New moving ground glass mechanism - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Alternative Imaging Methods

Alternative Imaging Methods
DV Info Net is the birthplace of all 35mm adapters.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 15th, 2004, 05:47 AM   #31
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
Brett,
I have used the DVX. I am not happy at all with the "look" generated by 24P (although, is different than 30fps @1/60 )
The exposure is still 1/60 (not 1/48) (like messing a bit with the shutter @172 instead of 180)
http://www.adamwilt.com/24p/#CodecDifferences

The quality of footage is subject to way too many factors to consider
one over another. I hope to post more footage from the GS (with the adapter, and anxious to hear your view) Cross my heart I would not trade.

oh well,
matter of taste....I guess.

The movement is covered (dust protected) on both sides. (you got to
see the very first pics without the covers)

Dust (if any in there and dark) is likely to show if the amount of movement is
small (and to "lose" the grain, that's all it takes a small movement)
I have the means to adjust the amount of movement (not only the speed! )
I do not think I will offer it. Too much trouble. Risky and costly (to
manufacture and that would render higher price in the end)
For what? Would you pay say, and extra K for that alone?
Don't think so.

I made the first one for GS in Aug.
http://www.cannibalcruise.com/index.aspx?p=svi_currentproduction&cc=camera

Then I looked at FX1 and got me thinking.
The new one might have a "larger" audience since it goes on 72mm.

Do you see a problem that you would have to use another monitor
4 framing (one that has the flip switches to reverse the image)

Or would you rather carry a heavy rock/prism(s) (in a big case) in front of the
lens? (with all the aberations and light loss of a longer light path)

and pay a heafty price for all that (on top)
I am very curious to hear other opinions as well on this matter.
Dan Diaconu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2004, 08:14 AM   #32
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA.
Posts: 4,356
Dan.

Covering front and back is thorough. If you could pull a partial vacuum in that enclosure you might get a better performance and battery endurance from the small motor but if the motor is also in the enclosure then you might have arcing problems - just a thought.

The prism versions so far put up for the Agus place the prisms between the groundglass and the camcorder. The Mini35 seems to use a combination prism - surface coated mirror path again in this stage. Prisms capable of carrying the image from the prime lens to the groundglass do not fit within the available space.

You product might best be built as a module from the prime lens mount to a standardised rear mount, then custom adaptors for the different camcorder types or prism erector paths could be built to match up to that rear mount. The bottom face of your product might well become a machined base with a selection of tapped bolt holes to enable an industry baseplate and rods assembly to be fitted. You've probably already gone there but again - just a thought.
Bob Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2004, 09:44 AM   #33
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ - USA
Posts: 300
<<<
and pay a heafty price for all that (on top)
I am very curious to hear other opinions as well on this matter.
>>>

I'd personally rather have the highest quality image and the lowest light loss and use a monitor (or steadicam monitor) then flip in post.

One thing a few people have experimented with is using medium format lenses which project a bigger image onto a bigger ground glass. I'd like to see a quality comparison - it's hard to know if that would make a real world difference on the final tape.

Your market will certainly be biggest if your unit adapts to most prosumer camcorders like the XL2, DVX100, FX1. Heck, people are using Pro35's from P&S on Sony CineAlta's. It seems to me one well design unit could be capable of all that and therefore have the widest market.

Considering lenses still need to be purchased, I'd GUESS the price needs to be under $800ish to get decent sales. I would think at around $500 most home builders would give up and you'd really see some volume. If you're leaving out the prism it should really cut the cost. Someone else around here offered to machine the moving GG mechanism for around $350 (I don't recall the exact figure). I don't think he got much interest. I wasn't interested in that alone because that alone doesn't solve the problem... you've still got mounting and hotspot issues to be resolved. Without the rest of it, he might not have sold any for $99 - it's hard to know.

Anyway - I'm sure I'll be an early adopter of someone's system, but I'd really like a unit versatile enough to throw in front of a Panasonic Varicam in addition to most prosumer videocams. That way when the next cool thing comes out the device still works.

Also, a focus pulling attachment would be great.
Joel Aaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 15th, 2004, 12:40 PM   #34
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
"One shoe fits all".... may not work.
I might be able to make it work on other cameras such as Varicam.
I do not know and have no interes at this moment.
Market size is my "eye on the ball"
72mm lens seems the biggest market (for now)
We'll see.
As for price, we'll see aslo.
Dan Diaconu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2004, 03:32 AM   #35
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA.
Posts: 4,356
Dan.

