on pinhole out there, none covers the subject remotely close enough to its intricacies. I'd put Renner's book dead last though in any department, and when it comes to technical aspects ... it has close to none required. Mr. Renner either deliberately makes pinhole some sort of guess work, or he actually does not understand the behinds of the subject.

I also never look into pinhole as a resolution target, even if making quite sharp pinhole images is possible, but takes a bit more than matchbox with film in it.

Bottom line, to expand your pinhole knowledge it is nothing but net, net, net. Including any and many dedicated pinhole groups, flicker and similar on line galleries etc.

Thanks, I guess, for a rant that (again) doesn't answer my question but does manage to slip in a snide insult to my intelligence and taste. *roll eyes* Hopefully it made you feel superior at least momentarily. If you don't have or haven't consulted both the first and a later edition of Renner's book, then there was no real reason for you to post as I'm not asking about your general assessment of the worth of Renner's book. And if you have, then a straight answer comparing the content (pictorial and textual) would have been much appreciated (and preferred).

For what it's worth, for the purposes of my original (still unanswered question), I am uninterested in the technical aspects that everyone in this thread comments on exclusively, nor on hearing that the internet is where I should be looking. Technical stuff is easy to find on various internet venues which I've read for years; and I keep up with many pinhole groups on flickr too for current images. Because I enjoy books (as physical objects that don't just suddenly go 404 for a whole host of reason), I was and still am interested in whether there are significant differences between the first and later editions -- and completely uninterested in hearing yet again that Renner's book lacks "technical" help or guidance. In case it's not clear: I know this, already, as I have the first edition.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Thanks, I guess, for a rant that (again) doesn't answer my question but does manage to slip in a snide insult to my intelligence and taste. *roll eyes* Hopefully it made you feel superior at least momentarily. If you don't have or haven't consulted both the first and a later edition of Renner's book, then there was no real reason for you to post as I'm not asking about your general assessment of the worth of Renner's book. And if you have, then a straight answer comparing the content (pictorial and textual) would have been much appreciated (and preferred).

For what it's worth, for the purposes of my original (still unanswered question), I am uninterested in the technical aspects that everyone in this thread comments on exclusively, nor on hearing that the internet is where I should be looking. Technical stuff is easy to find on various internet venues which I've read for years; and I keep up with many pinhole groups on flickr too for current images. Because I enjoy books (as physical objects that don't just suddenly go 404 for a whole host of reason), I was and still am interested in whether there are significant differences between the first and later editions -- and completely uninterested in hearing yet again that Renner's book lacks "technical" help or guidance. In case it's not clear: I know this, already, as I have the first edition.

And again I say: Renner is dead last in my assessment in all published books on pinhole, irrespective of what information or inspiration one is after. That was my main input whether you like it or take offense to. I certainly did not mean to "insult your intelligence", even if only now I read about your overall experience in pinhole and what other sources you have been using, hence my additional "rant" on available sources. And the fact you have seen other sources outside of Renner just furthers my astonishment you find Renner's book (first or last) enjoyable, given what all other sources have to offer in comparison. Renner refers to his book as a BIBLE. When one does that, he better has something to cover the subject from all angles, and Renner does not even begin to do that. But that is usually the case with all self-masters of a medium.

Pinhole can be shockingly high aesthetics (and even in resolution if one is after it). IMHO, Renner delivers none of that on any page. There is a Pinhole Photography Festival held annually in Poland that at least used to publish a book of chosen work. I cannot find a direct reference to a source of getting one as I bought a couple of years from an auction site, possibly volume is low and one needs to wait for new festival to be covered same way again. The two I have are great way of enjoying a hard book while seeing what pinhole can be. Hopefully they will continue and make more widely available albums.

Apologies for making my post as some sort of personal attack on your intelligence, never my intention.

 

[Papercut]

And again I say: Renner is dead last in my assessment in all published books on pinhole, irrespective of what information or inspiration one is after. That was my main input whether you like it or take offense to. I certainly did not mean to "insult your intelligence", even if only now I read about your overall experience in pinhole and what other sources you have been using, hence my additional "rant" on available sources. And the fact you have seen other sources outside of Renner just furthers my astonishment you find Renner's book (first or last) enjoyable, given what all other sources have to offer in comparison. Renner refers to his book as a BIBLE. When one does that, he better has something to cover the subject from all angles, and Renner does not even begin to do that. But that is usually the case with all self-masters of a medium.

Pinhole can be shockingly high aesthetics (and even in resolution if one is after it). IMHO, Renner delivers none of that on any page. There is a Pinhole Photography Festival held annually in Poland that at least used to publish a book of chosen work. I cannot find a direct reference to a source of getting one as I bought a couple of years from an auction site, possibly volume is low and one needs to wait for new festival to be covered same way again. The two I have are great way of enjoying a hard book while seeing what pinhole can be. Hopefully they will continue and make more widely available albums.

Apologies for making my post as some sort of personal attack on your intelligence, never my intention.

Apology accepted.

