DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Alternative Imaging Methods (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/)
-   -   New moving ground glass mechanism (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/36209-new-moving-ground-glass-mechanism.html)

Dan Diaconu December 10th, 2004 04:35 PM

Possible alternative?
 
Moderator note: Dan, I've started a new thread for your mechanism in our Alternative Imaging Methods forum which seems to be the most appropriate place. -Boyd
--------------

Hi Cris,
I just do not know where to post the following pic

http://pictures.care2.com/view/2/941356005

to let the interested people know of an alternative for "home made"
adapter.
Cheers,
Dan Diaconu.
setarcos@shaw.ca

Brett Erskine December 11th, 2004 01:44 AM

Hey Dan I looked closely at your pic but wasnt sure what kind of movement you are creating with your mechanism. Rotating, vibrating or oscillating? Whats the range of movement?

Bob Hart December 11th, 2004 05:51 AM

Dan

Concentric bearings and keyed eccentric median ring?? How are you managing wear debris/lube vapors settling on the groundglass? Does the deep frame with angled sides take care of that?

Dan Diaconu December 11th, 2004 10:06 AM

Gents,
Thanks for your interest. (and thank you for the new thread :-)

The movement of the GG is of a circular uniform motion:
the whole GG describes a circle (very small 0.2-0.6mm)

At 20-60 R/sec and the small ammount of movement is perceived as "shaking" or "vibrating" as of a linear vibrator.

The rotation is done on a horizontal plane ONLY. There is no
vertical movement whatsoever.
(Otherwise it would be IN and OUT of the focal plane)

There is no wear debris/lube vapors settling on the groundglass. As near as I can figure it out it will work
from -10 (maybe -15?) deg C to +40- 50? without any changes is performance. I did not do a temp test but I am confident 90% that the perfrmance is not affected by temp.

The "deep frame with angled sides" is only to prevent any
reflection of light ending on the GG. It resebles a MB (with the same purpose)

As for the movement, I can not give details at this time (being subject to a patent application)

However, I can assure you that if anyone will be on the market with a lesser quality and a higher price than what
our world film community desrves, I will be there to make sure
ANYONE who can afford to buy an HD Sony (or whatever brand of prosummer HD) will access CONFORTABLY one of this adapters.
My aim is to open the "inner circle" to many.

I will post some footage before the week end and I will be happy to receive your comments and answer further questions.

PS. IMHO, the technical chalange of manufacturing this
units lays beyond average homebuilder. I have a precision miniature lathe and milling machine from SHERLINE and six years of using them (must have learned something......)

http://www.sherline.com/tip35.htm

I have been working on this project since August/2004 and this is the 23 version of the "shaker"
(Took me a while to get here...)

Brett Erskine December 11th, 2004 12:25 PM

Good work. I take it what you mean by "circular uniform motion" is oscillating motion. I was thinking about the speed of such system and figured out the fastest you would need to make it oscillate would be 1 rotation per shutter speed. In other words if you shoot no faster than 1/1000 then it doesnt help to rotate the GG faster than 1 rotation per 1/1000 of a second. I mention it because noise is a issue with these movements. Will we be able to use a on camera mic with your design? If not I might recomend that you have a variable speed motor and you can dial in various speeds like 1/1000 all the way down to the common 1/48th to conserve power and make on camera mics possible. Just a random thought. Good luck on your project. Thank you for all your hard work.

Dan Diaconu December 11th, 2004 02:26 PM

Thank you for your input.
From what I observed, the slower the movement the better the bled of the grain into itself.
If one of two is fast motion (shutter spped or GG movement)
the end result is the same (you start seing the grain)
(never thought one would shoot higher than 1/60 like 1/1000
for that is the closest to our beloved 1/48...... and not use ND's)
The closer to matching speeds (hence 60r/s for 1/60s shutter speed) the better the blend.
If a speed of something in between matching is dialed (yes the speed is variable) then you would get a "fliker like" effect
very pleasing (to my taste) and much closer in "suggesting"
film transfer than 24P (way................ nicer)
Noise is allmost 0 to ear from 1 ft from the open mechanism.
When mounted in, with propper sound dumpening I guess it will be good enough for "on camera" mic.
Thanks and look for a new post.
I will load some pics and clips soon.