"One size fits all" was not the idea. If you lock yourself into a complete module which starts at the SLR lens in-point and ends at the 72mm lens mount out-point, you will exclude all the detachable lens style cams such as the B3 and B4 mount types plus many XL1 and XL2 owners who want a direct relay path via a replacement lens.

Maybe the owners of these cams would be looking at the Mini35 / Pro35 but I think you will find, due to full-industry and prosumer product improvements, some higher-end DVCAM stuff like the PD250 onwards may come across secondhand underneath the latest generation prosumer equipment into the low - no budget end of videography where the AGUS/ALDU projects live.

Just a thought.
Bob Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 16th, 2004, 07:42 AM   #36
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
The 72mm filter can mount on whatever:
FX1, PD150 or an intake lens ending in B4 or Canon (XL2).
72mm is just a "common denominator" (I think)
(I have to have "something" at that end)

I am saying that a 72mm to B4 (or XL1) with some lens (or another) in between may not be out of reach, without changing anythink else. (just a "add-on" option for those that need it)
How do you see it?
Dan Diaconu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 01:33 AM   #37
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 84
So nobody answered the question how much they would pay for it (or I may have missed it) - so I'll offer my opinion, since you asked.

First off, it needs to integrate seemlessly into a prosumer camcorder system (such as the DVX or XL2). I think as it stands right now it's more of a 'hobbyist toy' rather than a 'professional tool' - and therefore will only attract a 'hobbyist' price. I think there are a few potential problems that need to be worked out (vibration, casing mterial, noise, size, fit & finish, etc). Assuming that everything was tried and true and the unit looked a little less 'home made' and was built and finished in a factory with machined parts, I think you could pull $1000 without lenses -- but you've got a long way to go.

Here's the breakdown: if you market to the consumer, you're marketing to people who wouldn't spend more on an accessory than they had spent on their whole camcorder (which is from $300 - $800) - otherwise they'd buy prosumer. The professional market would probably want something solid, tried and true, and professional such as the Mini35 (because the $10K is not a big deal). That leaves us with the Prosumer market, which consists of people who spend $2-5K on their cameras. If they were to spend more than $1000 plus the cost of lenses on a "Mini35 imitation' unit, they'd just as well spring for the real thing.

Another huge factor is the look. I'm picturing the alien-looking thing that was rotating in that video ... and I definitely wouldn't bring that to a professional shoot.

Take all of this advice as my opinion. You asked for it, so here it is. As a marketing guru I'd tell you exactly what you'd need to do to get this thing up and running, but "this is all I am at liberty to share right now". He he.

Seriously, as a homebuilt alternative to the Mini35 you've done a pretty good job. It's probably not professional grade but it's a cute contraption. Keep up the good work.
Daniel Stone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 03:25 AM   #38
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
Thank you Daniel,

Your feeling is right. I made it specially for one show only:
http://www.cannibalcruise.com/index.aspx?p=svi_currentproduction&cc=camera
with one goal in mind:
for a DVD release, the image is good enough. (I know everyone has an
opinion on this matter, but so was the case with Star wars on HD and ........
There was even one feature print on film from XL1 ( blasphemy?)

That unit was never intended for manufacturing (or sale)
Toooooo much trouble. Just to make a point. That's all.

For a market that knows PD 150 and DVX100 as the pro tools. I think that wired looking "thing" can deliver a better
picture, but who cares anyway. Was not intended and Is not for sale.

I guess I was lucky with Mark Irwin on the set of SM3.
He had the guts to bring the "alien" thing on the set:
http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/960710576/0
BTW:
that "thing" got me a Gemini award last year here in Canada.
http://www.goldderby.com/lostmind/year/2002/2002_2003gemini.htm

I know is not the real Oscar, but here, that's all
we have....
(I was invited by the Academy for the same "alien looking thing" to
submit for Oscar in 1999.
Did not qualify at that time, I did not have
it ready and used in production.....)
.................................................................................................... ........
The price question was actually for this device :

http://pictures.care2.com/view/2/717325749
http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/682555803

and/or the GG movement only :
http://pictures.care2.com/view/2/655804674

(for those that want to assemble the SLR lens mount, batteries, speed control, mount on the lens of PD150, FX1, etc, themselves.
I am anxious to hear your opinion (price) for this units and the GG
movement.

