Microcrystalline Wax Techniques?

Oscar Spierenburg · July 25th, 2005, 02:32 PM

Yes, but cooling rapidly gives too much side effects, like patterns in the wax.

About the grain, I have one strip spacers and with a fairly open aperture I don't have noticeable grain and I loose just about 1 or 2 F stops of light. You can check all my test images and see that the ones with bright sunlight have some grain but the ones with lower light (I don't mean darker) don't have grain. The more the iris closes on the camcorder, the more contrast it gives on the wax glass.

Glen Hurd · July 26th, 2005, 01:07 AM

I tried rapid cooling -- dumping a 350 degree glass and wax sandwich into a cold bucket of water. Surprisingly, the glass didn't break, but the wax layer stayed practically clear. I couldn't believe it. I didn't try it with a thicker layer of wax, though. I'd been trying to get the same success as Oscar, and am still struggling, though having fun with this ;)
I'd hoped the rapid cooling would completely eliminate the patterns/stratification I keep encountering in the wax. It did -- too much. I believe what makes the wax so effective is the crystalline structure it achieves over slow cooling -- rapid cooling seems to destroy that structure completely.

Bill Porter · July 26th, 2005, 01:38 AM

Glen,

Are you related to either Chris or James Hurd?

Oscar Spierenburg · July 26th, 2005, 06:23 AM

<<<<though having fun with this>>>>
You sometimes forget this....it's allot of fun.

Glen, I had the same thing putting the glass is the fridge.
Also something to keep in mind, if you remelt the wax too often the grain will get bigger, so you could better let it cool down on a normal cool flat surface.

Matthew Wauhkonen · July 26th, 2005, 06:43 AM

I tried rapid cooling, too (with a thinner spacer, two layers of scotch tape instead of one layer of aluminum tape) and the grain was so much smaller I could no longer see it with my naked eye (or barely). With slow cooling, it was very easy to see. Unfortunately, the slow cooled wax was near perfect but the quick-cooled one was a bit of a mess. Somewhere inbetween might be ideal, although the small patch in the fast-cooled wax that was perfect was incredibly even, smooth, and virtually grainless.

Oscar Spierenburg · July 26th, 2005, 09:08 AM

To describe the grain on my wax glass (normal cooling): you can only see it under a strong lupe. The grain has also allot to do with how you heat the wax. You should mix or vibrate it when it's hot. That's the reason I use the horizontal setup. The wax can settle before you catch it between the glass. And even then I move the glass to even out the wax.

Glen Hurd · July 26th, 2005, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Porter

Glen,

Are you related to either Chris or James Hurd?

But I've never seen so many Hurds in one place before. I've been lurking for a month, hoping I'll have something to contribute soon. But I don't ;)
I am buying more MicroWax, however, since discovering that I can't keep re-using what I've got and expect to get the quality needed for a static adaptor. Anyone want to buy some off me? (JUST kidding! :)
I've tried capillary (thick and thin), melted in a frying pan, melted in a toaster oven, melted with a propane torch (broke three that way). Frozen, dunked in water, slowly cooled over 12 hours (5 degree drops at a time). Used rubbing alcohol, film cleaner, cotton, paper towels . . . What a blast! Every time I put a ground glass in my cereal box with my Nikon lens taped to the end I catch my breath. Some day I'll be able to shoot video that looks like this!! Only without the patterns and evolving bubbles, etc.
Or so I hope.

Matthew Wauhkonen · July 26th, 2005, 01:23 PM

I just used a cereal box yesterday! I even tried mounting it to my dvx. Talk about messy.

Oscar Spierenburg · July 26th, 2005, 06:29 PM

Glen, before you end up making fish and chips in your microwax..., take a look at my site (if you haven't already) because this actually works: http://members.chello.nl/a.schultzev...g/wax/wax2.htm
Make that circular filters in stead of square glass if you want(like the top image). One filter with the ring left and one with just the glass and spacers.

Tom Wills · July 26th, 2005, 07:50 PM

I know I'm kinda late to this discussion, but I just figured out a real cheap way of doing this. Sure, the quality's not even close, but it works decently for playing around.

