# Paper pinhole photography



## Torus34

A thread on another forum [APUG] tweaked my interest in pinhole photography again.  A quick trip to the cellar unearthed an 8x10 I'd thrown together a while back.  They're easy to make.  Mine's wood, but all you need is cardboard, tape and some black paint.  Think of an oversize old box brownie and you've got it.  A needle and some aluminum soda/beer can stock equals a pinhole.  I'll be using 8x10 RC variable contrast paper as the negative.  A medium amber gelatin filter should take care of the blue sensitivity issue.  The 'shutter' is a strip of black plastic electrician's tape I can pull down and then press back up.  Given a sunny day tomorrow I'll get a handle on the exposure time.

It's one way to chase those winter blues away, no?


----------



## snowbear

I remember making one as a kid - I taped a 35mm film box to the business side of a 136mm (instamatic) cartridge.


----------



## Torus34

snowbear said:


> I remember making one as a kid - I taped a 35mm film box to the business side of a 136mm (instamatic) cartridge.



Yup!  Pinholery's a relatively simple thing.  It's also something that one can get 'into' with a minimal darkroom set-up.  A dark room, a few chemicals, some enlarging paper, a few kitty-litter trays, a safe-light and away you go.  All the rest is a matter of making do.  The final images can be rather impressive, 'specially if you make use of the nostalgic softness of a pinhole image and the impressive cell-phone-like DOF.

Aside: If anyone reading this is interested in giving it a try, I'll respond to any start of a 'conversation'.


----------



## limr

It's been almost a year since I've used mine. I think it's time to break it out again!

My first homemade pinhole camera | Photography Forum


----------



## JustJazzie

We used film canisters and itty bitty photo papers when I make mine in school. Never really thought about making them bigger.


----------



## Torus34

JustJazzie said:


> We used film canisters and itty bitty photo papers when I make mine in school. Never really thought about making them bigger.



When it comes to pin-holers and paper negatives, bigger's better.  With film negs it's a different matter.  Big sheet film can bust a budget somewhat sooner than now.  Happily, the pin hole itself is almost cost-free.  You can feel really smug when you look up the prices of some of the lenses people swoon over these days.

I'll be posting my results as I start pinning down the techniques I develop..


----------



## Light Guru

Torus34 said:


> JustJazzie said:
> 
> 
> 
> We used film canisters and itty bitty photo papers when I make mine in school. Never really thought about making them bigger.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When it comes to pin-holers and paper negatives, bigger's better.  With film negs it's a different matter.  Big sheet film can bust a budget somewhat sooner than now.  Happily, the pin hole itself is almost cost-free.  You can feel really smug when you look up the prices of some of the lenses people swoon over these days.
> 
> I'll be posting my results as I start pinning down the techniques I develop..
Click to expand...


You should consider using x-ray film. You can get a box of 100 8x10 sheets for $30. 

X-ray film is not sensitive to red light so you can also load your film holders and develop it under safelight conditions unlike regular film.  It's double sided so the Negitive tends to be more dense, it also scratches easier then regular sheet film so a lot of people put it a leave of glass on the bottom of the developing tray when processing x-ray film.


----------



## Torus34

@ Light Guru:

Thanks for the film tip.  I may go that route later.

Meanwhile, I've got a handle on exposure now and will confirm on the next 'bright sunshine' day.  I'm developing the negative in 1:7 [stock:water] Dektol and may actually be too soft in contrast.  Next neg will be at the corrected exposure with ordinarily-diluted Dektol.  A read of a gray card with my trusty Luna Pro will take care of exposure times from there.  The filter seems to have taken care of the blue sensitivity issue.  I've a range of them so I can play around a bit.  Final check will be clouds in a clear blue sky.

I'm anxious to explore the sub-1:1 world of macro.  Should run into some problems in exposure there.  That, plus some inevitable 'arty' prints, is where I'm headed.  Along the way I may get involved in making a camera with removable sheet holders.  Doesn't seem to be an impossibility.  An exposure a day's kinda slow, but my cellar darkroom lets the dark leak out in the daytime.

Regards.


----------



## Rick58

Torus, care to show some photos of your rig?


----------



## terri

Rick58 said:


> Torus, care to show some photos of your rig?


Hear hear! 

Pinhole photography is something that never really grabbed me personally, but I do love to see what others are doing.    I wish you many sunny days ahead, Jim!


----------



## dennybeall

Can you use a digital camera w/o lens instead of the film? If so, would you want to?


----------



## Torus34

Rick58 said:


> Torus, care to show some photos of your rig?



Hi, Rick!

Sorry 'bout taking so long to get back to you.  A picture wouldn't really say much, I'm afraid.  The camera's basically a box with a lid, all made of 1/8" presswood.  Interior edges are reinforced with strips of square x-section wood.  Carpenter's glue was the adhesive.  The top lid has a simple light trap built in and one end of the box has three strips of wood forming a slot to hold the paper negative.  There's a 1/2" hole in the business end with the pinhole [carefully sized and inspected hole in a piece of soda can aluminum] and a gel filter taped to the inside.  A strip of black electrician's tape's the shutter.  Interior's painted flat black.  Bright light exposure's 'bout 4 minutes with resin-coated Ilford variable contrast paper.

Now, if I made a soft case with a neck strap for it, THAT would rate a picture!  ;-)

Regards.

PS: I'm also enjoying working with a Brownie Hawkeye camera.  Gives a gentle softness to enlargements.  A little fussin' 'round with sepia toner and I can add 'bout 70-80 years to a photo taken last week.


----------



## Torus34

dennybeall said:


> Can you use a digital camera w/o lens instead of the film? If so, would you want to?



Hi!

Two problems: The very low light level and the very small size of a digital sensor.  I suspect that even if you could accumulate enough light you'd get little more than a blurred image of a dot.  Perhaps if you used a sensor such as those used in astrophotography you could get something useful, but now you've lost one of the major charms of pinholery -- it's dirt cheap if you've already got a darkroom.


----------