Brett Erskine December 12th, 2004 03:14 PM

The reason why some would choose to shoot faster than 1/48th or 1/60th is the same reasons you use a tighter shutter angle in film (sharp effect like, Gladiator, some music videos and action scenes). It was somewhat over used a few years ago but it would be great still be allowed to pull this trick out of bag. In other words your variable motor will have to be fast enough for at least 1/500 shutter speeds. But thats just icing on the cake.

That effect of having a slow moving GG sounds interesting. Like you I've had dozens of generations of adapter designs. One worked on the idea of not moving the GG fast enough so you tried to make it disappear. Instead it only moved slightly between video frames and then stopped when the next frame was captured. This was happening 30 times a sec. In other words each frame had a different grain static structure than the previous so when put it motion it would give a very believable film look and create a unique softness to the image. The problem with such a system though is you have to sync it with the camera thru the cameras own pulse signal it gives out but I didnt want to get involved with the electronics since its not my expertise.

Anyways great design. Im glad to see you used a motion picture film gate rather than a still film gate because then we can use both lenses. Keep us updated.

James Hurd December 12th, 2004 05:54 PM

Is it just me or is this guy saying we're all wasting our time and anything we've done or do will never amount to something that will work?

Isn't this the place where everyone has been sharing ideas and accomplishments which will allow everyone to move along together? The same place that probably put him on his quest?

And he want's us to give him more ideas?

Brett Erskine December 12th, 2004 06:51 PM

James-
Are you talking about me or Dan? If it was something I said please email me so I can better explain myself because thoughs are not my intentions at all. Email is better because I'd rather not dirty up this thread with this or anything else off subject. If its Dan then all I can say is I didnt get that impression. He seems like he truely knows what hes doing and is offering yet another option for us to consider. I good one at that. Now back to the thread.

Dan Diaconu December 12th, 2004 08:30 PM

Good point Brett,

Indeed for fast motion, sometimes a high speed (or small shutter ) is used to "freze" the motion and give it a strobe like
look. I (mentaly) did not consider it as an option based on my
(old fasshioned) interpretation of fast movement (too fast to
be caught on film, hence blured....) But than again, is used
and sometimes looks nice (although, most time cryes for attention to the effect itself and the story (if there ever was one) and the "magic" goes bye-bye.

However, most times with a small shutter used comes
slo-mo and that's over 70-90 fps, which can not be
(yet) achieved in video, so what's the point? Only to "slow it down" in post?

Fast shutter speed means fast action. When something
happens that fast that requires 1/500 and 1/1000 then who's got the time to "pull focus" (in video).

In a fast scene, hardly
anyone will look for the "look" (I might be wrong though)

If one decides to shoot 1/500 or 1/1000 in video, it would require a very fast movement (with all the noise and mechanical shake that comes with it to loose the grain of GG. Is it worth it? Just for the look?

Not to me.
I am happy with it as is.(As a matter of fact, one of the
prefious models was going up to very fast speed (possibly
1/500 but was obviously much noisier)
As you know, if there is enough demand for "whatever",
someone will get out and do it. The question is :would it be enough demand for that hi speed alone? Anyone?

James, I am sorry if you interpreted my post that way.
I willl keep it short here for the other members.
I have gained nothing new in terms of knowlege from the discutions related to any replicas of this video adapter.
The only thing was the strugle, ambition, creativity and bitternes of the high price of P+S (to which I subscribe)
The only thing I looked for was "to what extreme and creative solutions some people would go to get the look.

That is true passion!

I respect it and I love it.

Please do not waste your energy on hate. Please!
You might be happy one day soon to have an alternative
(movement) and build your system around it 4 a lot less.
Ta-Daaaa....
I choose to take your post as one of the most sincere
compliments I have received lately. Thank you and no
hard feelings.

http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/868859207

http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/758330850

Dan Diaconu December 12th, 2004 08:39 PM

...

Dan Diaconu December 12th, 2004 08:48 PM

Good point Brett,

Indeed for fast motion, sometimes a high speed (or small shutter ) is used to "freze" the motion and give it a strobe like
look. I (mentaly) did not consider it as an option based on my
(old fasshioned) interpretation of fast movement (too fast to
be caught on film, hence blured....) But than again, is used
and sometimes looks nice (although, most time cryes for attention to the effect itself and the story (if there ever was one) and the "magic" goes bye-bye.

However, most times with a small shutter comes
slo-mo and that's over 70-90 fps, which can not be
(yet) achieved in video, so what's the point? Only to "slow it down" in post?

