january 5 i will go to the same store and will tell you the model of the zenit.

by the way, what u mean with viceral footage?

anyone have a place where i can upload the video i made for the first ray of sun light from 2004?

very pretty.

beach, girls, djs playing in the sand, etc...

ciao

Daniel you can send video to me I will put on my site for you.

taylor@moorefilms.com

Spencer Houck and I have finished our final version of the mini-50 (with a ton of help from his dad, thanks Mr. Houck!). After closely watching this thread since it was a mere 2 pages we've been able to research and test various methods to find what we think is the best. Spence built a version without ground glass, but there were some problems with distortion, so we reverted back to the frosted cd model. Here's how our version works:

GL1 > +10 macro lens > pre-frosted > fresnel > olympus 50mm lens

It's an ordeal getting it mounted to the baseplate, but once it's on it's a snap to setup and shoot. If you'd like to see some pics of the inside of the box, just ask and we can post. We used a radio shack project box to house the optics, a U shaped piece of particle board mounted inside (you can see the 4 mounting screws on the front), and a cd motor. There are some problems with vignetting, but that's an issue with our macro lens, not the light. We're really happy with our results and are looking forward to putting it to good use.

http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_wide.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_button.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_front.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_base.JPG

The video was shot on my GL1 in 30i, cc'd in premiere pro, then converted to 30p before compression. It's on the following page http://www.par-t-com.net/media.html entitled "Completed Mini50 with (w/ ground glass)". Enjoy!

Great job Devin,
Do you have any more interior construction photo's.
It would be great if you could put up a construction from A-Z on this. I want to create this for my DVX 100.
If you don't have the time but you have all the images, i would be more than willing to create the website for this...and we can define the construction copy to help liberate the Agus35/Mini35 camera.

Cheers

Taylor

Daniel,

I have chatted with you personally and i really love the footage, there is some grain in your footage, because the TRV18 produces grain, cause it has only 1 chip, and it is only 680k effective... Same as mine, cause is teh same camera.

So, when you are picking in a dv camera with 3chips, well, you will get now the real grain from the GG... rememeber that most of us are quality freaks, if we see tiny really tiny grain... it is still grain, and the process is incorrect.

So... another issue is to find more of those groudn glass... which seens imposible to most of us. and second is the most important thing.

the agus35 uses mobile parts, only from a 25-50 spindle.. that is the basic concept, now we are improving that first baby step which produces no grain at all to make a close enogh perfect adapater for 100 times less the price of the Mini35.

For everybody, we are still designing the commercial version. Now i am waiting for my pentaprism and i just ordered the allumuniun Oxide to make a 3micron GG (that will still rotate, cant believe the movietube produces zero grain...).

One another really tricky part is the les adapter mount, we are still working a particular part, that will let any adapter to be mounted or we will provide the mounts for each type.

We are resuming the work maybe in the 5th or 10th of the month, cause we have also many other projects coming along.

Thanks to all for the support.

Agus casse


Ah...

BTW...Devin Doyle

Some credit for the adapter would be really nice and welcome :)

I just want that the Agus35 name be settled to this kind of homemade adapter.

I just watch the footage and i notice that are having the same problem taht i did... the macro lens is starting to deform the image... make a test...just pan from one side to the other and shoot one subject in, you will notice that in the left and right side, the image is stretched.

You can solve this by putting the macro lens more near the dv camera, and closer to the ground glass... in that way you now need to zoom less with the dv camera.

That is a common problem with the macro lens... using a frenel lens the image comes the same, but is corrected so you dont get that effect.

As promised -- a new clip (http://ideaspora.net/agus35/teaser.mov) for your viewing pleasure. And only one hour late, at that :)

- jim

youre right.

i dont know how it will work on a 3ccd camera or hd.

i just have the trv18.

but i think it will be great too. even if i got some grain.

anyway, super35mm theres grain in it, from the film cam gg.

even photo has grain, the tinies one.

doesnt matter.

i think that the grain will improve the footage from the hd10u, cause the cam has so much definition that i isnt that nice as a raw, its to vivid, ...

anyway, im looking foward to buy yours adaptor...

thanks
ciao

I am a TRV18 user, and the Agus35 make this camera to now beat the ass to any 2k camera, just because of the DOF... audio, and video noise are another story to tell.

