35mm Adapter Static Aldu35

[Brett Erskine]

I'd just like to say that I've been working on this project since the begining and despite my daily post Im still hearing the same questions and still giving the same answers OVER AND OVER again... You would think most people would start using the search engine on this site to answer some of their questions or perhaps do some research to find the answers for themselves. Oh well. Cant fight human nature. Trust me I've tried. I've put too much of my own personal time helping people that arent willing to take the simplest first steps in helping themselves. I hope you understand my frustration and decision to no longer answer questions that have been answer dozens of times before.
Im not saying I dont want to post any more. I just think at this point I want to use my time to make progress with the project and have a open discusion with people with the same mind set.
Anyways I hope I was some help over the last year or so.

Now its time to finish the project.

-Brett Erskine

[Les Dit]

Frank, Even a very short clip of 10 frames from a slow pan would show everything. It may be beneficial to have fully lit frames, rather than just the middle. It does not need to be the DV compression, but for 10 frames even that would not make that big of a file!
-Les


<<<-- Originally posted by Frank Ladner : Microcrystalline wax beats using AO ground glass, no doubt about it. I have posted stills of my progression through different ground glasses and eventually microcrystalline (even shots with the iris near closed, with no sign of grain).

http://www.frankladner.com/m_001.jpg
http://www.frankladner.com/m_002.jpg
http://www.frankladner.com/m_003.jpg

Yeah, I know you can't tell as much with just stills, but after you've looked at so much footage shot with these adapters, it becomes easier to spot, even in stills (esp. on out of focus parts). With me being on a dialup connection at home, it takes a while to upload big video files. However, i'd be willing to upload an uncompressed 720x480 clip of a quick pan or something that you guys can look at in an NLE. That way you have some frames to scrub through and see if you can spot any grain.

It has been mentioned in the microcrystalline wax thread that it may not be fine enough for HD. I don't have an HD camera to test it on, so I don't know if that's true, but I will say that I haven't found a better static solution for SD.

,Frank -->>>

[Brandon Adams]

I'm sorry for your frusturation, but all the information is so incredibly scattered that its extremely difficult to understand it and know all that has been discussed without having been here from the start.

It would help a lot to have a definitive FAQ. The tutorial here http://ideaspora.net/aldu35/index.html is extremely beneficial. But in it he says to just go here and look at your posts and figure out how to use it with a DVX. I tried that, couldn't find anything definitive, so I asked. Sorry.

[Giroud Francois]

in fact part of the goal is the path/time you spend to reach it, that is why most of references to build this device are not referring to the definitive how-to procedure.
it depends the camera you get, the ressource you can find and so on...
there is almost a different solution for every project.
if you plan to build an industrial solution there will be a recipee for it, but it will be probably a different product than the ones we are talking about in this forum.
to build mine a spend several night to read several forum (probably about several hundred of post) and still surfing the web for info. that is the price to pay for a cheap miniDV

[Brandon Adams]

Ok, i understand that. But then why doesn't everyone post exactly what they did to build theirs, with pictures and everything. I have seen a few, but like I said, I'm trying to find out how to do it with the DVX.

[Giroud Francois]

when you build your project, you do not know where you go and when you reach the target, you probably do not really how you get there, so making a clear recap. seems easy but has no meaning since the chain of move you do has been generated by pure chance.
My project start by reading a french forum, challenging to build an equivalent to P+S for 10$.
At this time i do not even knew what was this device and how it works. the first step was to collect info, to know what it is and acquire the knowledge required to build one.
then i start to build MY strategy, consisting to purchase cheap lens and body camera from ebay. That was an expensive step i would not consider or advise now.
By chance i got old SHARP tube camera with very nice lens that i dismount for other reason. Inside the zoom lens i found some glass and aluminium stuff that i reuse. in parallel my first purchase start to de delivered. Now i got tons of mirror, prism and lens that are uselesse for the miniDV but at the time, i was sure that i would need them.
In parallel, there was too the problem of building the gg and finding the AO. I got the chance on a forum to find a guy who purchased too much and was willing to share.
The same for the lense, all my effort to define/find a good one gave no result until i found one but i was really lucky.
Finally a got my miniDV build and performance seems very good.
But now we are on the vibrating GG... another story.
As you can see there was many line crossing at different times and i doubt this will happens the same way for you.
If you want to go the fast way (and expensive) there are some website that are selling already made component (like gg or lens) that could you help to go faster.

[Frank Ladner]

Les: Ok. I will try to get something put together. Thanks!

Jim: Check here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...threadid=27433

I believe I posted some outside shots there. The wax I'm using is from a free sample. However, the guy I talked to quoted a price of around $1.50 / lb for the wax, so it's not that expensive. However, I believe he mentioned a minimum order of 50 lbs. This may be negotiable, however. See the above referenced thread for contact information.

Thanks!

[Jason Keenan]

That's a huge shame Brett. Seems like I got on board at the wrong time. I've only known about this for a few days but I understand your frustration. Unfortunately it is difficult to find info on a particular question when people aren't sure what questions to ask. A FAQ is good in this respect because it gives you the questions too. It takes someone who knows which are the right answers though to do this eg. someone who has a working model

Generally, when I join boards for research I try to offer stuff before, or as, I ask questions. I must admit, I tend to use them to store my own info too which is probably a waste of memory, but I do it in the hope that someone might find it interesting or answer a question they are asking, dumbass to dumbass.

I hope that you will still be checking in from time to time to add good content even if you aren't answering questions per se.