Fast shutter speed means fast action. When something
happens that fast that requires 1/500 and 1/1000 then the look would be less noticeable (I would guess)

In a fast scene, hardly
anyone will look for the "look"
(I might be wrong though)

If one decides to shoot 1/500 or 1/1000 in video, it would require a very fast movement (with all the noise and mechanical shake that comes with it to loose the grain of GG. Is it worth it? Just for the look? How many would
be willing to pay for the extra feature? How much?

I am happy with this one as is.
(As a matter of fact, one of the
prefious models was going up to very fast speed (possibly
up to 1/500 but was obviously much noisier and heavier)

As you know, if there is enough demand for "whatever",
someone will get out and do it. The question is :would it be enough demand for that hi speed alone? Anyone?

James, I am sorry if you interpreted my post that way.

(I will try & keep it short here for the other members)
I have gained nothing new in terms of knowlege from the discutions related to any replicas of this video adapter.
The only thing was the strugle, ambition, creativity and bitternes of the high price of P+S (to which I subscribe)
The only thing I looked for was "to what extreme and creative solutions with limited machining capabilities"
some people would go to get the look.

That is TRUE passion!

I respect it and I love it.!!!!!

Please do not waste your energy on hate. Please!
You might be happy one day soon to have an alternative
(movement) and build your system around it 4 a lot less.
Ta-Daaaa....
I choose to take your post as one of the most sincere
compliments I have received lately. Thank you and please, no hard feelings.

http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/868859207

http://pictures.care2.com/view/1/758330850

Valeriu Campan December 13th, 2004 01:19 AM

James... James...
I don't understand. Can you please explain?

<<<-- Originally posted by James Hurd : Is it just me or is this guy saying we're all wasting our time and anything we've done or do will never amount to something that will work?

Isn't this the place where everyone has been sharing ideas and accomplishments which will allow everyone to move along together? The same place that probably put him on his quest?

And he want's us to give him more ideas? -->>>

James Hurd December 13th, 2004 09:34 AM

Sorry guys but I guess it was just me. My feeling is that if he would how his designed worked, I would not have taken it that way. If he does have a patent pending AND prior documentation, he wouldn't have any risk of someone trying to rip it off to go and sell it (even though ps already has a patent on a moving gg). He should know this already holding several patents (according to his website.) But by holding his cards and asking us what we're holding kinda rubbed me the wrong way.

I won't go into the fact that he parachuted in here and said look what I've got, and don't try it because I'm a pro with 7 years experience...

We all need motivation. The comradery that we see and read throughout this board. I'll help you! You help me!

And many people here are not able to buy an HDV Prosumer camera. They've got everything from 3ccd cameras to 1ccd handycams. So for you average home builders, your're outta luck!

Maybe it's just the engineer in me... Either we're all on the same team or we're not.

Dan, are any of your inventions on the market today? Do you think that you're not covered by explaining your design more indepth? What will be your path to market or will you just be selling to the "The average Home Builder"? What do you think it will sell for? Should everyone stop working on their adapters and wait for your silver bullet?

I'll get off of my soap box now. (by the way, I've found the cure for cancer, but I can only show you a piece of the formula. Maybe I'll sell it to you some day ;) )

Bob Hart December 13th, 2004 11:37 AM

The beauty about this whole AGUS/ALDU open source thing has been the crossfeed of ideas and information without hindrance.

However as we see with Linux, ideas will begin to be with-held. Whilst it might irritate that the collective intellectual property from this site has been harvested, I can't myself cry foul as the basis behind these developments is a patented reverse projection method many have attempted to emulate.

P+S Technik have had the good grace to leave me alone for which I am appreciative. They could have been quite vengeful and injuncted the entire construction and development effort out of existence by now, but they have not gone there.

I would hope that by reading the collective published efforts, their own R&D people may have found some fresh ideas to try which can only benefit the industry generally, not harm it.

With the AGUS/ALDU appliances, many can be thrown together quite crudely and still yield a result in that 95% perfection region. My specimen for example can be 5mm or nearly 1/4" out and still work because adjustments are built in and if worst comes to worst, plastic can be bent.

Dan's appliance on the surface appears to be a viable alternative to the orbital arrangements which are being published here. Despite its sophistication it will remain only as effective as the other components of the arrangement allow it to be.

His appliance might spawn a viable commercial enterprise which becomes an employer of a few people who have fallen victim to the export enhancement program on jobs. Keeping a unique idea close to the chest before release makes good business sense. After release, it will then remain secret no longer than it takes for the first screwdriver to touch it or the service manual to be read.