Agus,

Devin and I are very happy with the adapter so far. Yeah, we're getting a little bit of blurry distortion around the corners, but we may switch to a +7 macro to reduce it (as long as it still allows us to fill the frame with the image).

In regards to credit, I will be glad to thank you for re-instilling my hope for a homebuilt mini35..or 50, as it may be. But I regret to inform you that I had been following prototype building of these adapters much earlier than when this post arrived, closer to March of 2003. The people over here: http://www.kopfrauschen.de/view_en.php?page=dv35m had shoved a little miniDV'er right into a medium format camera, and Cosmin Rotaru from DVinfo's boards begun with talk of using frosted CDs as GG. I feel you share in the credit with many others from this board, but to specifically request credit in our evolved adapter seems a little too bold.

This post is truly meant as a community effort, and it surely has been. My adapter was built from a picking and choosing of the whole of the group's input. We used the project box pioneered by Jim Lafferty, in combination with an adjustment system much like Tom Jensen's, and added a lot of our own ideas, again with the help of my dad.

I feel that this whole "hey, don't forget to put agus35 on it", "hey, don't put copyright on your images," type of talk is destructive to the feeling that this board is trying to perpetuate. Sure everyone wants to "make a buck", it's the way of the world, and I understand that, but you came on with high hopes of helping others and I've still, almost 50 pages later, not seen the detailed instructions promised since page number 1. Taylor Moore seems to share my opinion on the necessity of detailed plans being made available. We'll try our best in our spare time to help achieve a higher level of understanding amongst the community.

I'm not trying to burst anyone’s bubble, and I don't mean to be "flaming" anyone, it's just something that’s been on my mind as this post gets bigger and bigger, and I felt it needed to be said.

Thanks again for everyone that contributed to this post,
We'll keep you up to date on our adapter's evolution.

Sincerely,
Spencer Houck

Well, the thread is abuot the agus35 like it was named the idea of putting a fake CD as a ground glass to eleminate the grain.

The credit... well... nowdays anyone have invented everything, right ? this is not about who invented it.

I just love teh agus35 name, and it was a great brainstorming in making and building the adapter... and it was really but really hard to make it sooo simple to build.

But let me tell you something.

Neither if i had started this thread or keep the original design for my own, the goal is to bring this kind of adapters that cost really a fortune, to the masses and for the indie filmakers, i am a pioneer on this and i am very proud... of course that many many people made the experimentation of building a camera obscura and putting the dv camera... that is not new... but the use of a fake cd and rotate it so it will cost you pennies to build it... sorry kid i made it first and it work and i share it to all of you..

But it even if it wasnt my original idea... if you have really read more about this adapters you know of who i am talking about. He just shoot an idea to the air and i just catch it.. and yes.. this is all teamwork...

and it is the largest thread in dvinfo.net ... isnt that great ?

well, i dont want to insult anyone.. i am going to sleep cause i am very tired.

i will post some pics of the comercial version as soon as i can have the best results.

Taylor, I'll be glad to help out as much as I can. Here are some more photos of our mini-50 adapter:

http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_ring.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_guts.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_fresnel.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_frost.JPG
http://www.par-t-com.net/mini50_macro.JPG

As far as construction goes - we just went with what worked. Both Spencer and I have made simpler versions via trial and error - that and frequenting this thread. We decided to go with the project box for the sheer fact that it had space to work, could easily house the spinning cd, and was light tight. That idea can be chalked up to Jim Lafferty, I believe. I'd say that finding a nice sturdy enclosure is half the battle here. My first version was a 30 pack like Agus used, but I found it to be too flimsy - that and there wasn't an easy way to install an adjustable cd motor. For those of us using larger cameras (esp. with your DVX's 72mm threads) the place to mount the motor on the center of the cd spindle is taken up by the lens. At least that's the way it was on my 58mm GL1. Anyways, the dimensions on the project box are 8"x6"x3", it can be had for $7 at radio shack. While you’re there be sure to pick up a AAA battery enclosure and a toggle switch. The 3 volts provided by the batt. pack is perfect for running the cd. The switch is a nice touch too.

The particle board with the opening for light to pass through helps a ton. Because it rides on those 4 bolts you're able to easily adjust it to the focal point of your lens - this is done by simply adjusting the nuts that hold it in place on either side. The fresnel resides right below the spinning cd and helps punch up the light level. I had a tough time finding a "fresnel" at office max, but all it really is is a pocket magnifier. It shouldn't cost anymore than $2 and is usually located around the magnifying glasses and books at Office Max or any of those office type stores. I believe others have found them at Walgreens.

