How To Turn a Halloween Pumpkin Into a Pinhole Camera

How To Turn a Halloween Pumpkin Into a Pinhole Camera

Photo by Haiku Garry

Claire O’Neill and Mito Habe-Evans over at NPR’s The Picture Show blog have just posted a fun

experimental project you can try out this halloween: making a pinhole camera out of a pumpkin.

What you’ll need is a pumpkin, aluminum foil, a knife, tape, photo paper, dark spray paint, and
access to a dark room. This would be a fun way to capture photos of trick-or-treaters this
halloween.

Here’s a shot taken with the pumpkin-cam:

To learn how to make your own, check out the post on NPR and watch this fun step-by-step
 video  they made:

(via PetaPixel)

Instant Portrait Film Photography by Denis Peaudeau

Instant Portrait Film Photography by Denis Peaudeau

Denis Peaudeau is a French film photographer, based-in Rennes. He learned black and white
film photography in 2004 and had a chance to process films at home when a friend gave him
his lab  equipment.

"I started using Polaroid in 2006, just before the production stopped: I bought a SX-70 and
some SX-70 Blend films on Unsaleabled website...That's how I've caught the virus of 
instant film, but I  started using Polaroid for portrait photography only 2 years ago." He says.

Denis often shoots everything with his Polaroid but mostly portrait. "Using Polaroid need to be

 patient, to think before shooting because of the price of the film. But that's what I like : "make" 

pictures, instead of "take" pictures, think about what you want to do before to press the 

SHUTTER, not after. That's my philosophy." He adds.

See more of his work at:

• Website
• Flickr

Q: Are you a full-time wedding photographer

A: Yup! Photography is how I make a living. Being full-time is great and it allows me to better serve my clients. I'm not worried about a day job, (I was there, I don't plan on going back) I'm worried about making sure I serve my clients the best I can.

That means if you email me during the day, I will WRITE you back as quick as I can, If you call me, I will do my best to pick up, if I miss your call, you just jumped right to the top of my to do list. I have ample time to edit your photos and deliver them to you in a reasonable amount of time. I can help you make a wedding day timeline that flows perfectly and most importantly I'm here for YOU!

Q: What's your wedding photography style

A: My style is modern with a touch of vintage flare.

I like to take a photojournalist approach during the ceremony and reception, capturing moments as they happen in a unobtrusive manor. 

When creating formal photos, I strive to pose my clients in a modern and elegant way to create timeless photos. 

Q: What gear do you bring with you on a wedding day

A: This is a good one!

I personally use professional NIKON CAMERAS and lenses. I always carry back up gear and I have plenty of professional lighting tools to tackle even the most difficult lighting situation. 

Q: Film or Digital

A: I capture all my weddings on DIGITAL cameras, if time allows I will shoot a roll or two of 35mm film. 

I love to SHOOT FILM for personal projects, and I do run 35to220.com a WEBSITE dedicated to showcasing the best film photography in the world. I find though on wedding days, digital allows me to work as efficiently as possible to create beautiful images for you.

Q:  What type of venues have you photographed weddings at

A: Let's see...

A seaside mansion, cute little hotels, the beach, large WEDDING VENUES, farms, private residences, oh and a rooftop penthouse in New York City just to name a few.

Q: How much should I expect to invest in wedding photography

A: The big question (wait the proposal was the big question wasn't it)?

Complete WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY collections begin at $2,800 and include some pretty awesome stuff.

If you would like to know more, please contact me to schedule a meeting over coffee of drinks. We will get to know each other, hopefully share some laughs, and chat about all WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY options. 

Q: I'm having a small intimate wedding or eloping, do you offer an hourly rate

A: Yup, please contact me for more information if you would only like a few hours of coverage.

Q: I'm getting married out of town, do you do destination weddings

A: Um, YES! I would love to travel with you to photograph your wedding. It could be the next state over, Manhattan, Napa Valley, Aruba, or Paris. If you're having a destination wedding I would love to talk with you!