Step 1. Buy bag of 100 Votive Candles from IKEA. Cost: $10. (Don't you just love IKEA pricing?)
Step 2. Pull votive out of metal by it's wick.
Step 3. Pull wick and metal plate out of wax.
Step 4. Cut wax in half and put in metal container.
Step 5. Set on stove on lowest setting.
Step 6. When melted, pour over a cut piece of CD Jewel Case cover.
Step 7. Let cool for about a minute, then play!

It acually produces relatively decent footage. I don't have a box to put it in yet though, so the footage is a little tainted, thus I haven't recorded enough to make a web-ready clip.

This stuff really is fun.

Glen Hurd · July 26th, 2005, 11:12 PM

"Buy bag of 100 Votive Candles from IKEA."
Is this microcrystalline wax or parafin/bees wax? I started with the parafin, actually, and never got close to what I've seen with the micro version.

Oscar, you are a huge encouragement to this process, and yes, I've seen your website and thought I was following it quite faithfully. I bought a glass cutter, and have gone through 6 picture frames of glass already. I've got one almost perfect glass a couple of weeks ago, but within a couple of days, it was filled with bubbles. I haven't followed your procedure perfectly, however. I've never glued the aluminum foil to any glass (just slid into place with tongs, and held it there). Also, I've never agitated the wax per se (lots of slipping and sliding of top glass, though). And I've never squeezed down on the top piece of glass once everything was all lined up. So I'll include them in my next test ;)

Matthew, you should have seen my first setup -- a paper towel tube with a Nikon lens at one end, glass/wax sandwich gg at the other, duct-taped to an upside-down Sony Digital 8. I couldn't tell if I'd made progress or just wasted a good roll of tape.

Tom Wills · July 27th, 2005, 05:31 AM

It's unluckily just parafin. There's some pitting for some reason, but other than that it looks pretty good.

Oscar Spierenburg · July 29th, 2005, 06:39 AM

I started with all kinds of candles (and even pealed off the glossy top layer), but they have some mixture that only increase the grain structure. Pure beeswax or Paraffine was always better in my tests, microwax is just much finer.
Glen, if you still have trouble next time, tell me exactly what it is, because I probably didn't explain why I do everything the way I describe it on my site. Almost every step has a reason why I do it like that.

Glen Hurd · July 29th, 2005, 04:09 PM

I'll be experimenting again tomorrow, and let you know how it goes. Thanks for your help, Oscar.

Bill Porter · July 29th, 2005, 06:19 PM

Oscar,

Just in case you were wondering, IKEA is a chain of home furnishings stores we have here in the States. Nice candles. No microwax though.

Hope this helps,

Bill Houser

July 26th, 2005, 01:07 AM	#392
Glen Hurd Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Burlington, NJ Posts: 59	Rapid Cooling I tried rapid cooling -- dumping a 350 degree glass and wax sandwich into a cold bucket of water. Surprisingly, the glass didn't break, but the wax layer stayed practically clear. I couldn't believe it. I didn't try it with a thicker layer of wax, though. I'd been trying to get the same success as Oscar, and am still struggling, though having fun with this ;) I'd hoped the rapid cooling would completely eliminate the patterns/stratification I keep encountering in the wax. It did -- too much. I believe what makes the wax so effective is the crystalline structure it achieves over slow cooling -- rapid cooling seems to destroy that structure completely.

July 26th, 2005, 11:12 PM	#401
Glen Hurd Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Burlington, NJ Posts: 59	Is it microcrystalline? "Buy bag of 100 Votive Candles from IKEA." Is this microcrystalline wax or parafin/bees wax? I started with the parafin, actually, and never got close to what I've seen with the micro version. Oscar, you are a huge encouragement to this process, and yes, I've seen your website and thought I was following it quite faithfully. I bought a glass cutter, and have gone through 6 picture frames of glass already. I've got one almost perfect glass a couple of weeks ago, but within a couple of days, it was filled with bubbles. I haven't followed your procedure perfectly, however. I've never glued the aluminum foil to any glass (just slid into place with tongs, and held it there). Also, I've never agitated the wax per se (lots of slipping and sliding of top glass, though). And I've never squeezed down on the top piece of glass once everything was all lined up. So I'll include them in my next test ;) Matthew, you should have seen my first setup -- a paper towel tube with a Nikon lens at one end, glass/wax sandwich gg at the other, duct-taped to an upside-down Sony Digital 8. I couldn't tell if I'd made progress or just wasted a good roll of tape.

