Mini35 Oscillating Ground Glass Idea

Rai Orz · July 19th, 2004, 08:24 AM

Frank, try it, but think about fine mechanic like a clock, and not like a toy. If you remove one plate the axis "hang" only in the bearings. The slack in the bearings is not a defined parameter and the axis will swing and the bearing will not work long times. The only possible way is you use a thicker plate and mount two bearings in place of one (one directly over the other)

Frank Ladner · July 19th, 2004, 08:38 AM

Rai: I completely understand your thinking. But would the top plate act as a support also, or would it not due to the fact that it is offset (with the motion - although small - and weight moving the poles)?

When I actually get my hands on some bearings, I'll have an idea of their characteristics and will better understand these principles.

Giroud Francois · July 19th, 2004, 09:11 AM

For the optical fiber idea, it already exists in night vision device (generation 2 and up).
They put a lot of optical fibers together, then make a 180 degree turn and glue all. this gives a really lightweight system.
http://www.us.schott.com/fiberoptics...ghtvision.html
unfortunately it cost probably the hell, but it would be a good solution because you got two problems solved in one shot.
vibrating the picture and putting it upside down.
if somebody is in touch with some military guy who could provide a dead model, we could check if resolution is usable (i doubt).

for the 2 or 3 plate question:
If you put a ball bearing at each side of the plate and this one being thick enough (approx. 3 or 4 mm), i thing there will be no more problem while keeping only two plates.

for the pulley and belt, i do not undersand why you need it.
if you drive one hole of the top plate , the other ones should follow as their are physically drilled in the same plate.
it put a little bit of stress on one of the axis.
It should be even better as the motion created is not more exactly an ellipse but can slightly vary.

Sorry to challenge the design , but i am not a mechanic guy and i try to think to all these guy who are building the stuff on the kitchen corner and hope for a really simple design.
On the other hand , if you sell it finished for a good price , i do not really care how it works.

Frank Ladner · July 19th, 2004, 10:19 AM

I just came across this page and wanted to share it for the guys like me that are new to bearing nomenclature.

http://www.dynaroll.com/catalog/pag005.htm

Pretty helpful information, I think.

Rai Orz · July 19th, 2004, 10:58 AM

Frank, every transmission , every wheels and every axis need two bearings. It´s basic mechanics. If you try those with only one, it will work inaccurately and only short time.
The first two plates in my disign stand still. The only think they do is hold the 6 bearings (and housing and motor).

Giroud,
1.) optical fiber idea: Cool. I newer see this before...

2.) 2 plate, your idea is good. You have to bearings on a axis, but only one plate, okay.
3.) pulley and beld. You need it, because the moving only is to small.
4.) really simple design. Oh, yes, there is a realy simple design, but ... ...mmmmh

Frank Ladner · July 19th, 2004, 01:00 PM

I am about to order the following ball bearings, and wanted to share the source with you guys.

MR105-ZZ (5x10x4mm) $2.00 each or $6.95 for 4 Pack (BWK-06)
(10mm diameter, 5mm bore, 4mm thick)
MR63-ZZ (3x6x2.5mm)$3.50 each or $11.95 for 4 Pack (BWK-40)
(6mm diameter, 3mm bore, 2.5mm thick)

http://www.bocabearings.com/cart/cart1.cfm

I am getting 2 packs of the 10mm (8 total) and 1 pack of the 6mm (4 total) the final price comes to $25.85. (Free shipping on orders > $10.00.)

Brett Erskine · July 19th, 2004, 11:01 PM

The fiber optics idea was explored a while back but the research on the subject revealed that the resolution of current systems on the market was not up to par with even standard def. But perhaps they have inproved on the technology since then. Its also used by some plummers to check a pipe for a clog with a video probe. Same low res problem though. It would seem that you would have to either have every fiber optic strand perfectly lined up with each pixel on the CCD. If not your would need to have a much finer array of fiber optic strands to make up for any misalignment. Either way it sounds like is not a option for a DIY project. Pretty interesting stuff though. On a interesting side note they are thinking about using fiber optic cable instead of flourescents in office buildings during the day. The sunlight would be captured by a parabolic mirror on the roof and sent down a array of fiber optics cables to each room. No power needed. Cool stuff.

-Brett Erskine

Rai Orz · July 20th, 2004, 12:47 AM

Brett, that the point. The fiber optics idea work only if perfectly lined up with each pixel on the CCD (like the RGB filter on one chip sensors). My company make opto mechanics and also a very fine 35mm GG solution (last week we tested it on a optical bank with a 25000x1500pixel sensor and it show a high sharp test picture with no grain) but the fiber optic idea, we can not realizable.

Justin Burris · July 20th, 2004, 02:46 AM

Rai,

Is this GG that you make for sale? How much?

