Re: Smaller than optimal pinholes

[George L Smyth <GLSmyth@xxxxxxx>]

Dwight Shackelford wrote:
> 
> The other day someone said that using smaller than optimal pinholes will
> lead to image degradation.  I have heard this, but was told by someone
> who does a lot of pinhole work that he just keeps getting finer
> resolution and longer exposure times.
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with this?  What have your images looked
> like when using smaller than optimal pinhole apertures?

I did my own testing on this a while back, and you may wish to also.  I
made a range of pinholes for my 4X5 and tried them out.  I found that
holes close to the optimum size appeared to give similar results. 
However, I found that the more I strayed in either direction, the more
degradation I could see.  I use those pinholes for differing bellows
extensions now.  Try it for yourself.  If you see no difference, there
is no difference.

george

- -- 
 Handmade Photographic Images     
  http://www2.ari.net/glsmyth/


*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************

------------------------------