Our +10 macro is a bit much and introduces some distortion at the edges, so we're going to take it down a notch to a +7. The distortion could also be attributed to the fact that our macro's glass doesn't take up the whole of the ring diameter, the glass is really only about 45mm of the 58mm lens, you can see that in the pic above. You can stack multiple macros to achieve more magnification, IE stack a +1, +2, and +4 to get +7 - but then you've got some vignetting from the stacked glass. I also tend to want to keep the glass in front of my lens to a minimum (except for a UV), so a single glass element is always my first choice.

We used a pre frosted cd....not much else to say about it. Spence just found it in a stack of old cds. We tried using fine sandpaper, but it was too grainy. We also tried a form of sandblasting with fine glass grain at Spencer's dad's machine shop - but that yielded the same, grainy results. The pre-frosted cds work best in my opinion. Jim Lafferty found that Maxell's 48x/700mb 50 spindle contains pre-frosted cds. http://ideaspora.net/agus35/frosted.jpg.

For the portion where the camera actually attaches to the box we used a flanged piece of PVC from lowes, it's actually called a "2" fitting cleanout body". We then used the clamping end of a "flexible drain + trap connector" to actually seal the macro lens light tight. Once again, Jim used the same material. As far as connecting the 50mm lens - I was lucky enough to find parts for the Olympus OM-10 camera on ebay, specifically the ring where the lens snaps into place. What stinks is that this ring isn't universal for all makes of lenses, each company creates their own adapter rings that only work with their lenses, thus forcing you to buy glass from them. If you want you can use a back lens cap for whatever lens you're using and cut off the back. The lens will easily lock into it, but it won't be a tight fit, and the lens will easily fall out. Regardless, it can be had for $5 at your local camera store.

The support - we designed it so that the camera would film the bottom of the spinning cd and would allow us to use a straight piece of aluminum to support the box. This bar provides all the support for the rig, the portion where the DV cam's lens and the adapter meet only acts as a light-tight coupling.

Precision played a large role in this, and many parts of our adapter. Luckily Spencer's father is an engineer-type and left no stone unturned when it came down to brass tacks. We also had Spencer's dad's machine shop at our disposal. This allowed us to perform some precision tasks such as cutting holes in the project box to exact dimensions. This is a distinct advantage that many don't have. BTW - We used expoxy to glue everything together, it should be at your local hardware store.

Anyways, I would have to suppose that the reason exacting details/schematics for this thing don't exist is due to the fact that there are too many variables. My Olympus OM-10 50mm SLR lens would yield a diff. focal point than your Canon 35mm (for example), and each of our DV cams have various differences: focal abilities, lens sizes, macro abilities. I hope this post has helped you on your way to contructing your own adapter. If you decide to create that website and want to use any of my post, feel free. Our adapter is a "melting pot" of everyone's ideas and experiences around here, and it comes together to yield quite a neat little tool to have in the kit. This is a community, and we can all benefit from each other's experiences, I hope ours will help. Thanks, and good shooting in the new year!

I was under the impression that a fresnal lens was not needed? can someone please explain?

For those who might be thinking of ornamentation there is a quick and dirty "Agus 35--" logo at ---- www.dvinfo.net/media/hart/ --- as a .pdf file. The web address is here at this site.

There's also a few .jpg images captured as the local flavour of the Agus 35-- has improved and evolved and a few which demonstrate the raw relationship between the front lens and the disk.

The most recent are the "agusroto" series of images which were captured via the path :-

SUBJECT >> FUJINON 50MM SLR LENS >> GROUNDGLASS @ 1500RPM >> 4X +2X +1X 58MM CLOSE UP LENSES >> PD150P CAMCORDER >> FIREWIRE TO ADOBE PREMIERE 6.1 (FRAME EXPORT TO .BMP FILE) >> ULEAD PHOTOPLUS 4 (CONVERSION TO .JPG FILE >> .

The chain from Adobe Premiere introduces about a 2 stop darkening of the image.

On some of the still images you will observe some interlace artifacts. There was a fair bit of wind blowing and leaves were moving. - but, there is also artifact on some shots where there was no movement which leads me to think there is still some shimmer caused by the rotating groundglass.