Did I also hear you saying a while back that you make follow-focus devices for still lenses? I would be interested in knowing the price on that too.

Thanks

Bob Hart · July 20th, 2004, 07:53 AM

Regarding fibre optics. They are called coherent fibre bundles when their arragement at one end is the same as the other so an image at one end is reproduced at the other.

Following is information kindly provided to me by Electrophysics Corp who make the night vision devices which provided the Iraq war news night-vision footage.

"""""
Clearly the prism/mirror approach would be lower cost and better performance. There is no existing production of image twisters having 35mm format. In addition, performance will be degraded in several areas:

1)

There will be a significant reduction in effective F-number from the coherent fiber bundle (they usually have about 30% transmission);

2)

Resolution (MTF) will be significantly reduced due to the limited size of each fiber;

3)

They will be costly.

"""""

Rai Orz · July 20th, 2004, 08:47 AM

Justin, in principle yes. Fact is, up to now we had make all products only for use in productions, not for sale, so far. At this time we make some examinations with our products (ISO, CE ...) A must for the market. This need a little time.

Arround the 35mm solutions, i think this products are possible:

Complete units and/or

Self-made-GG-sets with m42 on the front side, maybe in two versions, static and with vibration drive (because vibration make the best GG better). A low-cost version for full PAL and a special HDTV version but this not for self made.

Prism-Set, suitably for the backside for UP-Side-Down correction

Relay-Lens-Set for XL1 or other

Motor driven follow-focus system for all kinds of still camera lenses. Controllable over a poti on the side of the GG unit, or wireless (For steady cam users)

All part made for our rail mount system.

The products are here on my table, but yet i dont know details about prices or delivery.

Giroud Francois · July 20th, 2004, 09:10 AM

the problem is there are already several company making such product and we are not purchasing from them because it is too expensive. I do not really see why you would give yours for less than theirs.
The first thing that your market Dept. will do is to compare with equivalent product and price your stuff in order to get the money back, then still too expensive for us.....infinite loop, as soon as you are trying to do a business with something, it does not interest people that are not willing to purchase finished products.
My static mini cost me less than 100$ and i will probably add 100 for the moving stage. if it should cost me even less than 1000$ (that is actually pretty nice) i would not even started to read all these posts.
Probably you are in a different category, but i am in the "nice to have , as long it doesn't cost me too much". Additionally the reward of doing it by myself is bigger than just spare money.
And if i am able to justify it professionally, i would probably simply rent the real stuff.
I think we should focus on this because it is the start of everything.

ok , that was few hours ago, now i am back home and found the perfect roller for the project.
initially it is a metallic roller about 12mm dia.that is used to drive a belt. the axis is about 12 mm long , 2mm dia , threaded on each end. when you remove the flange, surprise... it contains 2x 7mm roller bearing. in fact not really... the axis has thread of 2mm dia on each end , but is larger in the middle (about 4mm) and serve as core for both the rollers bearing. the greatest thing is that there is 2mm of this axis available between the two roller so i can put the belt here. The three plate design (with a spacing of only 2 or 3 mm) takes all the meaning here with almost no work than drilling holes. additionally, i will use one of the threaded end to fix the motor on one of the axis.

On the other hand, if you can build a business on it , good luck for you.

Les Dit · July 20th, 2004, 03:54 PM

Rai,
It seems you would have to hit a very low price to interest people on this forum. I offered a kit for a 4 shaft 12 ball bearing kit, with motor,belt, misc parts to make a complete GG orbiter for $350, and there was ZERO interest. It's not a pipe dream on paper on my end, as my posted pic have shown.
Perhaps a price of $100 might work here. Or maybe we let them try to make one for a while, and then see what happens :)

It's *not* the cost of the parts. The labor of making the custom parts is the price here.

-Les

James Hurd · July 20th, 2004, 06:16 PM

Les,
If you want to sell one for $100, give me a shout.

Jesse Rosten · July 20th, 2004, 07:50 PM

Hey Les,

I am interested in you orbiter. But $350 is a lot of money for no guarantee.

You see, I've been following these 35mm adapter threads from the beginning. Every time someone came up with a new idea, I went out and bought something different hopeing I'd finally have the holy grail of adapters. I've spent a lot of time and money on aluminum oxide, filters, filter rings, condenser lenses, old camera lenses, the list goes on. I still don't have a working adapter. I sure wouldn't want a $350 vibrator to be the next dead-end purchase for me.

I think you might have more luck if you lower your price to start with. This would help you get a user-base established who can then vouch for the validity of your product. Once there is more demand, you can raise the price to more effectively cover your labor.

Anyways- I am interested. How big is the target size on your vibrator? Will I be able to use medium format lenses on it? What kind of battery does the motor use?