I love to travel and I want to see the world. Why not capture a couples wedding day while I'm at it :)

Q: Do you work with a second photographer

A: Most of the weddings you see on my site I have captured alone with the help of a none shooting assistant. I do THINK second photographers are great to have, especially for large weddings.

I like to let my couples decided if they would like to add a second photographer for their wedding day vs. including one in my collections.

By not including one, it allows me to keep my prices lower, and gives you the option to choose what's best for you. We can chat about this in detail during our initial meeting over coffee or drinks.

Q: How many photos will I receive after my wedding day

A: It's impossible for me to say something like "You will receive 500 fully edited images after your wedding."

Every wedding is different. For some weddings the whole day is captured in 500 photos and with others 200 photos capture the day perfectly. So it's hard for me to give you an exact number.

What I will say is I average about 30-50 final edited images per coverage hour. 

Q: When will I receive my final edited wedding photos

A: This question is easy! 4-6 weeks

Q: How do I receive my photos

A: All collections include a private online gallery you can share with family and friends and a USB DRIVE containing the final edited photos from your wedding day. 

Q: How can I use my images

A: Who am I to say how you can use your images? I'm not one of those photographers that holds your images hostage. I do retain full copyright on all my photos, but you do get a personal use release allowing you to share your images online, make your own prints, or anything that I can't think of as long as you're not MAKING MONEY off my work.

All I ask for in return is that you don't re-edit the final images and then share them on SOCIAL media ( I take a lot of time and pride in making sure your images are perfect when I deliver them to you). Plus, I always post a few edited images on Facebook from your wedding that you can share all over social media.

Oh, and I would love if you spread the good word about Chris Nachtwey Photography with everyone you know :)

Q: Can I order prints from you

A: If you would like PROFESSIONAL prints from a professional lab, that option is available via your online gallery. My professional prints are beautiful, and shiped directly from my lab to your doorstep.

Some of my larger WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY collections even include my favorite print of all time! The 16x20 thin style float mount GALLERY WRAP.

Imagine a beautiful photo from your wedding day printed on metallic paper (it's so awesome), covered with a protective coating, and has float mounts on the back of it. When this print is hanging on your wall it looks like it's floating! The 16x20 thin style float mount gallery wrap is honestly a work of art and will look great in your living room or office!

I offer a lot PRINT PRODUCTS, ask away when the time to purchase prints comes along!

Q: Do you offer albums

A: I do! I know for a fact that photos are not meant to live on a USB DRIVE forever, they're meant to be printed! What better way to remember your wedding day then a custom made album!

The albums I offer are lay flat, have thick pages, a protective coating on all pages, and a beautiful leather cover. 

Albums are avalialbe a la carte, and there are lots of options. We can chat about those things when you get back from your amazing honeymoon!

Oh, if you purchase my top WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY collection, an album is included!

Q: Can guest take photos at my wedding

A: Heck ya! All I ask is that your guest do not interfere with me or my team when we are capturing your day. I would hate to tell you I don't have an amazing image of you walking down the aisle because a guest jumped right in front of me with their iPhone (that would really stink wouldn't it)?

Unplugged weddings are pretty cool too...just saying :)

Q: Do you offer discounts of any kind

A: Not typical, but hey, never say never right! For making it to the end of the facts page, I will give you 2% off the WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY collection you choose to purchase. Just mention in our meeting that you read to the end of the facts page. That will be our little secret :)

 

Why do you agitate the developing tank while developing film?

Jim Mowreader
When you develop film, the chemical that's touching the film wears out after a while--the real term is "reaches exhaustion," but that just means it wore out. When you agitate the tank, the worn-out developer is exchanged for fresh. Over-agitation can cause development streaking because the solution travels through the sprocket holes too much. Too little agitation can result in lowered contrast and un-even development (mottling).Comment on overagitationYou "overagitate" by moving the tank too rapidly. You can overagitate if you turn the tank over once every five minutes, if you flip it really, really hard when you do. There are rotary processor systems such as Jobo that continuously agitate the tank, but it's a very slow, gentle agitation so you don't get streaks around your sprocket holes. I also remember being into H&W Control film, which was a film-developer system that promised nearly grainless, super long tonal scale images. It actually did it too, if you didn't mind that the film was ISO 25. You had to continuously agitate it. Wouldn't work any other way, or so the instruction sheet said. I figured if they went to the good time and trouble to tell you to do it they had a reason, so I always did it and it worked like the book said it would.