There is some apparent "grain" on brighter images with the spinning groundglass which cannot be blamed on low-light noise. I have upped the disk speed to about 3200RPM. This hopefully will deal with the disk motion being "frozen" by the camcorder but introduces another problem if a compliant motor mount or disk-to-spindle mount has been used to try to keep the disk image from shivering. Quick pans or tilts are not good. The disk moves off the focal plane momentarily due to gyro effect, with softening mostly on the outer (lower) edge of the recovered image. - In my specimen, the disk centre axis is directly below the lens centre axis.

Of the clear CDs which might be used to make a groundglass, there are some from Sony which appear to be incomplete CD-Rs. They have guide tracks on them but no silver or top layer. These may have been diverted from production, a sensible alternative to molding disks just for packaging purposes. As genuine CD material they should be optically superior and should run true. Some of the clear CDs used for packaging are not optically true and some have obvious casting marks on them. If you use these for a home-made groundglass you will never get them to run true and stay on the focal plane and you may also get a shivery image when the molding marks pass by.

How can Premiere introduce a 2 stop darkening of the image?

2-stop darkening of image? I wish I knew why and that it would go away for purposes of authentically representing test results. There may be settings which do this but I haven't found them yet.

As stills the pictures actually look the better for it. I'm using de-interlace when saving frames to .bmp files which might have something to do with it.

I've chosen not to re-adjust the images for brightness so that they stay closer to genuine.

I just returned from Home Depot to pick up parts for a rod system, and came across a steel 2.5" conduit hub -- it fits perfectly over the Century Optics achromatic diopter and, in fact, "clips" onto the bayonet tabs on the front of my GL1. The diopter then fits very snugly inside the ring at the other end of the hub. I will be using this as a replacement for the rubber ring I'd fashioned to fit over the diopter originally, which allowed too much movement. It will be potentially useful for those of you with a GL1 with or without the diopter. The trouble now will be milling out a notch for my CD motor at the back of the adapter...

Here are pics:

http://ideaspora.net/agus35/hub1.jpg
http://ideaspora.net/agus35/hub2.jpg
http://ideaspora.net/agus35/hub3.jpg
http://ideaspora.net/agus35/hub4.jpg

- jim

In earlier post I referred to putting a fullstop after the web address for the .jpg files Chris posted. I was confused. The address as quoted should be used without the full stop.

Out of curiosity, I cut out a 35mm 1.85:1 gate from a piece of paper and framed my camcorder on that. Compared to the image I have been framing in the Agus35 it is a lot smaller.

Given this smaller target size, I tried the modified telescope eyepiece again and found it will frame the 35mm widescreen gate with the PD150 in 16:9 setting. This adaptor screws straight in to the PD150 filter thread.

For those who are into roll-your-own optics and machining, the lens set comes from a no-name 42mm eyepiece for Tasco 2" scopes and has a handwritten part number "SW5042". I believe it is sourced from China.

An equivalent "Maxview" eyepiece has a 58mm thread already built on but how it performs in this application I do not know.

(For those who cannot get their hands on a widescreen gate, the open end of a Ventolin puffer cap is close enough in size on the side of larger, for a rough assessment target.)

A bit is cropped off top and bottom of the image in standard 4:3 frame and there is vignetting and too much of the widescreen gate area is lost zooming in to get rid of it.

If there is any advantage to using eyepiece optics it might be in closer coupling to the camcorder with the gg 52mm from the front of the camcorder. The lens set might couple even closer however my adaptor has metal on the front which prevents this.

The stack of Hoya 58mm close-up lenses (1x +2x +4x) will also frame the 35mm widescreen gate with the gg 127mm from the front of the camcorder.

See all of Bob's images from the list at www.dvinfo.net/media/hart -- hope this helps!

Hey guys.. the original logo to put it anywhere that you want is here....

http://altoque.tv/35mmAdapter/agus35.tga

in IE will look bad... try opening in photoshop or after

Spencer Houck & Devin Doyle,

I would be honored to put your info and photos on my page:
www.thecountrybulletin.com/dv_dof.htm soon to be under the domain name: www.dvdof.com

Really like the simple but effective answer to a mounting bracket. Please let me know.
Thanks,

Paul

my footage from january 01.

look

http://www.moorefilms.com/dtest.htm

to me it looked GREAT.

the best i can get from a trv18 with the 35mm adaptor.

ciao

Paul, i just saw your last design and it is so very similar to ours, only that we are using a smaller GG now smalller....

