Solargraphy

>>2918620

cool. thanks for reminding me of that. ill mount a solargraphy cam with a sheet of agfa litex.

>>2918623
>agfa litex
I've got a sheet of Shanghai 4x5 100iso film in mine. Seems like most people are using paper, which is going to be way slower.

>>2918627
>paper

never thought of that. i have a friend who was tons of photopaper. will try both.

whats the recommended amount of time for this? a couple of months? a whole year?

File: nonlatent.jpg (201KB, 999x800px)

201KB, 999x800px

>>2918635
People talk about the range of 1 to 180 days.

I did a test earlier this year with my 4x5 at f/4.5 for three hours. Image is scanned, inverted, and levels tweaked, no development at all..

This says to me that you'd need a lot more time than 1 day to get an exposure with a pinhole camera, but I haven't tested it so, I don't know.

File: non-latent-023-sm.jpg (334KB, 782x999px)

334KB, 782x999px

>>2918620
I pulled the film out of the can, and scanned it. Here's what a 16 hour exposure looks like.

>>2919182

we need to go deeper.

im thinking in going into a high point outside the city, some hill top with a nice view and leave the camera there for some months.

>>2919192
Yeah, longer exposure would be better, I wonder if there's an upper limit on the exposure

>>2919379

Use the datasheet for your sensitive material, the size of hole and the distance from hole to material to compute exposure. Keep F11 1/100s ISO100 (Sunny-11 rule) in mind.

I may try guessing it if you give all information.

>>2919387
I've never seen a data sheet that had any information about non-latent images.

>>2919395
i've got 2 coke cans in the garden with pin wholes poked in them. They both contain some paper i've used in pinholes before. I left them outside on the longest day of the year June 21st and plan to get them on the shortest. There's a good chance i will not get anything but my intention is to fix the paper and then scan and invert it.

>>2919395
>non-latent images.

I cannot understand this. What is this?

Non-latent means that the exposure is infinite and it is false. Your paper clearly has some sensitivity (expressed in whatever) even if very low and paper features reciprocity failure.

>>2919409
Anon. A non-latent image is a visible image you don't have to develop. It's literally photographic paper darkening visibly from silver halide breakdown caused by light. So much of it darkening you get an image. Without having to use developer. Get it? That's a thing that happens regardless of your useless erroneous academic information. Relax. Calm down.

>>2919387
That's 16 not 11

>>2919438
It's sunny 11 in the UK...

File: boxcam.jpg (271KB, 999x532px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 999x532px

Op here. I decided that the image quality of a pinhole wasn't going to cut it. I'm 80% of the way through building a little focus free box camera that will use an enlarger lens and uses 4x5 film holders.

Will post a scan of one of the shots in a couple days.

>>2920141

sheeeit. looks sweet. now i want to build one. how difficult would it be to add bellows and some sort of viewing glass?

>>2919455
Sunny 1.4 in Latvia.

>>2919438

Sorry. I was almost sure that I was confusing something.

>>2919455

Lmao!

>>2918635

Solargraphy is actually typically done with photo paper and not film. If you use film, you're going to have a bad time.

>>2920238
Why a bad time? I've used film a few times, seems to work ok.

>>2920145
The bellows would make this way more complicated. Much easier to build two boxes that fit snugly together, one box has the film holder or ground glass, the second box has the lens. To focus you slide one box in or out of the other.

With this one I'm going to have a piece of ground glass with a spacer that slots in where the film holder goes. Not going to be super accurate, but at least I'll know where the camera is pointed.

With this camera, I just figured out what the hyperfocal distance at f/22 was, and set the lens at that distance. Should work fine.

>>2920178
>not being slavic
Good to the last drop, I tell you!

File: boxcam (1).jpg (83KB, 999x566px)

83KB, 999x566px

>>2920141
Boxcam complete. Will load some film and run it over the weekend and see what I get.

>>2920254

You'll get overexposure if you plan to shoot for more than a day (which is true solargraphy). Better to use an ISO 3 paper.

>>2920521
I'll cut down some photo paper to fit in the film holder and try it out too.

I also have some of the Ilford Direct Positive paper. I wonder what that will do.

>>2920517

looks great, how does focus free work?

File: Fig8.png (127KB, 600x854px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x854px

>>2920534
a high aperture's depth of field (think f16+ for anything bigger than mf) permanently focused on a distance that keeps both infinity and something as close as a few meters in focus.
The term you want to read up on is hyperfocal distance, anon. Photography 101. Pic related is depth of field for different focusing distances.

>>2920542
i thought i had you blocked, goodbye again shitty slav.

File: 130775871946.jpg (40KB, 437x598px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 437x598px

>>2920547
>The great thing about tripcode filtering