What chemical is used to develop film?

Jim Mowreader
Since I spent many happy years in total darkness as a professional developing and printing all my own black and white, I can address the question from a monochrome standpoint.

Most black and white (monochrome) developing solutions are what old timers call "M-Q" developers.The M stands for Metol (monomethyl-p-aminophenol hemisulfate), and the Q is short for hydroquinone, or just Quinone, a type of phenol. These two are often used in various combinations to formulate many common monochrome developers for either film or paper. Metol and hydroquinone in aqueous solution have the property of reducing sensitized silver halides (salts of silver) found in films and papers to metallic silver, which is what the developed image is made of. By varying the proportions of each, many types of developers may be made for longer scale or higher contrast. There are ready to mix powders or liquid concentrates, or the worker with a laboratory scale and a sense of daring can formulate his/her own. Eastman Kodak used to publish a fat book of all their formulas, but I don't know if it's still available.

Many developers also include Phenidone (1-phenyl-3-pyrazolidinone), which is much more active than Metol but harder to control because of its reactivity.

Together with the necessary developing (reducing) agents are usually mixed alkalis because an aqueous alkaline solution works much better and faster than one with a neutral pH. Sodium carbonate is one typical alkali added to developers. Many others may be used alone or in combination depending on the contrast wanted and the speed of working.

Developers are perishable and liable to combine with atmospheric oxygen, since all developer is, is an oxidizer. To prevent accidental underdevelopment due to aerial oxidation of an older solution, many workers use "one shot" developers, mixing and using them fresh. Sodium sulfite is usually added to developers as a preservative. It is also alkaline.
 A little more about b&w developersAs the above answer stated, there are three basic chemicals in use: metol, phenidone and hydroquinone. There are a LOT of agents that have been used in the past, like paraminophenol, amidol and pyrocatechol, but the trinity of metol, phenidone and hydroquinone has served us well for decades and will into the future.

Metol and phenidone are "detail" agents. In general a formula will contain either metol or phenidone; very few formulas use both. It's possible to replace metol with phenidone in most formulas, and it's better if you do--metol is a weird, weird ingredient. For one thing, it won't dissolve if there's too much sodium sulfite in solution. If you buy packaged D-76 from Kodak, you will pour it into water just a little at a time while you stir and stir and stir until your arm tries to fall off, and in the end you'll have all these little metol crystals floating on top. Come back the next day, and the metol basically just gives up. Ilford made a version of D-76 they called ID-11. The difference was it came in two little pouches. One had the developing agents plus just a little sodium sulfite, the other had all the rest of the ingredients. You mixed Packet A into water, then Packet B and added more water to equal one litre. That dissolved really easily and gave the same result on film. The other problem with metol is, it's a sensitizing agent--a lot of people are allergic to metol, and the more you work with metol the more likely you are to be allergic to it. Phenidone is hypoallergenic and dissolves in any sulfite concentration.

One thing you need to know if you're trying to substitute phenidone for metol: phenidone is so active it's capable of producing chemical fog in the highlights. You need to add a restraining agent to a phenidone developer; the classic restrainer is benzotriazole aka "Kodak Anti-Fog Number 1." The other restrainer is 6NBN (trust me, you do NOT want to know what that means!) aka "Kodak Anti-Fog Number 2." Number 1 is available wherever fine photochemicals are sold. 6NBN isn't so easy to come by.