The macro lens wont be necesary now using that design. as the image now comes up corrected and bigger from the source thanks to the fresnel lens.

Agus:"i just saw your last design and it is so very similar to ours"

Really it is just a copy of the light path to the viewfinder in an SLR. Will work as shown or inverted depending on how it is to be mounted. Hard part is finding a prism large enough that wouldn't cost $1000. Have you had any luck? I have duplicated the prism with mirrors and it can be done, but it's not easy.

Paul

thecountrybulletin.com/dv_dof.htm

Yeah, i think the same, copying the same way a SLR camera will do trick. I think you will have some problems when making the adapter, because of its size and teh camera... i am making all the model in 3dsmax to test in a 3d world.

i just bougth the proper self adhesive frosted foil for home use (for windows, screens, panels etc.), and it looks almost the same as Frosted MAxell CD.

just sent my pictures to TAYLOR (thanks), and when he uploads it on his site - you can compare it. i can bet thay you cannot see the difference. it is frosted in the similar way as MAXELL, same opacity, same look. i also took a picture for comparition with MAXELL CD and FOIL frosted CD side by side.
hope this can help someone. when you find proper gradient of this foil it tooks 2 minutes to prepare your own evenly frosted fake CD.
i tested it with my agus35 and for me it looks absolutelly ok

good luck.

filip

Daniel,

I think that one of the fundamental points of the Agus35 design is that Agus came up with parts and plans using household equipment, such that we could all take a shot at building one of our own.

Your design may work great, and a fixed GG is an exciting development, but until you can help me to copy your design (by posting parts and plans that I can utilize), it holds less interest (for me anyway) than the existing design which I can build right now with $20 in parts and tools.

Any research you can do to find out how I (or anyone else here) can find the pieces you used will go a long way towards validating your results (along with some plans/detailed photos of the device.) Until then, don't get upset if people "ignore your adapter" - first help us to build one of our own, and then excitement will follow! :-)

paulb

Here are Fillip's pictures of the foil material
Looks good

www.moorefilms.com/filip.htm

"just sent my pictures to TAYLOR (thanks), and when he uploads it on his site - you can compare it. i can bet thay you cannot see the difference. it is frosted in the similar way as MAXELL, same opacity, same look. i also took a picture for comparition with MAXELL CD and FOIL frosted CD side by side.
hope this can help someone. when you find proper gradient of this foil it tooks 2 minutes to prepare your own evenly frosted fake CD.
i tested it with my agus35 and for me it looks absolutelly ok"

my adaptor was all homemade, and has a good advice for everyone in here:

try to find a GG from old photo cams. i think every big city in this planet has a place with used photo cams. i live in brazil, and a find one of these stores here.

ciao

An idea for moving a smaller groundglass in an orbital motion without cranks and links. Try fixing a groundglass, CD spindle motor onto a common plate. Suspend the plate with several small tension springs on the focal plane. Make a guide track for the plate to stop it drifting off the focal plane. Fit an offcentre weight on the CD motor spindle. Make sure this weight is mounted central to the centre of the plate's thickness. The plate itself might be the mount for the motor and carry holes for the springs if it is a piece of frosted CD cut down. There may have to be experimentation to just where the weight should be to balance the opposing mass of the motor across the centre. Put the power to it and there hopefully should be a random orbit with no stationary centre, little vibration conducted to the frame and no wearing parts except for the motor itself and the guideframe faces.. Just a thought.

I've sent some construction pics to Chris of the PVC plumbing parts version of the Agus 35-- > I had promised not to burden him with more .jpg files but I think I might have lied.

Parts list for the hardware bits in Australia follows :-

End caps 165mm OD "Iplex Pipeline D105150 (9311381153157)".

Inner alignment sleeve for removable cover. Any PVC pipe which fits the caps or a piece of thin plastic trimmer bent to fit and glued in place. The sleeve must but against the motor mount retainer ring to hold it place unless this is itself glued in place.

Mount plate retainer (ring only used from an assembled part) "Iplex UVPC 100mm DO99100A DWV
Registered Design No. 110042 127.100A - Casting number on the ring itself is DO99100C".

