What does one do when frustrated at the lack of affordable, open source portable trackers? If you’re [OG-star-tech], you design your own and give it modular features that rival commercial offerings while you’re at it.

What’s a star tracker? It’s a method of determining position based on visible stars, but when it comes to astrophotography the term refers to a sort of hardware-assisted camera holder that helps one capture stable long-exposure images. This is done by moving the camera in such a way as to cancel out the effects of the Earth’s rotation. The result is long-exposure photographs without the stars smearing themselves across the image.

Interested? Learn more about the design by casting an eye over the bill of materials at the GitHub repository, browsing the 3D-printable parts, and maybe check out the assembly guide. If you like what you see, [OG-star-tech] says you should be able to build your own very affordably if you don’t mind 3D printing parts in ASA or ABS. Prefer to buy a kit or an assembled unit? [OG-star-tech] offers them for sale.

Frustration with commercial offerings (or lack thereof) is a powerful motive to design something or contribute to an existing project, and if it leads to more people enjoying taking photos of the night sky and all the wonderful things in it, so much the better.

Social media microblogging has brought us many annoying things, but some of the good things that have come to us through its seductive scrolling are those ad-hoc interest based communities which congregate around a hashtag. There’s one which has entranced me over the past few years which I’d like to share with you; the Shitty Camera Challenge. The premise is simple: take photographs with a shitty camera, and share them online. The promise meanwhile is to free photography from kit acquisition, and instead celebrate the cheap, the awful, the weird, and the wonderful in persuading these photographic nonentities to deliver beautiful pictures.

Where’s The Hack In Taking A Photo?

Of course, we can already hear you asking where the hack is in taking a photo. And you’d be right, because any fool can buy a disposable camera and press the shutter a few times. But from a hardware hacker perspective this exposes the true art of camera hacking, because not all shitty cameras can produce pictures without some work.

The #ShittyCameraChallenge has a list of cameras likely to be considered shitty enough, they include disposables, focus free cameras, instant cameras, and the cheap plastic cameras such as Lomo or Holga. But also on the list are models which use dead film formats, and less capable digital cameras. It’s a very subjective definition, and thus in our field everything from a Game Boy camera or a Raspberry Pi camera module to a home-made medium format camera could be considered shitty. Ans since even the ready-made shitty cameras are usually cheap and unloved second-hand, there’s a whole field of camera repair and hacking that opens up. Finally, here’s a photography competition that’s fairly and squarely on the bench of Hackaday readers.

A Whole World Of Shitty Awesomeness Awaits!

Having whetted your appetite, it’s time to think about the different routes into camera hacking. Perhaps the simplest is to take a camera designed for an obsolete film format, and make a cartridge or spool that takes a commonly available film instead. Perhaps resurrecting an entire home movie standard is a little massochistic, but Thingiverse is full of 3D-printable adapters for more everyday film. Or you could make your own, as I did for my 1960s Agfa Rapid snapshot camera.

If hacking film cartridges seems a little low-tech, a camera whether film or digital is a simple enough device mechanically that making your own is not out of the question. At its simplest a pinhole camera can be made from trash, but we think if you’re handy with a CAD package and a 3D printer you should be able to do something better. Don’t be afraid to combine self-made parts with those from manufactured cameras; when every second hand store has a pile of near-worthless old cameras for relative pennies it makes sense to borrow lenses or other parts from this boanaza. And finally, you don’t need to be a film lover to join the fun, if a Raspberry Pi or an ESP cam module floats your boat, you can have a go at the software side too. As a hint, take a look on AliExpress for a much wider range of camera modules and lenses than the ones supplied with either of these boards.

If I’m exhorting readers to have a go with a shitty camera then, perhaps I should lead by example. Past entries of mine have come from that Agfa Rapid cartridge I mentioned, but for their current outing I’ve gone for a mixture of new and old. The new isn’t a hack, I just like those toy cameras with the thermal printers, but the old one has been quite a project. Older consumer grade Polaroid pack film instant cameras are particularly unloved, so I’ve 3D-printed a new back for mine that takes a 120 roll film. It’s an ungainly camera to take to the streets with, but now I’ve finished all that 3D printing I hope I’ll get those elusive dreamy black and white landscapes on my poll of FomaPan 100.

If you want to try the #ShittyCameraChallenge, hack together a shitty camera and get shooting. Its current iteration lasts until the 1st of February, so you should have some time left to post your best results on Mastodon. Good luck!

It’s perhaps not fair, but even if you have the best idea for a compelling video, few things will make people switch off than poor lighting. Good light and plenty of it is the order of the day when it comes to video production, and luckily there are many affordable options out there. Affordable, that is, right up to the point where you need batteries for remote shoots, in which case you’d better be ready to open the purse strings.

When [Dane Kouttron] ran into the battery problem with his video lighting setup, he fought back with these cheap and clever cordless tool battery pack adapters. His lights were designed to use Sony NP-F mount batteries, which are pretty common in the photography trade but unforgivably expensive, at least for Sony-branded packs. Having access to 20 volt DeWalt battery packs, he combined an off-the-shelf battery adapter with a 3D printed mount that slips right onto the light. Luckily, the lights have a built-in DC-DC converter that accepts up to 40 volts, so connecting the battery through a protection diode was a pretty simple exercise. The battery pack just slots right in and keeps the lights running for portable shoots.