July 29th, 2005, 06:19 PM	#405
Bill Porter Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ventura, California, USA Posts: 751	Fyi Oscar, Just in case you were wondering, IKEA is a chain of home furnishings stores we have here in the States. Nice candles. No microwax though. Hope this helps, Bill Houser

July 25th, 2005, 02:32 PM	#391
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Yes, but cooling rapidly gives too much side effects, like patterns in the wax. About the grain, I have one strip spacers and with a fairly open aperture I don't have noticeable grain and I loose just about 1 or 2 F stops of light. You can check all my test images and see that the ones with bright sunlight have some grain but the ones with lower light (I don't mean darker) don't have grain. The more the iris closes on the camcorder, the more contrast it gives on the wax glass.

July 26th, 2005, 01:38 AM	#393
Bill Porter Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ventura, California, USA Posts: 751	Glen, Are you related to either Chris or James Hurd?

July 26th, 2005, 06:23 AM	#394
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	<<<<though having fun with this>>>> You sometimes forget this....it's allot of fun. Glen, I had the same thing putting the glass is the fridge. Also something to keep in mind, if you remelt the wax too often the grain will get bigger, so you could better let it cool down on a normal cool flat surface.

July 26th, 2005, 06:43 AM	#395
Matthew Wauhkonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 285	I tried rapid cooling, too (with a thinner spacer, two layers of scotch tape instead of one layer of aluminum tape) and the grain was so much smaller I could no longer see it with my naked eye (or barely). With slow cooling, it was very easy to see. Unfortunately, the slow cooled wax was near perfect but the quick-cooled one was a bit of a mess. Somewhere inbetween might be ideal, although the small patch in the fast-cooled wax that was perfect was incredibly even, smooth, and virtually grainless.

July 26th, 2005, 09:08 AM	#396
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	To describe the grain on my wax glass (normal cooling): you can only see it under a strong lupe. The grain has also allot to do with how you heat the wax. You should mix or vibrate it when it's hot. That's the reason I use the horizontal setup. The wax can settle before you catch it between the glass. And even then I move the glass to even out the wax.

July 26th, 2005, 01:23 PM	#398
Matthew Wauhkonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 285	I just used a cereal box yesterday! I even tried mounting it to my dvx. Talk about messy.

July 26th, 2005, 06:29 PM	#399
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Glen, before you end up making fish and chips in your microwax..., take a look at my site (if you haven't already) because this actually works: http://members.chello.nl/a.schultzev...g/wax/wax2.htm Make that circular filters in stead of square glass if you want(like the top image). One filter with the ring left and one with just the glass and spacers.

July 26th, 2005, 07:50 PM	#400
Tom Wills Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 326	I know I'm kinda late to this discussion, but I just figured out a real cheap way of doing this. Sure, the quality's not even close, but it works decently for playing around. Step 1. Buy bag of 100 Votive Candles from IKEA. Cost: $10. (Don't you just love IKEA pricing?) Step 2. Pull votive out of metal by it's wick. Step 3. Pull wick and metal plate out of wax. Step 4. Cut wax in half and put in metal container. Step 5. Set on stove on lowest setting. Step 6. When melted, pour over a cut piece of CD Jewel Case cover. Step 7. Let cool for about a minute, then play! It acually produces relatively decent footage. I don't have a box to put it in yet though, so the footage is a little tainted, thus I haven't recorded enough to make a web-ready clip. This stuff really is fun.

July 27th, 2005, 05:31 AM	#402
Tom Wills Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 326	It's unluckily just parafin. There's some pitting for some reason, but other than that it looks pretty good.

July 29th, 2005, 06:39 AM	#403
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	I started with all kinds of candles (and even pealed off the glossy top layer), but they have some mixture that only increase the grain structure. Pure beeswax or Paraffine was always better in my tests, microwax is just much finer. Glen, if you still have trouble next time, tell me exactly what it is, because I probably didn't explain why I do everything the way I describe it on my site. Almost every step has a reason why I do it like that.

July 29th, 2005, 04:09 PM	#404
Glen Hurd Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Burlington, NJ Posts: 59	I'll be experimenting again tomorrow, and let you know how it goes. Thanks for your help, Oscar.