Lens tube. Any manufacturer ID 63mm approx. OD 68mm approx.

Spindle motor mount plate. "Decor Australia Pot plant saucer Registered Design No. 78935 *610".

(The motor mount method I have used does not allow for backfocus adjustment by moving the groundglass. I may change from a compliant mount to a simple firm perspex plate, long screws with compression springs and washers so that the plate can be moved for back focus, or make provision for this on the final front lens mount which might be simpler. )

i wish to send to someone's server (talyor? louis feng?) my tests with GG and no GG.

i shooted one night WITH GG on agus35, and the next WITHOUT. the pictures ARE different of course, and my deepest appologies to all of you who are talking about that there are different. and there is no use to shoot WITHOUT GG. (i was sceptical, but at least i tested it).

no GG solution is subjectivelly better than normal "old" video shooting, probably because of zooming into 35mm lens, but it gives video impression all the time. my first tests are kind of extreme colse ups, so i thought that there is no difference between agus and NO GG solution. in wider shots, difference is obvious. AGUS 35 RULES!!!!

please send me your thoughts which compression is the best (the file is 2:30 minutes long) to send to server and to acheive the smallest size with proper quality. i tryed vith virtual dub, but anyhow file is so huge that is useless to send it.
i have access to avid dv, premiere and virtual dub.

any thougts?
(if anyone is interested of course)
filip

Some folk here may recall me carrying on about an adaptor which uses a lens set out of a telescope eyepiece. It does not make the image upright but it does allow a closer coupling of a 35mm motion film format widescreen size image into a PD150.

Two .pdf files which Chris will be kind enough to post can be found sometime soon at --- www.dvinfo.net/media/hart/ ---- for those who might have a curiosity and interest.

I am not an engineer, so the drawing should be regarded with some cautious contempt. The adaptor however did work in its intended application without any problems.

When installing into the 58mm filter thread on the PD150, extreme care has to be taken to avoid crossthreading as the PD150 housing is plastic and can be very quickly ruined by careless handling.

Additional bracing off the camcorder tripod mount is highly recommended as the PD150 lens enclosure to maincase fixing is simply not robust enough for additional load-bearing on the filter mount.

Bob's latest PDF's now online at www.dvinfo.net/media/hart/ -- cheers,

Devin Doyle
Please email me.Thanx

taylor@moorefilms.com

To Daniel Moloko:
I also thinking about system maded from some old broken SLR photo camera. But when I saw your shots... Of course there are no grain, because there are no detail at all, they are very blurry, and very dim. It looks like an old rewritten VHS record. I hope it is possible to film SLR ground glass in better way because when I'm looking through my SLR camera viewfinder i see crystal clear and sharp image. If I'll fail I'll try to put spinning CD instead of ground glass. Hard to believe, but maybe home maded spinning ground glass from CD really is better solution than hi-quality ground glass from camera.


BTW, some info about fibre solutions:

http://www.us.schott.com/fiberoptics/english/products/healthcare/imagingfiberoptics/fusedcomponents/faceplates.html

First of all for anyone interested I just picked up the Maxell 50 pack that contains the frosted cd at me local Circuit City store. I also saw the same pack at Staples and Office Depot. Its the one with the aqua blue label. Cant wait to try it.

I have a couple of questions regarding the Fresnel lens issue.

1. Is it always neccessary to use the fresnel in the design of the adapter?

2.From the description given by Devin and Spencer regarding their design, am I to understand that the fresnel lens is the same lens used by a typical pocket magnifier. Wouldnt that be the same lens as a magnifying glass?

Thanks for your help
Mike Perkin

Here is a draft of an enquiry I thought I would send to the Schott company referred to above :-

Given that there are a large number of participants in the Agus 35, I thought it might be more appropriate for folks here to have some sort of editorial rights and to correct the intended email where it needs same.

"""
Dear Sir.

I participate in a group at www.dvinfo.net which is workshopping a low-budget 35mm motion picture format adaptor for video camcorders. We currently use transparent CD disks hand finished on one face as a groundglass opaque plane for an image projected from an objective lens. To improve apparent resolution, the disk is spun so that the surface texture moves through the frame faster than the videocamera can resolve it but the projected image remains. There are some resolution and light transmission issues remaining and plastic CD disk surfaces are easily injured.

