Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Pinhole photography in UV, Visible and IR spectral range


Andreas

Recommended Posts

I have taken same image with 0.15 mm small pinhole mounted on a full spectrum converted Sony A7R using different filters. The distance of pinhole from sensor is about 21 mm, this means it is a true wide angle view. A full frame camera is more suitable for pinhole photography than a small sensor based micro four third camera, therefore I try this photographic topic again which a gave up after a few tests with my micro four third cameras. Unfortunately I have some problems with dust on the sensor and in the case of the UV image a small light leak between the body cap for micro four third (with the pinhole) and the Chinese adapter for the E-mount.

Nevertheless I think these images are interesting for a comparison of pinhole photography with different spectral ranges. The UV image is clearly sharper than visible and infrared images. The 1000 nm infrared image shows a nice sky due to the long exposure time.

 

 

Ultraviolet Light: Baader U 2" , Exposure time: 410s

post-147-0-53735100-1536007390.jpg

 

Visible Light: Hoya UV IR Cut , Exposure time 4s

post-147-0-40983100-1536007404.jpg

 

Infrared Light: Zomei IR720nm , Exposure time: 5s

post-147-0-31100300-1536007414.jpg

 

Infrared Light: Noname IR1000nm , Exposure time: 103s

post-147-0-60295200-1536007426.jpg

Link to comment

A very good illustration of the change in rendition (and image sharpness) induced by the different spectral ranges.

 

It might be interesting to see these cast in a colour image, too.

Link to comment

Here are the images with colors. To be honest I like the black and white versions more than the color versions. There are some strange color effects visible especially in edges and the upper part of the image. Most probably it has something to do with light that reaches the sensor with a to small angle. I am not sure about that, however I think it has something to do with the sensor and not only with the filters.

 

Ultraviolet Light: Baader U 2", Exposure time: 410s

post-147-0-72243300-1536089312.jpg

 

Visible Light: Hoya UV IR Cut, Exposure time: 4s

post-147-0-38908800-1536089328.jpg

 

Infrared Light: Zomei IR720, Exposure time: 5s

post-147-0-63880500-1536089341.jpg

Link to comment

... and clean that sensor, or Photoshop those spots... ;-)

Actually, my question is, if we don't use pinholes to shoot pics, then why are we using pinholes to shoot pics?

The next best thing to a UV-Nikkor, is that what pinholes are all about?

Just wondering here.

Link to comment

I don't think that a pinhole could replace a UV-Nikkor.

 

There are also some other reasons for using pinholes in photography. In my opinion using pinholes is primarily an artistic way to obtain pictures with unique character. About 14 years ago I have enjoyed pinhole photography with self-made pinhole cameras and photographic paper. Digital Pinhole photography with Baader U filter (or other UV pass filters) has a similar look like pinhole photography with photographic paper. However with photographic paper you can use larger formats and you can put it simple in a pinhole can camera with a round shape, so it is not exactly the same thing with digital cameras.

 

Another reason from scientific site is that a pinhole is the most simple "lens". Using short wavelengths compared to image size it is still possible to obtain sharp images.

 

Additional the focal length is shorter than with my usual UV lenses.

 

One reason for not using pinholes in digital UV photography is the very long exposure time of at least several minutes for a good quality.

Link to comment
... and clean that sensor, or Photoshop those spots... ;-)

Tote that barge, lift that bale...

 

 

The next best thing to a UV-Nikkor, is that what pinholes are all about?

The thing is, a UV-Nikkor is good because it lets through the short waves so you can play around with 340nm filters and such. But with pinholes, even though you pass the <340nm waves, you have such a long exposure anyhow that you can't do much of anything with them aside from make lens tests. So getting to shorter waves is not all that helpful a property of the pinhole pics. I thought pinhole photos were mostly for the artistic value (and bragging rights for using 19th century tech with a digital camera).

 

What I would like to see someone do is use a zone plate! I haven't seen any zone plate pics in UV at all.

Link to comment

Tote that barge, lift that bale...

 

 

 

The thing is, a UV-Nikkor is good because it lets through the short waves so you can play around with 340nm filters and such. But with pinholes, even though you pass the <340nm waves, you have such a long exposure anyhow that you can't do much of anything with them aside from make lens tests. So getting to shorter waves is not all that helpful a property of the pinhole pics. I thought pinhole photos were mostly for the artistic value (and bragging rights for using 19th century tech with a digital camera).

 

What I would like to see someone do is use a zone plate! I haven't seen any zone plate pics in UV at all.

 

I'm not familiar with zone plate photography, but it sounds intriguing. Anyway...I found this interesting site selling both pinhole and zone plate caps.

https://www.pinholeresource.com/

Link to comment

I posted about UV pinhole photography a couple of years ago, but I never had the issue with weird color patches such as are seen here--that may be something camera-specific (green circular haloes are a dichroic filter artifact with wider-angle optics.) And yes, if you think your sensor is clean, just take a few pinhole images--you will find dirt you never knew existed! If you really want higher-definition pinhole images, use a large-format film camera.

 

For lovers of the arcane, there is also such a thing as pinspeck photography.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...