July 19th, 2004, 10:19 AM	#109
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	Ball Bearing Info I just came across this page and wanted to share it for the guys like me that are new to bearing nomenclature. http://www.dynaroll.com/catalog/pag005.htm Pretty helpful information, I think.

July 19th, 2004, 01:00 PM	#111
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	Ball Bearing Source I am about to order the following ball bearings, and wanted to share the source with you guys. MR105-ZZ (5x10x4mm) $2.00 each or $6.95 for 4 Pack (BWK-06) (10mm diameter, 5mm bore, 4mm thick) MR63-ZZ (3x6x2.5mm)$3.50 each or $11.95 for 4 Pack (BWK-40) (6mm diameter, 3mm bore, 2.5mm thick) http://www.bocabearings.com/cart/cart1.cfm I am getting 2 packs of the 10mm (8 total) and 1 pack of the 6mm (4 total) the final price comes to $25.85. (Free shipping on orders > $10.00.)

July 20th, 2004, 03:54 PM	#118
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Costs Rai, It seems you would have to hit a very low price to interest people on this forum. I offered a kit for a 4 shaft 12 ball bearing kit, with motor,belt, misc parts to make a complete GG orbiter for $350, and there was ZERO interest. It's not a pipe dream on paper on my end, as my posted pic have shown. Perhaps a price of $100 might work here. Or maybe we let them try to make one for a while, and then see what happens :) It's not the cost of the parts. The labor of making the custom parts is the price here. -Les

July 20th, 2004, 06:16 PM	#119
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Les $100 Les, If you want to sell one for $100, give me a shout.

July 19th, 2004, 08:24 AM	#106
Rai Orz Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 136	Frank, try it, but think about fine mechanic like a clock, and not like a toy. If you remove one plate the axis "hang" only in the bearings. The slack in the bearings is not a defined parameter and the axis will swing and the bearing will not work long times. The only possible way is you use a thicker plate and mount two bearings in place of one (one directly over the other)

July 19th, 2004, 08:38 AM	#107
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	Rai: I completely understand your thinking. But would the top plate act as a support also, or would it not due to the fact that it is offset (with the motion - although small - and weight moving the poles)? When I actually get my hands on some bearings, I'll have an idea of their characteristics and will better understand these principles.

July 19th, 2004, 09:11 AM	#108
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	For the optical fiber idea, it already exists in night vision device (generation 2 and up). They put a lot of optical fibers together, then make a 180 degree turn and glue all. this gives a really lightweight system. http://www.us.schott.com/fiberoptics...ghtvision.html unfortunately it cost probably the hell, but it would be a good solution because you got two problems solved in one shot. vibrating the picture and putting it upside down. if somebody is in touch with some military guy who could provide a dead model, we could check if resolution is usable (i doubt). for the 2 or 3 plate question: If you put a ball bearing at each side of the plate and this one being thick enough (approx. 3 or 4 mm), i thing there will be no more problem while keeping only two plates. for the pulley and belt, i do not undersand why you need it. if you drive one hole of the top plate , the other ones should follow as their are physically drilled in the same plate. it put a little bit of stress on one of the axis. It should be even better as the motion created is not more exactly an ellipse but can slightly vary. Sorry to challenge the design , but i am not a mechanic guy and i try to think to all these guy who are building the stuff on the kitchen corner and hope for a really simple design. On the other hand , if you sell it finished for a good price , i do not really care how it works.

July 19th, 2004, 10:58 AM	#110
Rai Orz Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 136	Frank, every transmission , every wheels and every axis need two bearings. It´s basic mechanics. If you try those with only one, it will work inaccurately and only short time. The first two plates in my disign stand still. The only think they do is hold the 6 bearings (and housing and motor). Giroud, 1.) optical fiber idea: Cool. I newer see this before... 2.) 2 plate, your idea is good. You have to bearings on a axis, but only one plate, okay. 3.) pulley and beld. You need it, because the moving only is to small. 4.) really simple design. Oh, yes, there is a realy simple design, but ... ...mmmmh

July 19th, 2004, 11:01 PM	#112
Brett Erskine Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Anaheim, CA Posts: 445	The fiber optics idea was explored a while back but the research on the subject revealed that the resolution of current systems on the market was not up to par with even standard def. But perhaps they have inproved on the technology since then. Its also used by some plummers to check a pipe for a clog with a video probe. Same low res problem though. It would seem that you would have to either have every fiber optic strand perfectly lined up with each pixel on the CCD. If not your would need to have a much finer array of fiber optic strands to make up for any misalignment. Either way it sounds like is not a option for a DIY project. Pretty interesting stuff though. On a interesting side note they are thinking about using fiber optic cable instead of flourescents in office buildings during the day. The sunlight would be captured by a parabolic mirror on the roof and sent down a array of fiber optics cables to each room. No power needed. Cool stuff. -Brett Erskine

July 20th, 2004, 12:47 AM	#113
Rai Orz Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 136	Brett, that the point. The fiber optics idea work only if perfectly lined up with each pixel on the CCD (like the RGB filter on one chip sensors). My company make opto mechanics and also a very fine 35mm GG solution (last week we tested it on a optical bank with a 25000x1500pixel sensor and it show a high sharp test picture with no grain) but the fiber optic idea, we can not realizable.