As for astonishment at my enjoyment of Renner. Perhaps it's hard to fathom(?), but different people can find different things desirable in a book -- and I don't care that Renner mischaracterizes it as a Bible. I don't read it like scripture or take it as such. But I have enjoyed the first edition for its breezy jaunt through pinhole history and the potpurri of methods, artist statements, and images that aren't just shots of rocks along a coastline with the ghostly waves; etc. I started the thread because I wondered what has been added to or taken away from later additions in terms of images and text. I'm guessing that no one can say as they don't own (or haven't seen) more than one edition, which is fine.

In any case, I will keep a look out for the Polish pinhole festival book as that sounds like it would scratch an itch (maybe the eBay gods will smile upon me), so thank you for that reference!

 

[Arthurwg]

I have the same question as the OP. I have and love Renner's first book and would like to buy the latest edition if there's a good reason.. I see that it has more pages, which I view as a good thing...

For internet reading, I recommend Jon Grepstad's Photography and texts (Johngrepstad.com/pinhole-photography), which as tons of great information.

 

[Jim Jones]

I second Jon Grepstad's fine pinhole site. Both he and Eric Renner have made tremendous efforts at compiling and distilling information on a subject that has been plagued by misinformation and dissention for most of photography's history. Neither can cover everything in one source. I struggled to acquire dozens of valid citations while working on a paper on pinhole photography for a master's degree without the aid of the internet 40 years ago. Jon, Eric, and others have made this task much more rewarding.

 

[tezzasmall]

For internet reading, I recommend Jon Grepstad's Photography and texts (Johngrepstad.com/pinhole-photography), which as tons of great information.

I second Jon Grepstad's fine pinhole site.

Having just tried to access the site with the link above, I was unable to access it. It turns out that 'John' in the address should not have a 'h' in it as given, so should be written as:

https://jongrepstad.com/pinhole-photography/

Many thanks for bringing it to my attention though.

Terry S

 

[Arthurwg]

Just looking at Renner's book. again (I have the second addition). While it may have some value to show that it's possible to make a pinhole camera out of a fruit, cereal box or God knows what, I think the emphasis on foolish things is really a waste of time. The same goes for all the multiple pinhole cameras that make pictures that you would not want to look at a second time, or other images that illustrate useless bazar distortions . Let's face it, most of the photos in the book are without real photographic or aesthetic value. Yes, they prove that such pictures are possible, but now that you know, so what? Indeed, many of the photos used to illustrate the book are downright ugly. A much better book, IMHO, would stress high-quality photos of real aesthetic or pictorial interest, with an emphasis on "beauty". and discuss the ways that can be achieved. There are many excellent photographers who make great pinhole pictures. Craig Barber comes to mind at the top of the list.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Just looking at Renner's book. again (I have the second addition). While it may have some value to show that it's possible to make a pinhole camera out of a fruit, cereal box or God knows what, I think the emphasis on foolish things is really a waste of time. The same goes for all the multiple pinhole cameras that make pictures that you would not want to look at a second time, or other images that illustrate useless bazar distortions . Let's face it, most of the photos in the book are without real photographic or aesthetic value. Yes, they prove that such pictures are possible, but now that you know, so what? Indeed, many of the photos used to illustrate the book are downright ugly. A much better book, IMHO, would stress high-quality photos of real aesthetic or pictorial interest, with an emphasis on "beauty". and discuss the ways that can be achieved. There are many excellent photographers who make great pinhole pictures. Craig Barber comes to mind at the top of the list.

Succinctly so correct. Sadly, Renner's "bible" is anything but, that on top of below average or plain ugly and in fact some disgusting photographs, if you look deeper in, contains minimal even basic pinhole principles, exposure and what one needs to do to get best resolution. How pinhole resolves and what governs it does not have to be one's goal, yet without understanding it, it remains a record of chance, meaning no progress can be made in mastering it without knowing what and why things happened inside that "fruit with a hole".

It is indeed amazing how many get excited about seeing something coming out of these silly "boxes" without having any clue what hit them. Funnily enough, no matter how far looks, Renner does not help, and he either does not really know himself, or chooses not to share. The part I laughed at most was in edition 4, when he says, to improve final image he ... uses Photoshop. Then looking back again, when you realize he does not really cover how that image was created in principle, the whole story becomes little more than an arrogant joke (assuming he actually understands the process).

Pinhole photographs can indeed be of unmatched beauty in their own right. There are thousands examples proving that, and easily accessible for anyone with internet connection, yet pretty much none shown in Renner's book.

In summary, if one takes Renner's pitch at face value, he or she has no idea what is actually missing from it, both technically and aesthetically.

 

[Arthurwg]

Time for a new pinhole book.

 

[John Koehrer]

Don't want to use fruit?
Use one of these: http://www.steveirvine.com/ceramic_cameras.html

 

[Arthurwg]

Those pots (cameras) really are beautiful, and the photos are really good as well.

 

[scheimfluger_77]

Those pots (cameras) really are beautiful, and the photos are really good as well.

Steve posted regularly at f295, it was always a treat to see his work.