Could you advise :-

- if you make 120mm outer diameter clear glass disks with 15mm center holes and 1mm to 2mm thicknesses which would spin true which we could hand lap with fine grits to make groundglasses? (There is a Japanese company OHARA which makes such a product, "GD-FHT" for testing computer hard drive read heads but efforts to contact this company have been unsuccessful so far. Their product might be over-engineered for our purposes and out of our affordable price range. An alternative might be computer hard drive glass substrates.)

- if your fibre-optic image display panels function as a groundglass screen to fine groundglass standards?

(The CP16R motion picture camera used a small fibre-optic panel as a viewfinder groundglass screen in the early to mid seventies)?

- if your image display panels can be made to 120mm outer diameters?

- if they can be made with a 15mm diameter centre spindle hole?

- if they are capable of being rotated at speeds up to 3200 RPM without flying to pieces.

(There would be conflict with centrifugal forces on the disk by minor periodic lateral forces introduced by the centre hub across the disk from motor vibrations and greater intermittant lateral forces introduced by operator movements?)

What sort of costs would we be looking at if disks could be made?


It is believed coherent bundles for 180 degree image twisting are not made for diameters of 30mm and that costs would be more than conventional lens paths. Can you advise on this.

Any information you can offer would be greatly appreciated. As a marketplace, this might be a limited one. However if you have a fibre-optic product which exceeds the effectiveness of groundglass as a projection screen, P + S Tecknik in Germany might be a potential market for you if they haven't already evolved something better. They make the professional level MINI35 and PRO35 products comparable to our own more basic projects.

Regards from WA

Bob Hart.

""""

Adding to my earlier post, Chris has posted for me at www.dvinfo.net/media/hart/ some .jpg images of comparative tests of the telescope eyepiece
lenses versus the stack of 1x + 2x + 3x 58mm close-up lenses some folk have been using on the PD150. Lighting conditions were bottom end to get closest to real-world conditions.

The eyepiece tests were improvised by fastening a paper template of a 35mm widescreen gate on a fixed groundglass (microscope slide dressed with 600 grade aluminium oxide) and the objective lens crudely set up on an open jig. Ambient light was falling on the groundglass so there is reduced contrast.

how can u say its looks like VHS?

are u crazy?

what video did you watch?

man, i got it projected to an audience, they went crazy. theres no grain, the definition is the highest for a minidv system. just what i was expecting

have u ever seen the footage from agus 35 with children playing in a park?

that excatly what i got with mine zenit GG. the only diference is that i dont have a spin cd.

by the way, i work in movies, im very used to look at TELECINE 35MM. to me, my footage looks like a Telecine.
besides some of the night shots that dont gave me enough lite to do a good shot.

ciao

daniel,

is it possible for you to send somewhere full resolution still frames, with no or at least low compression on it?
i think we all wish to see that in as good as possible resolution.

thanks.

filip

One of Daniel's image (first one) is posted here:

http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/louisfeng@sbcglobal.net/album?.dir=/35mm+Video+Still+Images

http://www.bobflash.com.br/franquias/recife/bobcam/download.php?file=summerbeachv8.wmv


this is the best video i did with the adaptor

ciao

Daniel, in that second image there seems to be quite a lot of grain, almost as much as using the frosted cd as a static solution.

Anyway, we've completed the second mini50 for my Sony VX2000. It is nearly identical to Devin's, but the box has been cut down to allow the camera to get closer to the GG while still retaining the correct GG to 50mm distance. We found that with our Samigon 58mm +10's that getting closer to the GG and being less zoomed in kills the distortion that Agus had mentioned about our previous test, which can be found here:
www.par-t-com.net/media.html

And the images of the newest adapter are here:

http://par-t-com.net/mini50/wide_side.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/wide_angle.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/low_mount.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/lens_mount.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/tight_led.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/top_view.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/inside_wide.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/inside_medium.jpg
http://par-t-com.net/mini50/inside_tight.jpg

As you can see, the new adapter also features a niftly little LED to help remind us that the motor is running. Also, I had the mount to a Bogen monopod layin' around after building our steadicam, which sort of makes handheld footage more possible. The image from this new adapter seem to be about perfect, and I hope to get some footage up as soon as I have time (classes just started up again.)

