365 day pinhole camera shot

[Joseph O'Neil]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/...amy-image?bn=1

Interesting story year long shot done on a sheet of photographic paper. Article includes image

joe

[kev curry]

Amazing image. Makes the Gursky look like shit;-)

[Ari]

Impressive and admirable restraint in leaving cameras for months at a time all over the place.
But I'd like to know why didn't he keep the original photo? He could have shot a copy on his digital camera rather than scanning it, thereby losing it for good.

[Scott Walker]

Wow, that would be difficult for me.
I would either obsess over them or do my best not to and forget where I put them.

[Steven Scanner]

That is amazing. Like the article said, so many things can go wrong in 365 days.
@Ari: he probably scanned it because of the details. A scanner can produce more pixels than a digital camera. Also, a scanner is made to duplicate flat images. The original image was doomed anyway, because he couldn't fix the photographic paper. Scanning it would be a bold thing to do. Exposing it with the scanner light would distroy the original image. I don't know how fast it would distroy, but the chance of ruining it before the scanner can scan the picture is high.

[Tim Meisburger]

Why couldn't he fix it? Seems to me if it is destroyed by light, fixing is what is needed.

[Peter Gomena]

You'd have to develop it first, and given the amount of exposure to the paper, it would just turn black. Fixing removes undeveloped silver halides, so it would destroy the image.

Peter Gomena

[Mark Sampson]

hmmm. Maybe try the POP method- gold tone first, then fix? Might work with Lodima or some similar paper.

[Matt_Bigwood]

I made this exposure from June to December last year http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattbigwood/6605661299

It was done with a beer can pinhole camera onto Ilford Multigrade paper after I attended a workshop with Justin Quinnell, the renowned pinhole photographer.

It wasn't developed, just scanned and inverted in Photoshop. The path of the sun had burned quite distinct lines onto the paper.

[Ari]

That is amazing. Like the article said, so many things can go wrong in 365 days.
@Ari: he probably scanned it because of the details. A scanner can produce more pixels than a digital camera. Also, a scanner is made to duplicate flat images. The original image was doomed anyway, because he couldn't fix the photographic paper. Scanning it would be a bold thing to do. Exposing it with the scanner light would distroy the original image. I don't know how fast it would distroy, but the chance of ruining it before the scanner can scan the picture is high.

Thanks, Steven, that makes sense.