Joel Aaron December 13th, 2004 11:57 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Bob Hart :
However as we see with Linux, ideas will begin to be with-held. Whilst it might irritate that the collective intellectual property from this site has been harvested, I can't myself cry foul as the basis behind these developments is a patented reverse projection method many have attempted to emulate.
-->>>

Given the length of time the project has been ongoing and the fact that no one yet has come up with a workable moving GG solution that can be replicated I can certainly appreciate why someone would patent their efforts. Like Win vs. Linux vs. Mac, I just want something that works. If it's free and open source, so much the better. If not, give me a reasonable price. I've got no-budget-film-school-movies to make. :-)

I think the door has been wide open for someone to get tenacious and see this project to it's end for quite some time now - and make some money too. I, having attempted a moving GG project and given up, can certainly appreciate the level of skill and craftsmanship required and give a big salute to everyone trying.

I'm hopeful that several people will continue and complete "winners" including a medium format solution. Many are ready to pay for a good moving GG device, or kit, or plans or parts. Just not $10,000 :-)

Brett Erskine December 13th, 2004 12:54 PM

So much for email ;-)

Dan Diaconu December 13th, 2004 12:59 PM

James,

Thank you for cooling somewhat the "heat".
You were right. I did "show off" with the results of my work.
I am sorry for hurting feelings here. I really am!
My stupid pride.
I should have said nothing at all. I was too excited to
get the results I got.
That's all.

I did not receive any knowledge about "how to make it" from
this forum.
Not even the slightest clue. Believe me. Even if you do not (now),
some day when this one will be on the market, you and anyone else, could look back to all ideas vehiculated and
see if this one was ever sugested. Even so (I did not
follow threads) from a "sugestion" to the real thing is
a loooooooooooooooong way of #$@&* and sweat.

You are absolutely right. I did "parachuted" in this forum and
somehow raised the bar. But I never said don't try it or
don't do it. All I said was: here is a current level, do it better.
That's all.

About shearing knowledge.

I will not go in depth about my conceptions about knowledge and friendship.
I will only say this: friends are frinds as long as there is
nothing to fight for and all they have to share is a "good time". Trow something in between (girl, money, whatever)
and see for yourself.

You say P+S have a patent on the movement.
Could you please supply the link to that patent???

All I found was an abandoned application (here in Canada) for the adapter. That's all. See it here:

http://patents1.ic.gc.ca/details?patent_number=2336197&language=EN

http://patents1.ic.gc.ca/details2?patent_number=2336197

Even if they have a patent on the movement(as they made it), that does
not mean in any way that moving the GG in a different manners does not qualify for a patent. So, is all yours (ours)

About "giving tech details" :

Even if one, opens the currnet version of P+S , one needs
to be able to reproduce it (manufacturing cost, tooling, etc)
This is a big (the least to say) task.

Buy a camcorder. Is $200 us. Or a scanner ($20)
Take a screwdriver.
You have all the parts on your table. You can take measurements, and all that. Can you get anywhere?.....
Can you make more of those? Is it worth one's time?

An info will ONLY have value for someone who CAN make something
out of it.

It is my belief that without a miniature machine shop, this
task can not be accomplished with all the info on the table.

I will refrain from comments from now on.
Sorry to "make waves" here.

All the best to all members.


PS
If anyone is interested to receive updates on the matter,
please email me. I will have fottage soon on line.

James Hurd December 13th, 2004 01:48 PM

Dan,
I'm not trying to run you off. I've only tried to relay my interpretation of the etiquette of this forum.

I new way of moving a GG is very interesting. Just as you say #$@&* and sweat. This forum goes way back documenting that #$@&* and sweat and wasted money on failed attempts. And then for us guys sitting at our mini-lathes and mill-converted cnc all night, working on a design that the direction of the forum is heading, to findout that someone has a better design but doesn't care to share his findings, is somewhat personally disturbing. And then ask for suggestions on top of that.

I hope you see where I'm coming from, and I hope you understand that my personal opionions do not reflect the thoughts of the people on this board. It was just me talking.

So now that it's documented within this thread, it will be very clear that this is a 'proprietary' design that is looking for suggestions from people that are familiar with the concept. I'm sure there are many people that would like to see your progress and comment on it as its being developed, including myself.

Welcome to the forum.

james

Dan Diaconu December 13th, 2004 06:24 PM

James,

Once again, my apologies. I did not expect improvements from the list.
That was pure sarcasm, and I am an A$$$....