Hydroquinone is a "contrast" developer. If you're looking for contrast quick, this is the stuff. Metol doesn't NEED this agent to work right, if you're willing to develop film for 23 minutes. (There are also "stand" developers that produce really spectacular events. They're pure metol, are very dilute, and they're used by pouring them into the tank and letting it stand undisturbed for a couple of hours.) Phenidone requires hydroquinone; you won't get any contrast without it--hence, no phenidone-based substitute for the hydroquinone-free D-23 or D-25 developers, which contain only metol, can be made. If you need a very contrasty developer, like a lith developer (lith negs have black, white and nothing in between), use only hydroquinone in your developer.  And from the color side...Color images are formed of dyes--cyan (negative red), magenta (negative green) and yellow (negative blue). The film contains layers that are sensitive to red, green or blue light, and each contains light-sensitive silver halide grains plus color couplers--partial dyes.
When a silver halide grain is developed into a silver grain, it oxidizes. The color coupler grabs the product of that oxidation, and converts into a visible amount of dye.
There are two chemicals used to develop color today: Kodak CD-3 (used in the processes for color slides and prints from slides) and Kodak CD-4 (used in the processes for negatives and prints from negatives). No one uses the proper chemical names for these two because they are very long.
Please click the Related Question below for an even more detailed answer on photo chemistry.

How can you control contrast in black and white film development?
 Micron
Answer 2Since the question was about film contrast and not photo contrast, my comments pertain to step 1. The best way to control contrast is by matching the characteristics of the film with those of the developer, and modifying exposure to suit. Sounds vague because the answer is not as simple as suggested, and really requires a good knowledge of film and developer characteristics (which can be learned from books). Simply modifying development time is a less than ideal approach since that will affect the amount of silver halide that has been converted to black metallic silver (BMS) OVERALL, primarily affecting the image density and therefore, quality. Yes, the highlights will be slightly more affected than the shadows, hence a minor variation in contrast. To the critical eye, the result will likely be somewhat dissapointing, and in the case of increased development, may result in image fog (indiscriminate addition of BMS over the whole image). The best approach is to select a developer with the characteristics (more/less metol, hydroquinone, bromine [or is it bromide, I forget]) suited to your particular need. Read the product sheets or library books to learn more.Here is a technique that I learned 20 years ago for high contrast scenes (streetscapes/store fronts with night lighting, etc.) that produced some amazing results.1)Over-expose the film by 3 stops to produce extra shadow density (two would ordinarily suffice, but I went the extra to allow for reciprocity failure due to long exposure times).2) In total darkness with one open tank of regular developer and one open tank with water, using a reel with a spool center, lower the reel in the developer, rotate reel for 10 seconds to prevent air bubble adhesion & let sit for another 50 secs.3) transfer to the water bath for 4 minutes, NO AGITATION.4) transfer back to the developer, gently agitate (by rotating spool) for 10 secs., total immersion to be 1 minute.5) Repeat 3 and 4 so that the entire cycle is 1-4-1-4-1-4-1 = 16 minutes to develop.6) Stop and fix as normalHOW DOES THIS WORK??Each immersion in the developer does the usual thing. The water bath causes development to rapidly slow down in the highlights due to the levels of bromine (see above) being produced as a by-product of reduction (silver halide being reduced to BMS). However, the bromine levels in the shadows are less because the amount of BMS produced is less, hence the water has less effect. Since the film was much over exposed, the shadows will produce more density while the highlights are suppressed. I have produced B&W prints from such negatives on Ilford Multi-Grade paper with no contrast filters with detail in the shadows (showing bushes) and no burning-in required during printing for the lights on or in the builidng. The technique seems to enhance the acutance of the BMS as well, producing very sharp definition. BTW, I also learned how to reduce the contrast of color slides using a Freeman Patterson trick. If y'all would like to converse on this, I can be reached at yullneverknow.com (I only access this once every month or so, so be patient initially).By now you may have surmised that I got real heavy into the science of development at one time, and hopefully was able to spark some interest in my students.Micron************************* Answer There are essentially three basic ways to do it.First step is when you develop the film in the film tank with the developer. Developing times are put out by the film makers for optimum exposure representation. So if you want absolute control over your pictures, use these times. If you want to get a bit uncontrolled (crazy), try leaving the developer in for another minute or so, or take it out a minute early. The longer you leave it in the more the contrast, while the shorter its in the more gray you get. This is quite a random process, because as soon as you disregard the manufacturers recommended times, the film can behave in ways beyond your control, due to room temperature, water acid levels, and if you live in Auckland especially, the amount of fluoride in the tap water.Second, if you have a black and white enlarger (ie. there aren't colour control adjusters) you will need filters. You can buy these singularly, or in packs. I suggest the Ilford Filter pack, as this gives you a good range of filters. They come in grades, from 00 to 5, with half increments in between, the 00 give the least contrast, while the 5 gives the most. Depending on your enlarger, put a filter in above the light box. Some enlargers have the slot under the light box, so look out for a holder approximately the same size as your filter. When exposed, the light passes through the filter, with certain frequencies getting knocked out or converted, so the light hitting the photo paper is controlled to give a certain amount of contrast.The third common method gives you the greatest control over the amount of contrast, and is my preferred method. If you are lucky enough to have access to a colour enlarger, use it, even for black and white photography. Set all the dials onto 0, except for the Magenta, which you set to about 60. This gives you approximately the same amount of contrast as on a standard black and white enlarger. To get more, increase the magenta, and to get less contrast, decrease the magenta. From there, develop your paper as a normal black and white print.I have on one occasion required more contrast than the magenta dial could give me. To counter this, I squeezed a contrast filter into the machine above the light box. If you do this, ensure you have a foolproof way of removing it.Remember that as soon as you start using filters, you are cutting down on the amount of light that is getting to the paper. You will need to increase exposure time in the darkroom to compensate for this.