Would you be interested in plans only?
How much (BTW) would you pay for?
Drawings, dimensions, materials I used, etc.
You will have to go find all the parts you need and take care of the machining (so it looks more pro-like) Here is $60/h.( That's what I
paid some 9 years ago, anyway).

I am serious. I want to know
what would you pay for plans (if any).
There are lots of interested people
working on various designs for some time now, so there is a big interest on this issue.
It took me 5 months FT to refine this one. (I am talking about GG
movement and the current flipped image adapter to fit on 72 mm
front lens (PD150, XL1, FX1)
What would you pay for one or another ?
Thank you for the previous re.
Dan Diaconu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 05:51 AM   #39
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA.
Posts: 4,356
Dan.

I think the time is really nigh that you should be talking to a patent attorney if you have not already. You seem to have invested far too much time, energy and finance into this venture to leave yourself exposed.

If you have already taken care of the legal side then ignore all this which follows.

There are two general paths intellectual propery rights holders can pursue.

The intellectual property holders don't have to sue the backside off builders and designers of emulative products. They are now legion and it would bury any business financially to attempt it.

No device is going to be of any use if injunctive relief is sought in primary marketplaces to restrain the distribution of entertainment product originated via devices styled after the Mini35 or Pro35 for profit or reward.

Throwing down a legal dropnet where the end-product must converge is dead-easy by comparison and would be effective overnight. No festival or contest would likely go anywhere near anything originated via Mini35/Pro35 or Movietube emulations and forget about distribution.

None of these legal interventions has to succeed, only be initiated, be proven to a judge that they are not hopelessly futile and then continue to exist as indefinitely adjourned actions. Who of us can afford to fight them?

There would seem to be two legal solutions, assuming the intellectual property rights holders do have enforceable protection in jurisdictions where the film-makers and marketplaces are at.

-- Successful defense against an application for injunctive relief or compensation for commercial losses.

-- A binding licensing agreement between the intellectual property rights holders and the manufacturers of emulative products intended to compete in the same marketplace.

Sorry to be alarmist but these are realities any intending business enterprise must examine.

For my part, I make a point when explaining or demonstrating the AGUS35 to friends or industry professionals alike, of actively promoting the Mini35 and Pro35 and mention the Movietube, for no other reason than to avoid being the cause of commercial injury to those enterprises.

On reflection, it is probably time for some communication between the AGUS35 community such as it is and the intellectual property rights holders in any event. I myself have been kneeling on the mountain-top with my butt in the air in an approaching storm and hoping lightning won't strike for far too long.

The ALDU35 builders likely have a little more time yet.
Bob Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 08:12 AM   #40
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 1,414
for a good highquality working GG adaptor that fits a dxv100 I would pay $500-$1500 retail
Obin Olson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 08:16 AM   #41
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wilmington NC
Posts: 1,414
BTW I still want to see some footage from this unit with a good highquality 3ccd camera in progressive scan..

can you guys think how nice of an image you could get with this and the vx100 4:4:4 12bit mod!!!?!?!?!
Obin Olson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 08:46 AM   #42
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 59
@Dan:
Most people with a budget can go for a P+S mini35 or 35Pro.
Either renting or buying it.
It's an accessorie like a mattebox or followfocus.
Video people want film look, so the want things like that.
DoF is one piece of the puzzle, we all now that and talked/wrote about it for hours.
Daniel summed it up pretty good: your aiming for the prosumer market. For me, the heritage of the VX1000.
Pro's wont flip screens, they can't afford such hazzle, rather pay P+S.
Prosumers will.
I can now buy a FX1 for 2839 Euros (I would't, but that's an other discussion...)
Would I spent 1000$ for one piece of the puzzle, if I still need lights, tripod, sound, dolly or would i rather shoot full open and in telezoom...?
Or would I go to a rental house and get a bundle allready including your adaptor?
My 2c :
Price it in reach, around 500$ and a lot of prosumers will BUY it, the same people, who want their own cam, be it DVX,XL2 or FX1, rather than RENT one for a project.
Make it too expensive and still less good than the P+S, and people will either go rent the mini35 or still try to build one themselves.
Make it even more expensive and deal with the pro market and maybe the P+S legal departement.
Make it solid, inexpensive and available SOON and not only for the FX1, and you will get rewarded for all your effort.
Anyway, keep on building...
Christian Schmitt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 10:07 AM   #43
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 804
Gents,
Thank you for your feedback. You are all right (in one respect or another)
A configuration consisting A + B + C gets a patent.
A+B+ D (instead of C) will not get a patent by the doctrine of equivalents,
but an A+B will. Same for a B+C. We can not stop at one point in time,
just because someone has invented something (we would not have
electricity to type messages)
The first one I made is a basic SLR config. (lens mount, mirror, GG, prism)
Can I get a patent on that? Yes because I "shake" the GG and the
results are different.
No because P+S may have a patent.
Well, I did not find any patents here in Canada in that respect.
Go here:
http://patents1.ic.gc.ca/intro-e.html
and if you find something relevant, let me know please.
(I asked them (P+S) recently to provide the patent. I had no answer)
I will leave it here for now.