Spencer Houck

Daniel, I saw 2 dark clips from cristmas party, and summerbeach.wmv
All are low quality, maybe it is about compression for internet, but i doubt. I think You didn't catch 100% focus on ground plate.

I'm curious ( now that more Agus35s are popping up) -- What type of SLR lens works best for the price. I'm not a big photographer and don't have any lenses lying around-this will be my greatest expense. What size? Anything special I need to look for. I found a couple lenses nearby that I could buy-- fstops as low as 1.8 on one and 2.8 on another. Is there a big difference here? I found one with an "80 mm macro zoom" would this be useful? I'm wanting to put it on a dvx100(A) (that's one more thing I've got to get :))
Is anyone here currently running an Agus on this camera?

Thanks for coping with my ignorace...

Hi Fenn,
I have been following this closely as I have a DVX100 and the issues with this camera is it probably will require a Acromatic Diopter lens (Century Optics make one). I am presently building one for my little Sony TRV 8 as a concept test.

Check out http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX/YaBB.cgi?board=news;action=display;num=1070228577

I started a topic specifically relating to this and the DVX.

Let me know how it goes.....

okey ignas.

if u dont know how to look at an image and overlook the internet compression, that not my problem.

i dont have the chance to show you the real stuff without compression, so, forget it. trash as u can.

make something worth and show it here.

the image you may like would look suberb, as u dont like anything that i did. so, im really looking foward to see what u did to fullfill your needs

ciao

Thanks Taylor... I guess I'll join the throng experimenting on the DVX. I'd prefer to see someone else who has gotten it to work before I waste my time and money :)
I guess I'll have to boldly explore this new frontier with some uncertainty! This will be a fun task. Sorry for not knowing much on lenses, but I'd like to clarify. The DVX100 has not yet been successfully adapted much because it need some sort of magnification to pick up the gg image. Correct? So another $50-$250 for an acromatic diopter. How about if I get an SLR lens with a "macro zoom". Will this work, or is it a totally different concept. Another problem is, one macro zoom lens I found is at f4.5. I'm guessing that may limit light intake a bit to severely?

Thanks again for the help...

I guess I'll have to boldly explore this new frontier with some uncertainty! This will be a fun task. Sorry for not knowing much on lenses, but I'd like to clarify. The DVX100 has not yet been successfully adapted much because it need some sort of magnification to pick up the gg image. Correct?

Yes Correct.

So another $50-$250 for an acromatic diopter. How about if I get an SLR lens with a "macro zoom". Will this work, or is it a totally different concept.

Different Concept as the DVX has to have the diopter attached to it so it can focus on the GG without the device being 5 feet away.

Another problem is, one macro zoom lens I found is at f4.5. I'm guessing that may limit light intake a bit to severely?

Yeah create a standard mount that will take say Pentax lens then start with say a 5omm, as fast as you can get. Then as it develops you can add more lens to your bag.

Lower f number the faster the lens lets light in.

Hope this helps. I know Martin on the DVX user forum is close...but since Christmas has been quiet...Must be building:)

Thanks again for the help... -->>>

So what is the difference between the standard SONY Handycam TRV Lens and a DVX lens? Why will the DVX not focus on something close without the diopter? I'll have to pull my TRV-310 out and do some experimentation. I'm about to buy a 50mm lens on e-bay. Everything else is ready, casing, gg, motor, etc... Thanks...

The achomatic dioptre. Could someone please enlighten this ignorant mind. My solutions so far for getting the PD150 close enough to the groundglass all tend to blur the corners.

I've sent another .jpg to Chris. I reprinted the test pattern on photo paper for crisper lines and ran the two tests again. They were combined in Ulead Photoplus4 at 50% transparency for easier comparison.

The results are intriguing for a camera which claims to resolve at 530 TV lines. The test patterns were small in the frame which should in theory cause the resolution to be on the low side, but make up your own minds on it.

The tests are far from scientific in that they have not been done with the camera and pattern on a frame with accurate centering and the lighting was very low which hopefully reflects real-world conditions.

This image will be at www.dvinfo.net/media/hart/ and is titled testpnew0+5.jpg

As for lenses, the best glass on front for best result. I would favour prime lenses, not zooms which are often not as sharp. You already have the zoom facility in your camcorder which will work a lot better than 35mm zooms through a groundglass. Your chances of getting the backfocus right and keeping it that way for a zoom lens with an improvised mount may not be good.