(How can one improve something that is not known or understood?)
I am sorry.

Is just that I did not think it can be done any better (smaller, lighter weight, less power consumption, more precise, etc)
(but then again, how many times before did I not just say THAT, only to change IT ALL ½ h latter?) (already have something to add goddamnit)

All I can say is that I will do the best I can to make it AFFORDABLE for all.
(and REASONABLE) so nobody will bother with "homemades" for not being worth the time.

Courtesy to one of the members (Joel from big smiles), you can see a short clip of the
complete version of this adapter and one shot using it (until I sort it out how to post more clips on line on my site) here:

http://www.bigsmile.com/video/

Keep in touch

Bob Hart December 14th, 2004 08:22 AM

Dan.

Don't feel compelled to go away. Everyone here represents the big "D" not democracy but diversity. And don't feel bad about showing us your project. We are here to learn and to share.

Every now and then a toe or two will catch in a crack in the pavement but in the bigger scheme of things, it is only a momentary stumble. Good luck in your endeavour.

By the way, have you thought of milling white nylon or nolathane for that gg frame?

Dan Diaconu December 14th, 2004 09:28 AM

Thanks Bob,
I do not feel bad for showing my work, I feel bad for "showing off".
I seem to master avoiding to learn from past mistakes. We all know who
does that!!!! ...............
"Pride" is one of the seven. I know I have it, and that's why I am taking drastic measures. Hopefully I will get better..... but when?.....
....................................................................................................
If the frame is black, transparent or white plastic (nylon or something else)
is allready philosophy. Which one will block light, or let it go or bounce it back....
Arguments for all - plenty. Who's to say which one?
Tried all three versions, did not see any changes (I am sure there are)
Setlled for black for that's what's around GG in all SLR's.

Bob Hart December 14th, 2004 10:44 AM

Dan.

My mistake. There is possibly black nylon available too. I was thinking of the noise/vibration factor associated with a metal frame. With nolathane can come cold-casting partially formed blanks, ease of milling and much less tool wear.

At the oscillation frequencies you are using, I wondered if you might get flexing on the corners and chipping wear on the edge of the groundglass unless you bond the groundglass into the frame.
Nylon should be more benign to the glass if it comes loose in the frame but of course with nylon, it might also be more inclined to come loose.

I'm using polypropolene for my diskmotor mount plate for reason it is less acoustically live than metal or a harder plastic. Although my version is made of PVC water and sewer pipe, I have not had to acoustically insulate the case with that arrangement.

I experienced repeated fractures of multistranded wire next to fresh soldered joints to the motor within a half-hour of testing when running an out-of-balance disk at 3000rpm approx. You may need to encapsulate the motor wires or peg them to the frame close to the motor for reliability.

Dan Diaconu December 14th, 2004 11:36 AM

Bob,
We are slipering here on the tech side.
I do not have bending, chipping on the corners (not even the remote possibility of getting it/them)
Sorry but that's about all I have the liberty to discuss.
But a fair question I am willing to ask.
What would you pay for this movement AS IS?
I hope to get a fair answer (if your price is fair or no to me, that's a different story)

Brett Erskine December 14th, 2004 12:55 PM

Hey Dan saw the video. Looks nice and compact! I was looking at the back of the adapter and noticed the size of the lens opening for the video camera is equally small. Have you had a chance to see if your adapter will work with pro-sumer cameras? I ask because they have larger lenses and different minimum focal lengths. So does it work with:

DVX100?
PD150/PD170?
GL2?
Sony HDV?
etc?

Also does your adapter rotate the image upright again before going to tape?

Les Dit December 14th, 2004 01:48 PM

How about posting a sample video using the device?
A high bit rate video would be the test.
Low bit rate hides a lot.

-Les
<<<-- Originally posted by Dan Diaconu : Thanks Bob,
I do not feel bad for showing my work, I feel bad for "showing off".
I seem to master avoiding to learn from past mistakes. We all know who
does that!!!! ...............
"Pride" is one of the seven. I know I have it, and that's why I am taking drastic measures. Hopefully I will get better..... but when?.....
....................................................................................................
If the frame is black, transparent or white plastic (nylon or something else)
is allready philosophy. Which one will block light, or let it go or bounce it back....
Arguments for all - plenty. Who's to say which one?
Tried all three versions, did not see any changes (I am sure there are)
Setlled for black for that's what's around GG in all SLR's. -->>>

Dan Diaconu December 14th, 2004 02:04 PM

Never interested to make it work for those.
No need to.
All one needs is the best 3 ccd and a gadget for the "look".
(In the DV world)
All the features found on those models are "one satifyes for all"
The shot at the end of the clip is one of many.
None of the PD's or XL's can deliver that by themsleves.
(so why bother? Check the resolution on the chips (XL1 vs GS200)
and see for yourself.
For sound (on Panasonic GS200), there is an aux mic input.
Minijack to XLR (for boom mic work) Bingo!
What else one needs????..................................

