Re: New site pinhole

Katharine,

I would rather suggest you to reduce your inner tube diameter than adding
pinholes because by adding pinholes you will add far more complexity in the
reading of the final image.
I' sometimes use a 6-pinholes home made box and I' ve already seen
8-pinholes images .
In my opinion, there is no interest in increasing number of pinholes. A
look-around division factor of 6 results in a fragmented 360° view [even
with picture blending don't forget the lateral image inversion betweeen
contiguous pictures !] that our brains can rather easily manage (6 is a
kind of "natural" factor, often present in Nature).
But in my personal opinion fragmenting more the picture by a 8 factor only
adds more difficulty to image reading, without really bringing a "new"
vision. Just a kind of anecdotic trick!

Bon courage
Cheers from France
Jean

----- Original Message -----
From: "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer@pacifier.com>
To: <pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] New site pinhole

> Thanks, Eric and Chris,
>
> So it sounds like what I need is either a smaller inner circle, or more
> pinholes, to get the very short focal length I want and still have a
> seamless blend between the pictures.
_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
pinhole-discussion mailing list
pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html
Received on Mon Dec 20 00:37:06 2004