How to Photograph the Milky Way

Last week, I took a photo of the Milky Way above an old schoolhouse building in Idaho. I posted the photo on our Facebook page, and it received 1,548 likes, 177 comments, and was shared 84 times. I was pretty happy (okay, fine… I was ecstatic) that so many of you said such nice things about my picture.

MANY of you asked how the photo was taken, and wanted a tutorial on photographing the Milky Way.  Your wish is my command.

If you are subscribed to this website via email and don’t get the videos associated with my posts, be sure to check out the on-location video of me photographing the Milky Way here.

Milky Way in Idaho

Camera Settings for Night Photography of the Milky Way

Shutter speed – 30 seconds: For this photo, I shot most of the night using a 30 second shutter speed (meaning that a professional tripod is necessary to keep the camera rock solid).  I find that if you use a shutter speed that is too long, the stars in the sky start to look oblong because of Earth’s rotation.  30 seconds of shutter speed only makes the stars look BARELY oblong, and you really only notice it if you zoom way in on the COMPUTER.

However, don’t take 30 seconds as the perfect answer for taking pictures of the stars that aren’t star trails.  The longer the lens you use, the shorter the shutter speed will need to be.  If you shoot on a crop sensor camera with an 18mm lens, you probably won’t be able to use a shutter speed longer than 15 or 20 seconds, because the stars will appear larger in the frame, so the streaking is far more noticeable.

Aperture – f/2.8: Normally, you would want to use a high aperture for landscape photography to achieve maximum depth-of-field.  Photographers often get tricked into thinking they need a very high aperture since the stars are far away, but remember that depth-of-field is about how much of the picture is sharp, not where the sharpness appears.

So the CORRECT aperture for this photo is–the lowest f-stop you have available to you on your lens.  By focusing on the stars, you’re focused to infinity (the furthest out the lens can focus), so you can use a low f-stop to capture the dim star light.

In this photo, I had a lens (the Nikon 14-24mm lens) that could go down to f/2.8, so that’s the aperture value I used to take this picture.  The trouble with using such a low aperture value is that I chose to take this picture with a large foreground element, the old schoolhouse, so when I used f/2.8, the house was BLURRY since I was focused on the stars.  Knowing that it would be impossible to shoot a photo in such low light with an f-stop like f/16 that would have afforded me more light, I chose to shoot one picture of the stars at f/2.8 and one picture focused on the house at f/2.8.  Then I simply combined the two in Photoshop.  If you’re a “get it right in the camera” zealot, this may not sound like an attractive way to take this photo, but I promise you that it is also the ONLY way to take this photo.  Yep, the only way.  You need a high f-stop for the depth-of-field, but a low f-stop for light gathering… so you have to use post-processing.