July 20th, 2004, 02:46 AM	#114
Justin Burris Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Olympia, WA Posts: 54	Rai, Is this GG that you make for sale? How much? Did I also hear you saying a while back that you make follow-focus devices for still lenses? I would be interested in knowing the price on that too. Thanks

July 20th, 2004, 07:53 AM	#115
Bob Hart Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: PERTH. W.A. AUSTRALIA. Posts: 4,476	Regarding fibre optics. They are called coherent fibre bundles when their arragement at one end is the same as the other so an image at one end is reproduced at the other. Following is information kindly provided to me by Electrophysics Corp who make the night vision devices which provided the Iraq war news night-vision footage. """"" Clearly the prism/mirror approach would be lower cost and better performance. There is no existing production of image twisters having 35mm format. In addition, performance will be degraded in several areas: 1) There will be a significant reduction in effective F-number from the coherent fiber bundle (they usually have about 30% transmission); 2) Resolution (MTF) will be significantly reduced due to the limited size of each fiber; 3) They will be costly. """""

July 20th, 2004, 08:47 AM	#116
Rai Orz Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Germany Posts: 136	Justin, in principle yes. Fact is, up to now we had make all products only for use in productions, not for sale, so far. At this time we make some examinations with our products (ISO, CE ...) A must for the market. This need a little time. Arround the 35mm solutions, i think this products are possible: Complete units and/or Self-made-GG-sets with m42 on the front side, maybe in two versions, static and with vibration drive (because vibration make the best GG better). A low-cost version for full PAL and a special HDTV version but this not for self made. Prism-Set, suitably for the backside for UP-Side-Down correction Relay-Lens-Set for XL1 or other Motor driven follow-focus system for all kinds of still camera lenses. Controllable over a poti on the side of the GG unit, or wireless (For steady cam users) All part made for our rail mount system. The products are here on my table, but yet i dont know details about prices or delivery.

July 20th, 2004, 09:10 AM	#117
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	the problem is there are already several company making such product and we are not purchasing from them because it is too expensive. I do not really see why you would give yours for less than theirs. The first thing that your market Dept. will do is to compare with equivalent product and price your stuff in order to get the money back, then still too expensive for us.....infinite loop, as soon as you are trying to do a business with something, it does not interest people that are not willing to purchase finished products. My static mini cost me less than 100$ and i will probably add 100 for the moving stage. if it should cost me even less than 1000$ (that is actually pretty nice) i would not even started to read all these posts. Probably you are in a different category, but i am in the "nice to have , as long it doesn't cost me too much". Additionally the reward of doing it by myself is bigger than just spare money. And if i am able to justify it professionally, i would probably simply rent the real stuff. I think we should focus on this because it is the start of everything. ok , that was few hours ago, now i am back home and found the perfect roller for the project. initially it is a metallic roller about 12mm dia.that is used to drive a belt. the axis is about 12 mm long , 2mm dia , threaded on each end. when you remove the flange, surprise... it contains 2x 7mm roller bearing. in fact not really... the axis has thread of 2mm dia on each end , but is larger in the middle (about 4mm) and serve as core for both the rollers bearing. the greatest thing is that there is 2mm of this axis available between the two roller so i can put the belt here. The three plate design (with a spacing of only 2 or 3 mm) takes all the meaning here with almost no work than drilling holes. additionally, i will use one of the threaded end to fix the motor on one of the axis. On the other hand, if you can build a business on it , good luck for you.

July 20th, 2004, 07:50 PM	#120
Jesse Rosten Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Redding, California Posts: 114	Hey Les, I am interested in you orbiter. But $350 is a lot of money for no guarantee. You see, I've been following these 35mm adapter threads from the beginning. Every time someone came up with a new idea, I went out and bought something different hopeing I'd finally have the holy grail of adapters. I've spent a lot of time and money on aluminum oxide, filters, filter rings, condenser lenses, old camera lenses, the list goes on. I still don't have a working adapter. I sure wouldn't want a $350 vibrator to be the next dead-end purchase for me. I think you might have more luck if you lower your price to start with. This would help you get a user-base established who can then vouch for the validity of your product. Once there is more demand, you can raise the price to more effectively cover your labor. Anyways- I am interested. How big is the target size on your vibrator? Will I be able to use medium format lenses on it? What kind of battery does the motor use?