Of course, if you don’t already have DeWalt batteries on hand, it might just be cheaper to buy the Sony batteries and be done with it. Then again, there are battery adapters for pretty much every cordless tool brand out there, so you should be able to adapt the design. We’ve also seen cross-brand battery adapters which might prove useful, too.

Have you ever scanned old negatives or print photographs? Then you’ve probably wondered about the resolution of your scanner, versus the resolution of what you’re actually scanning. Or maybe, you’ve looked at digital cameras, and wondered how many megapixels make up that 35mm film shot. Well [ShyStudios] has been pondering these very questions, and they’ve shared some answers.

The truth is that film doesn’t really have a specific equivalent resolution to a digital image, as it’s an analog medium that has no pixels. Instead, color is represented by photoreactive chemicals. Still, there are ways to measure its resolution—normally done in lines/mm, in the simplest sense.

[ShyStudios] provides a full explanation of what this means, as well as more complicated ways of interpreting analog film resolution. Translating this into pixel equivalents is messy, but [ShyStudios] does some calculations to put a 35mm FujiColor 200 print around the 54 megapixel level. Fancier films can go much higher.

Of course, there are limitations to film, and you have to use it properly. But still, it gives properly impressive resolution even compared to modern cameras. As it turns out, we’ve been talking about film a lot lately! Video after the break.

Thanks to [Stephen Walters] for the tip!

For all intents and purposes, photography here in 2024 is digital. Of course chemical photography still exists, and there are a bunch of us who love it for what it is, but even as we hang up our latest strip of negatives to dry we have to admit that it’s no longer mainstream. Among those enthusiasts who work with conventional black-and-white or dye-coupler colour film are a special breed whose chemistry takes them into more obscure pathways.

Wet-collodion plates for example, or in the case of [Jon Hilty], the Lumière autochrome process. This is a colour photography process from the early years of the twentieth century, employing a layer of red, green, and blue grains above a photosensitive emulsion. Its preparation is notoriously difficult, and he’s lightened the load somewhat with the clever use of CNC machinery to automate some of it.

His web site has the full details of how he prepares and exposes the plates, so perhaps it’s best here to recap how it works. Red, green, and blue dyed potato starch grains are laid uniformly on a glass plate, then dried and pressed to form a random array of tiny RGB filters. The photographic emulsion is laid on top of that, and once it is ready the exposure is made from the glass side do the light passes through the filters.

If the emulsion is then developed using a reversal process as for example a slide would be, the result is a black and white image bearing colour information in that random array, which when viewed has red, green, and blue light from those starch filters passing through it. To the viewer’s eye, this then appears as a colour image.

We can’t help being fascinated by the autochrome process, and while we know we’ll never do it ourselves it’s great to see someone else working with it and producing 21st century plates that look a hundred years old.

While this may be the first time we’ve featured such a deep dive into autochrome, it’s certainly not the first time we’ve looked at alternative photographic chemistries.

Photography is all about light, and capturing it for posterity. As any experienced photographer will tell you, getting the right lighting is key to getting a good shot. To help in that regard, you might like to have a fill light. If you follow [tobychui]’s example, you can build your own!

The build relies on addressable WS2812B LEDs as the core of the design. While they’re not necessarily the fanciest LEDs for balanced light output, they are RGB LEDs, so they can put out a ton of different colors for different stylistic effects. The LEDs are under the command of a Wemos D1, which provides a WiFI connection for wireless control of the light.

[tobychui] did a nice job of building a PCB for the project, including heatsinking to keep the array of 49 LEDs nice and cool. The whole assembly is all put together inside a 3D printed housing to keep it neat and tidy. Control is either via onboard buttons or over the WiFi connection.

Files are on GitHub if you’re seeking inspiration or want to duplicate the build for yourself. We’ve seen some other similar builds before, too. Meanwhile, if you’re cooking up your own rad photography hacks, don’t hesitate to let us know!

[packetandy] had a problem. He was still into classic analog photography, but local options for development were few and far between. After some frustration, he decided to take on the process himself, creating an automatic development tank for that very purpose.

For black and white film, developing is fairly straightforward, if dull and time consuming. The film requires constant agitation during development, which can be dull to do by hand. To get around this, [packetandy] decided to build a development tank rig that could handle agitation duties for him by wiggling the film around in his absence.

The tank itself is created by Patterson, and has a stick on top for agitating the film inside. The rig works by attaching a NEMA stepper motor to this stick to jerk it around appropriately. Rather than go with a microcontroller and custom code, [packetandy] instead just grabbed a programmable off-the-shelf stepper controller that can handle a variety of modes. It’s not sophisticated, but neither is the job at hand, and it does just fine.

It’s a nifty build that should see [packetandy]’s black-and-white photography on the up and up. Meanwhile, if simple development isn’t enough for you, consider diving into the world of darkroom robot automation if you’re so inclined!