If you take a photo out in the woods or the desert or another open location with nothing in the foreground to worry about, then you could easily just shoot at f/2.8 and forego the Photoshop bit.  But if you’re shooting a photo just like mine, there is no other way with current TECHNOLOGY.

ISO – 3200: Normally, photographers like to keep the ISO as low as possible to prevent the photos from becoming grainy.  However, many types of night photography require high ISO values.  Such is the case here, where I shot with an ISO of 3200.  If you have a camera made in the last couple years, it will likely allow you to choose an ISO as high as 3200 or even higher (I shot some photos this same night at ISO 6,400).

Since I shot at ISO3200, there is definitely some noise in the picture I took.  Frankly, that is unavoidable with current technology, but there are quite a few things you can do to at least mitigate the noise in the photo caused by the high ISO and long SHUTTER speed.   One of those methods is long exposure noise reduction.

Long exposure noise reduction is available on all DSLRs (that I know of, anyway) that were made in the last few years.  On a Nikon, you’ll find “Long Exposure NR” in the shooting menu of the camera.  On Canon cameras, go to your menu, then go to custom functions, and browse through them until you find long exposure noise reduction (it’s a different custom function on each Canon model).  This feature uses a technology called dark frame subtraction that I explain in the video associated with this post.

This photo was made for those of you who are kind enough to pin my stuff on PINTEREST.

How to Focus for Night Photography

All autofocus systems require some amount of contrast in order to find proper focus.  When shooting at night, there is rarely enough light outside for your camera to autofocus properly.  The best way to solve this problem is to look around you for a STREET LIGHT or other light that is the same distance away from you as where you want the focus to be.  Then, autofocus on that light, and slide the focus mode switch on your lens to “manual” this will keep the focus where you last set it as long as you don’t accidentally twist the manual focus ring at the front of your lens.

If you’re taking a picture of the stars and don’t have to worry about focusing on anything in the foreground, then you may want to rack your focus all the way out as far as it will go, and then come back just a slight bit.  This will focus your lens to INFINITY (as far as it focuses), which is always the proper focus for shooting the stars.  If the moon is bright enough, you could also focus on the moon and then you’re set.

If I need to focus on something closer to the camera, like how I focused on the schoolhouse for one of the photos, then shining a bright flashlight or laser pointer on the building will help your camera to find focus.  One other technique is to simply show up to the location where you’ll be shooting before it’s actually night time.  Then you can adjust your composition before it gets dark, and lock down your focus while there is still enough available light.

How to See the Milky Way

Most PEOPLE never see the Milky Way with their naked eye.  Usually, the artificial lights from houses and streetlights are too bright for our eyes to see the faint glow of the ring around the Milky Way at night.  However, by using the amazing light gathering ability of newer DSLRs, the Milky Way can usually be captured in a picture.

I intentionally waited to take this picture until a night that did not have a bright moon.  This lessens the amount of light in the sky to make the Milky Way less visible.  Also, I drove 1.5 hours away from the nearest major city to get rid of all of the city lights.  In this rural location, I could see the Milky Way with my naked eye, which was intensified when I took a picture and gathered the light with a 30 second exposure.

Frankly, I’m not much of an astronomer to tell you if the Milky Way is visible, or even to point you to a resource where you might find out when and where the Milky Way will be visible.  But in Idaho, I find that it’s visible most all of the year for most of the night.  I just go out and shoot a couple times to know where it will rise and set, and approximately what time of night.  For this shoot, I knew the Milky Way became visible as soon as it was FULLY black outside, and was directly overhead around 2PM.  Perhaps someone in the comments can point us to a good resource to check the sunrise time/location for different parts of the world.

Conclusion

Photos like this don’t happen by accident.  It takes a lot of practice and planning to take a photo of the Milky Way, but the payoff is huge!  Although it was quite cold outside taking this picture since I didn’t bring a proper jacket, the time I got to spend out in the middle of nowhere looking at the brilliant stars for a few hours last week was incredibly soothing.