About price:

I respect your opinion. Every one of us thinks though the earning
power we have at one point or another.
Most have a burning desire but a limited budget. Same goes for
productions. Yes. Imagine a series here in Vancouver where the DP
asked me (in Sept) to "make" him an adapter for HD.
I looked at it, and (Thank heaven with Sony) did what you saw.
I never thought of the PD150 market (thanks list!)
He is fully aware of P+S PRO, used it for one day on the show and returned it to the rental house. (It was booked for a week)
No further comments.
If one would rather go for "brand" regardless the price or alternative
solution, is not my problem.

Heavy optics (that could catch dust as they did in the small one I made for GS200) ,bigger box and heavier unit all together (and bigger budget) does not suit my view.

I do what I do for that's what I believe in.

I would rather use a monitor that flips the image L-R and U-D than
carry a heavy weight all the time. (it looks like is just me here and Joel) and pay a fortune for all the optic alignments that come with it.

Great forum. Great response. Thank you.
Dan Diaconu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 01:33 PM   #44
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Hi Dan,

May I ask what is your desire price target range for your device if it is not confidential?

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18th, 2004, 01:44 PM   #45
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ - USA
Posts: 300
<<<-- Originally posted by Dan Diaconu : Gents,
I would rather use a monitor that flips the image L-R and U-D than
carry a heavy weight all the time. (it looks like is just me here and Joel) and pay a fortune for all the optic alignments that come with it.

Great forum. Great response. Thank you.
-->>>

I have a hard time believing it's just you and I that think that's a better course. I'd trade 2 stops less light loss for an inverted picture every time. Add a lower price, higher picture quality and fewer places to get dust and I really have a hard time understanding what anyone else is thinking. I suppose they are thinking they don't want to flip it post.

Or they might be thinking it's tougher to market a device that records upside down and backwards. I'd agree, but you'll just have to make your case and then point them to P&S if they want it upright. I think economics and image quality will win out EVERY time. Artists are willing to go through a hell of a lot more pain than simply flipping in post to make beautiful images they are proud to show off.

ANY monitor will work too... just flip it 180 degrees and mount. All the camera playback controls work normal for on set reviews of the shots.

I hadn't seen this design of yours before:
http://pictures.care2.com/view/2/709905811

Very slick. That's nearly as compact as the static one guys are making. I think you've really got something nice there. My advice on price would be something like this... $350-$500 for the very early adopters... say the first two weeks or first 25 purchasers. Then double the price once you've got kinks worked out and have some great testimonials.

That's not unlike what software developers do for their private beta testers. (They usually get the BETA free and then can buy the retail version for cheap) Frankly, if it was me I'd take it a step further and reimburse a few people their purchase price if they provided you great footage for your demo DVD. To me that would be a well done short or music video etc. It would probably cost a lot more for you to hire someone to do that kind of work.
See http://www.marlathemovie.com for what I think is one good example.

Killer footage is how you'll convince the larger market to buy this thing. (people around here are already sold on the concept and probably don't need to see that).

FYI, the PD-150 will require a step up ring from 58mm to 72mm. A generic one is available at BHPHOTO for $7
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=98860&is=REG
Joel Aaron is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Special Interest Areas > Alternative Imaging Methods

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network