Re: Size and usefulness of 'viewing' pinhole

It was suggested to me that you start with the aperture that would be the
equivalent of f16 for your focal length. Then depending on the type of
ground glass you are using there may be the possibility of experimenting
with a smaller aperture.
This worked quite well for me when composing.
You would have to let us know what it does in regard to view camera
movements. I have no idea what the effect of rise and fall etc. would be
with a pinhole.
Ballard

>From: CXC <cxc@pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com
>To: pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com
>Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Size and usefulness of 'viewing' pinhole
>Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2002 11:08:28 -0800
>
>I am interested in putting a pinhole on a large format (5x7) camera in
>order to utilize rise/fall to change perspective. I would like to be
>able to see the results of the pinhole shift on the ground glass of a
>conventional LF camera, but of course the actual 'taking' pinhole does
>not allow enough light through to see anything. I have heard tell of a
>'viewing' pinhole, presumably for exactly my purpose. I presume it is
>oversized enough to provide a visible image.
>
>Has anyone used a viewing pinhole? If so, do they actually work? Is
>there a formula or starting point for finding the correct viewing hole
>size, say for 125mm taking hole? Would I be way better off using a
>comparable lens for composition?
>
>I am assuming that be the viewer a pinhole or a lens, the coverage of
>the taking pinhole would have to be determined by trial and error.
>
>TIA,
>CXC
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
>Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
>Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
>unsubscribe or change your account at
>http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Received on Sun Mar 3 14:37:35 2002