SeAAttle

I am looking for a new challenge and have been reading about pinhole photography. . Ran across zone plate and zone sieve photos and would like to give this a try. Can someone explain the difference?

Also, any suggestions for vendors? I have reviewed Skink (sells only on Ebay?), Pinhole Resource and Lensbaby (have run across this vendor often but never purchased anything). Any advice would be appreciated.

Forgot to mention that I would like to use my D700 but worry about dust. Still have my D200 that is just sitting in the closet.

anrkitec

Forgive me for talking a bit past your question in order to pontificate but I for one have just never understood the point of using Photoshop [or whatever other type of software] to manipulate pinhole, camera obscura, or Holga-type images.

Seriously, using Photoshop one can take any old standard image from any old 3MP p&s digicam and make it look like a pinhole or Holga image.

I have always thought of the point of the pinhole or Holga image as being the anomalies and surprises that crop up as a result of the lack of precision on the part of the camera device.

I guess my suggestion would be to go pick up a used Lisco 4x5 film holder or 667 Polaroid back [for which Fuji still makes several varieties of film], rig it to a shoebox with a hole in the front and experiment away.

Sorry for crapping on your thread, I have had several recent discussions with friends lamenting the continuing many little deaths of silver photography.

wiredboy10003

We made pinhole cameras in photo school and it was a fun project. It was kind of refreshing to get away from everything being tack sharp for a change. I remember that the less smooth the pinhole the worse the photo looked, which in this case wasn't a bad thing.

You can make a basic pinhole camera in about five minutes. The difficulty these days is what anrkitec said, the film. If it were me, I'd tape a piece of 4X5 film into the camera and avoid using film holders and stuff.

Doing pinhole photography with a digital camera seems like it's defeating the purpose of recreating what early photographers had to go through.

SeAAttle

My use of the term "pinhole" was clearly an error. I have read numerous sites about pinholes and preparing them from an old tin band aid box, electrical tape and a sharp tack, etc, etc. Not my interest. In addition, the introduction of digital reignited my interest in photography. Developing and printing in a dark room is too much like work (research lab). Finally, I want to carry just one body and be able to switch "lenses" when I feel like it. YMMV.

I liked the images I saw shot with zone plates and zone sieves. Since they don't have a pinhole, dust should not be a major problem. Ordered a zone plate from Pinhole Resource. Will see how it works and whether I really like the approach.

anrkitec

Understood and appreciated.

My question - and it is a real question, not rhetorical - is: Since Photoshop, through the use of various filters and combinations of actions, will allow you to take a normal digital image and make it look just like the images in the link you provided, why go to the bother and expense of the additional device?

I am not arguing against it, just genuinely curious.

SeAAttle

Just something new to try with the camera. I find that after spending a few hours shooting, I am very relaxed and feel I have used another part of my brain. Just not the same as sitting at the computer.

Relative to a new lens, the expense is trivial.