Hi Steve, In effect, this is what we did. But to get sufficient light, we had to use more than a bulb, so we used the modeling light of a flash head. This gave is quite a bit of width to reach the edges of the print and we added a diffuser to avoid the hot spot from the center of the head. We'll need to burn some areas of the print to get a more even print and some areas will require higher grade contrats filters. To do this we'll be using a honeycomb that will help focus the light right were we want it. I'll keep you posted when we get the print out of the wash and its dry... Guy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Hodges" <shodges@wantree.com.au> To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" <photoforum@listserver.isc.rit.edu> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 11:27 AM Subject: Re: The Wyndham Montreal Pinhole Camera Project > Sorry about the extensive quoting :-) > > Guy Glorieux wrote: > > > > We chose a 40" focal length > ... > > While the tests strips we had placed on the extremities > > of the frame suggested then that we might be underexposed, the centre, > > by that time was quite over exposed. > ... > > The next stage for us is to do a contact print of the paper negative > > into a positive image. > ... > > We need to illuminate an area 12.5 x 8.5 feet, > > and there is about 7 stops density difference between the centre of the > > image > ... > > working with a single lamp projector 15 feet above the print > ... > > the last stop and a half is really hard to > > tackle.... > > My suggestion, for what its worth, is to attempt to emulate the exposure > conditions as closely as possible for the printing. > > I'd try a bulb hung 40" from the paper to try to duplicate the light > falloff you go when taking the image. Naturally I'd try to minimise > stray reflections. > > At 40 inches even a bulb will pretty much approximate a point source. > > Steve > >