I had an L1 (11-12 years ago) and loved every moment shooting with it.
Now, I know a bit better.

However, this one I am working on is 4 Sony fx1 (but will work on any
having a 72mm filter on the lens, like PD and such...)

No, I am not interested in roating the image.
(did that allready, what a pain...)

Why add cost, weight,
size to unis and high price to consummer when you can use a flip monitor 4 framing and flip the footage it in post on-the-fly?
If there are seconders, I am right.
If no, I am the only one to go that route.
OK with me anyway.

Dan Diaconu December 14th, 2004 04:18 PM

Up-dates:

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

more to come.

Brett Erskine December 15th, 2004 02:10 AM

Dan-
Well Im glad to see that you built a adapter that accepts 72mm lens mounts even though you believe your GS200 is the same in quality to a progressive scan camera like the DVX100. For me the look is totally different and more in the spirit of a 35mm adapter. No matter. It looks like we dont have to agree because it will fit the DVX anyways. Very nice! So I've been meaning to ask you since you decided to electronically vibrate the GG rather than oscillate it have you noticed any problems with dust and dirt showing up on the GG. Seeing that any dust, etc riding on GG that is vibrating in very tiny movements I would think it would be more likely to show up because its basically sitting in the same general area of the frame. I hope that made sense. Basically it fairly easy to make the grain disappear due to contrast reasons but a piece of dust or hair is more likely to show up if its not moving in a large path. Larger the path the less time it has to expose its image on the CCD. This is based on the basic laws of how light works to create a image on film or a CCD but perhaps isnt a issue. I noticed you dont have a dust guard protecting to GG so have you tested for this? I ask because if it works flawlessly I would much rather switch to your design for my own adapter and just vibrate the GG. The oscillating movement is just too much of a pain in the butt.

Few more questions:
USB port? For what?

Did you make two different adapters. It seems so by your pictures? Whats the difference?

Brett Erskine December 15th, 2004 02:11 AM

Dan-
Well Im glad to see that you built a adapter that accepts 72mm lens mounts even though you believe your GS200 is the same in quality to a progressive scan camera like the DVX100. For me the look is totally different and more in the spirit of a 35mm adapter. No matter. It looks like we dont have to agree because it will fit the DVX. Very nice! So I've been meaning to ask you since you decided to electronically vibrate the GG rather than oscillate it have you noticed any problems with dust and dirt showing up on the GG. Seeing that any dust, etc riding on GG that is vibrating in very tiny movements I would think it would be more likely to show up because its basically sitting in the same general area of the frame. I hope that made sense. Basically it fairly easy to make the grain disappear due to contrast reasons but a piece of dust or hair is more likely to show up if its not moving in a large path. Larger the path the less time it has to expose its image on the CCD. This is based on the basic laws of how light works to create a image on film or a CCD but perhaps isnt a issue. I noticed you dont have a dust guard protecting to GG so have you tested for this? I ask because if it works flawlessly I would much rather switch to your design for my own adapter and just vibrate the GG. The oscillating movement is just too much of a pain in the butt.

Few more questions:
USB port? For what?

Did you make two different adapters. It seems so by your pictures? Whats the difference?

Dan Diaconu December 15th, 2004 05:47 AM

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.

Bob Hart December 15th, 2004 08:14 AM

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.

Joel Aaron December 15th, 2004 09:44 AM

<<<
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.

Dan Diaconu December 15th, 2004 12:40 PM

"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.

Bob Hart December 16th, 2004 03:32 AM

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.

Dan Diaconu December 16th, 2004 07:42 AM

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?

Daniel Stone December 18th, 2004 01:33 AM

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.

Dan Diaconu December 18th, 2004 03:25 AM

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.

Bob Hart December 18th, 2004 05:51 AM

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.

Obin Olson December 18th, 2004 08:12 AM

for a good highquality working GG adaptor that fits a dxv100 I would pay $500-$1500 retail


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:20 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network