Perhaps the Topic could be split into different topics like "Aldu35 Screen tech", "Aldu35 Lens tech", "Aldu35 test footage"... etc. Even a thread only for people who have completed projects to discuss how to improve them rather than basics.

Both the "Homemade 35mm Adapter" and this topic are around the '1000 posts' mark so for single threads they are a bit unwieldy. If they were separated, for example, if someone went through the footage thread and liked the look of it, they could search for that person on the other threads and see what method they used.

Just a thought.

Anyway, take care everyone and, to use a much overused cliche...I'll be back

Raavin ;)

[Jim Lafferty]

Brett,

I know where you're coming from. However, despite your tireless hours on the forums and the generosity you're inclined to with all your knowledge of optics, I think your frustrations are a little misguided.

What I see when I search for words like "PCX," "condensor" and "plano convex" is a list of posts a mile long, with you answering questions that are highly specific. If I were building an adapter exactly like someone else, this would be a lot of help, but many of us here are building with different materials and cams. So, specifics -- and believe me, I've got a 2,000 word document of PCX related posts lifted from this thread -- are all but useless -without a proper understanding of how they're interrelated.

May I suggest you write up a 'Condensed Tutorial on Condensors?' This would save you a LOT of hastle. For someone like myself, a good overview of the relation of focal length to condensor diameter and, relatedly, their relation to the GG would be enormously helpful.

To put it in context of my specific situation:

I've, at the moment, only got about 2 inches of space alotted in my setup between the rear of my Nikon lens and my ground glass. At the other end, where my macro is inserted into the adapter, I've got probably a half inch between the macro's outer surface and the rear of the GG. This doesn't exactly leave me with a lot of wiggle room to be placing a double PCX setup inside.

From what I understand of your posts, I should be placing two condensors together, convex sides facing AWAY from eachother, with the plano side of the rear-most PCX ground.

In ASCII, a cut-away side view would look like:

<-- action ||nikon|> (][) |macro|[]=[dv camera]

1. I'd be grinding the plano side of the right lens ( ---> [) ) ?

2. How do I determine the distance between the ground plano side and the rear of the Nikon lens? This is flange focal length, in other words, and I'm unsure if it changes with the condensors in place -- and how would I ascertain the change in FFL -- if any -- by other factors of the condensors (diameter, power, F1, ???)

3. I've got a setup based around a 58mm filter for my GG at the moment. Given that I've already built a housing to accomodate 58mm, I'd clearly like to get a PCX closest to that diameter. If, however, I have to settle with a smaller pair of PCX's (say, 50mm in diameter), how will this affect their optics (and FFL)?

4. How is diameter related to focal length (if at all)?


I don't have all the time in the world, but over the course of the next month or so I'd like to help you write the tutorial up -- if you're interested, that is. We could host it -- you'd get the lion's share of credit -- on my site along side my building tutorial (which is due for a facelift and writing updates...)

Drop me an email off board and we'll get it rolling -- jim@ideaspora.net.

- jim

[Jim Lafferty]

edit: nevermind

[Alain Dumais]

I am really happy whit my GG but still looking for something better and static solution. I can say that I can see grain in some rare situation but it's still pretty hard to see it. It's probably also because I am using a VX2000 that as the best low light performance ,the result are less good whit my VX1000.

Alain

[Frank Ladner]

While in the kitchen at our church, I came across a thin cutting board/sheet thing that was white and semi-transparent. (Can't see through it unless the object is right up against it on the opposite side - similar to a ground glass.)

It reminded me of the microcrystalline in that it appeared completely grainless when held up to the light. I didn't have a lens on hand to test it, but it sure looked like it would work. It may have been too thick, however, but I don't think it would be that difficult to find someone that could 'slice' it thinner.

I've been looking around for one of these cutting board things and the closest I've found was a multi-pack (different colors) from Wal-Mart. However, these were grainy on both sides, so they wouldn't work. I've asked around and nobody knows where it came from.

Any ideas?

[Filip Kovcin]

from heaven? :)

[Jim Lafferty]

New York has plastics companies on Canal street. I bought two 58mm frosted samples but the grain appears to be too large -- would be perfect for a spinner, especially given that you can custom order any diameter and have them center cut your hole. Will return to see if I can find a superior molded/etched surface, and if so I'll likely pass the info along here.

The pieces I purchased were $5 each, cut to spec while I waited in the shop for about ten minutes :D Sure beats grinding glass where time and money are concerned.

Also, my tutorial will be getting an overhaul shortly. On that note, if you're using white PVC to construct the body of your adapter, Rit brand dye is what you should be using instead of spray paint to color the adapter -- at least the interiors. I've found in practice the paint chips and can fall to rest on the three+ glass surfaces of the adapter.

Rit can be found at Pearl art supply stores or ordered online for about $1.75-2.50 a batch -- double up on the batch and dissolve it in just enough water to submerge your parts (after having scuffed them up thoroughly with sandpaper) -- or about four cups.

Bring the bath to a simmer. Stir in a tablespoon of laundry detergent. Drop your parts in and stir them constantly for about 30 minutes. Turn the heat off and stir a bit more. Let the parts soak over night.

Do not substitute Tintex brand dye, which is mostly comprised of common table salt. Do not have anything you value in its current color state near the stove. And above all, wear gloves.

- jim

[Brandon Adams]

What exactly is the purpose of the ground glass? I am able to see the image projected from the lens on a clear CD or a clear UV Filter. Am I missing something here?