Why limit myself to 'soft-focus' images? I sharpen all my scans. It
doesn't matter if they are taken with a pinhole camera or a conventional
camera. My scanner produces soft scans, so I sharpen them. It costs a lot
of money to have 120 film processed and printed in the UK so I process my
own and scan the negatives. The Zero 2000 produces sharp images but I also
like to use a 35mm body cap to produce softer pinhole images.
http://www.s-rees.co.uk/pinhole/wal/2.htm
I think it's nice to have the choice of a soft or sharp negative. Some
subjects look better slightly soft but others need a greater resolution.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean Hanson" <jhanson@pon.net>
To: "pinhole-discussion-request@pinhole.com"
<pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 12:53 AM
Subject: [pinhole-discussion] wondering
> About the message two days ago; a member took a pinhole image,
> "sharpened" it in Adobe or a digital method, and printed it out. I
> wonder why we don't just take traditional lens photographs and smear
> them a little and print them out to look like pinhole work. What is it
> that we are doing? I love pinhole photography and am retired from
> traditional photo studio work. So my sister asked me recently, "why are
> you and your friends intent on taking bad pictures?" I have always felt
> we had a kind of philosophy...we were trying to see the world, or time,
> or light another way. And I am not down on digital....but it is hard to
> explain to non- participants that we really are doing something, and
> something important. If we sharpen the images to look like better
> conventional photos, is something being lost? The mystery? The
> understanding of an almost occult medium? An atempt to see what light is
> really doing as it hits and wraps around an object? What can I tell my
> sister? Jean
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
Received on Tue Dec 10 03:46:07 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon 13 Dec 2004 - 23:18:50 PST