You're welcome!

Thank you very much!

amzn.to/2Sq8a7t They are commonly called threaded inserts. The most standard tripod mounting plates use a 1/4" by 20 size screw. Available many places online or at the hardware store.

True, we just have to solve the equation for f (focal length). so for d = 0.5 you would get: 0.5^2 / (2.44 * 0.00055) = 186.289mm focal length assuming focusing at infinity. on 4x5 this is close to the angle of view of a normal lens, so maybe not ideal for wide angle landscape photography. Something like a 0.3mm pinhole would be a better choice. I have another video on my channel that shows the effects of blur (from pinhole too big) and diffraction (pinhole too small). It turns out that the effects of diffraction have a much less significant impact on image quality. So for any given pinhole, use the optimal focal length OR GREATER So your 0.5mm is optimal at 186mm, but can be used past that. A 0.3mm is optimal at 67mm, but even using it at 90mm (standard wide on 4x5) will give good results. For any focal length you will need to calculate the F-Stop as focal length/diameter for proper exposures. Hope this helps!

Sometimes, images blur if too close to the subject ….

That will work. Your method assumes that M=0 which is true for most cameras (it basically means you're "focused" at infinity). If you plan on doing macro work you would need to calculate the magnification and then do [d^2 * (1+M)]/0.001342. Good luck with your build!

I have not made a video on my editing process, but I definitely should. Thanks for commenting! Glad you like the videos.

Exactly covering the sensor perfectly should not be your goal when designing a pinhole camera, you just need to make sure you have at least enough coverage to cover the entire sensor/film. The projected image will be a circle of light while your sensor is more than likely some kind of rectangle. You just need the image circle to be bigger than the sensor. I have another video on angle of coverage that should help, but in short, the thickness of material and the diameter of the pinhole will impact the size of the image circle.

A higher lambda (like 700nm for the red part of the spectrum) would mean you could use a bigger pinhole whereas if you were shooting things in the blue part of the spectrum (~400nm) you would need a smaller pinhole to be optimal. The difference would be very small though, and you should always error on the side of making a smaller pinhole. The most important is to have as round a shape as possible.

So you can use Konica 750 nm,cool.

There should be no contention about the number used as the constant. It is mathematically and scientifically proven to be 2.44 as I illustrated in my discussion about Airy Disks. An optical system does not image a point to a point. An Airy disk is produced having a bright central core surrounded by diffraction rings. An image is considered resolved using the baseline criterion which requires that the plot of the spectrum return to baseline at some point between the two signals. Using the model for an Airy Disk the first zero of the function is at a radius of 1.22. So if you have the central bright spot at a radius of 1.22 then its diameter is 2.44. Now imagine two circles that are the same size and next to each other touching on the edge. The distance from the center of one circle to the other is twice the radius or 2.44. If that distance between the two circle centers was less than 2.44 then the circles would be overlapping (like in a Venn Diagram) and the image would not be able to be resolved.

It's not quite as clear cut as that, as it depends what you are optimizing for. The value of 2.44 (1.562) optimizes for contrast, and as you say, it's not up for debate, it's physics. Photography is an art form though, and optimizing for contrast doesn't necessarily give the best aesthetically sharp image, this is why, while 1.562 is the optimal value for contrast, artists have chosen to use other, usually slightly larger values, usually between 1.7 and 1.8, as these values seem to sacrifice a little contrast, for an aesthetically sharper image. These larger constants are often obtained through trial and error testing, and use the artists aesthetic sensibilities to determine the value to use. Personally I chose to use 1.562 for small focal lengths up to about 30mm, and 1.7 for focal lengths larger than that. www.onlandscape.co.uk has a nice demonstration of this practical optimization process in their "The Science and Aesthetics of the Hole" article, and also shows the impact on the image that the method of pinhole creation has.

I had maths in high school and the theory is understandable for me