Microcrystalline Wax Techniques?

Stephen Finton · July 29th, 2005, 09:15 PM

Use earwax for a nice sepia effect. :)

Oscar Spierenburg · July 31st, 2005, 04:20 AM

Bill, I'm sitting on an IKEA chair right now. And we have those hotdogs too at the exit.

Scott Grocott · July 31st, 2005, 03:22 PM

I just rescently purchased a bag of "translucent crystals" from the hobby store. They are made to raise the melting point of wax and embed things in wax candles.

They are little pellets that melt at 210F.

Is this the same as "micro-wax"?

thank you

Oscar Spierenburg · July 31st, 2005, 04:51 PM

Scott, it's probably not the same, but an additive like stearine or Vybar, but who knows, maybe it's even better. I think no one here has tested it before. If you do a quick test, look at it with a magnifying glass. I you see the grain without it, than it's not as good as micro wax.

Bill Porter · July 31st, 2005, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oscar Spier

Bill, I'm sitting on an IKEA chair right now. And we have those hotdogs too at the exit.

Was the chair imported from the US?

Oscar Spierenburg · August 2nd, 2005, 08:48 AM

No, but maybe the hotdogs were.

Keith Kline · August 2nd, 2005, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Grocott

I just rescently purchased a bag of "translucent crystals" from the hobby store. They are made to raise the melting point of wax and embed things in wax candles.

They are little pellets that melt at 210F.

Is this the same as "micro-wax"?

thank you

I looked into that before and was going to try some of that stuff that my girlfriend had left over from her candle making days. I had a small bag there somewhere but before I had a chance to try it I found my microwax.

I'm going to try to make some new lenses soon. Oscar your method seems great I was trying it the other day, but I got to ambitious and was trying to do 2 sets in the same pan of wax and while i'd get one positioned it would throw the other one off so I'm going to try again and try to just get one set good set in a pan.

Frank Ladner · August 2nd, 2005, 10:26 AM

Well I haven't gotten wax on my hands in a few months now, but I think I'm gonna give it another shot using the horizontal (non-capillary) method. This method would require way less wax since I don't have to heat up a half-pound block to submerge the glass vertically... so that is a real plus.

I'm curious to see how well microwax adapters work with HD cameras. Any of you guys w/ wax adapters have access to do a test like this?

Oscar Spierenburg · August 2nd, 2005, 11:49 AM

Frank, it's not real HD, but I'll put a wax glass in my 'double cam' (two camera's split the image in two and create 1080 x 720 image). I start on that this month if I have some time.

Keith, good to hear from you again. If something does not work, let me know.

Frank Ladner · August 2nd, 2005, 11:55 AM

Thanks, Oscar!

That doublecam is something else, by the way. :-)

Glen Hurd · August 7th, 2005, 07:30 PM

OK. This is one of those projects that crawls like, well, warm wax. But out of desperation, I finally managed a contraption that would at least let me get a rough sense of what we're all here to accomplish. I'd ordered some PCX lenses from Surplus Shed (before I really knew how important diameter and focal length can be.) I've also been using rather large pieces of glass since I needed to improve the odds of getting some wax that actually would work for me. The CD containers are all over my office, so that wasn't a problem. The lens mount -- I'd got a c-mount for Nikkon lenses off ebay, and removed the c-mount portion of it. I used wax to "glue" everything together (doing all I could to keep this from looking like a highly refined competitor to anything else that has been produced thus far.)
So I combined all these elements with the engineering expertise of a 3-year old, and went outside to conquer the world. Or my backyard, in this case. The movie (10 mb, for Quicktime 7) is at http://mysite.verizon.net/divfotog2/ if you're interested.
Yes there's grain, the size of small ball-bearings. The vignetting moves with the adaptor (I had to hold the adaptor against the camera, and found it hard to keep everything straight). But it works! I love the highlights in Ally's hair.
So what if half the picture is tape and wax, it's the content that counts, right?

Bill Porter · August 7th, 2005, 09:42 PM

Good job! Glad to see one more person having some fun with their adapter.

Matthew Wauhkonen · August 8th, 2005, 04:43 PM

I did some capillary action tests between microwax and beeswax. The microwax cooled evenly, while the beeswax cooled in an ugly, very uneven pattern that would not be useable.

But the grain pattern was MUCH finer for the beesax. Odd. It transmits considerably more light, too, although I'm not sure if the thickness is the same.

Matthew Wauhkonen · August 8th, 2005, 05:00 PM

I stopped down to f22 and didn't see any "grain" per se, even when shooting at the evenly white sky, although there was tons of dust and the wax had waves and junk in it. I also cooled it rapidly which probably resulted in both the waves and small grain pattern.

Anyhow, I'll do more tests in a week or so when I get back from my vacation.

Oscar Spierenburg · August 8th, 2005, 05:08 PM

Matthew (reply to your first post), that's why I don't use capillary action. The wax has to 'suck' through a very small space and it looks like it widens(spread) the grain structure. One of the reasons I put the glass horizontal and flip the second glass on top is because it compresses the wax structure in a way. And you can make it as thin as you like.

July 31st, 2005, 03:22 PM	#408
Scott Grocott New Boot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: San Luis Obispo , CA Posts: 21	Wax crystals I just rescently purchased a bag of "translucent crystals" from the hobby store. They are made to raise the melting point of wax and embed things in wax candles. They are little pellets that melt at 210F. Is this the same as "micro-wax"? thank you

August 2nd, 2005, 10:26 AM	#413
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	Well I haven't gotten wax on my hands in a few months now, but I think I'm gonna give it another shot using the horizontal (non-capillary) method. This method would require way less wax since I don't have to heat up a half-pound block to submerge the glass vertically... so that is a real plus. I'm curious to see how well microwax adapters work with HD cameras. Any of you guys w/ wax adapters have access to do a test like this? Last edited by Frank Ladner; August 2nd, 2005 at 11:55 AM.

August 7th, 2005, 07:30 PM	#416
Glen Hurd Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Burlington, NJ Posts: 59	Gotta keep this thread alive . . . OK. This is one of those projects that crawls like, well, warm wax. But out of desperation, I finally managed a contraption that would at least let me get a rough sense of what we're all here to accomplish. I'd ordered some PCX lenses from Surplus Shed (before I really knew how important diameter and focal length can be.) I've also been using rather large pieces of glass since I needed to improve the odds of getting some wax that actually would work for me. The CD containers are all over my office, so that wasn't a problem. The lens mount -- I'd got a c-mount for Nikkon lenses off ebay, and removed the c-mount portion of it. I used wax to "glue" everything together (doing all I could to keep this from looking like a highly refined competitor to anything else that has been produced thus far.) So I combined all these elements with the engineering expertise of a 3-year old, and went outside to conquer the world. Or my backyard, in this case. The movie (10 mb, for Quicktime 7) is at http://mysite.verizon.net/divfotog2/ if you're interested. Yes there's grain, the size of small ball-bearings. The vignetting moves with the adaptor (I had to hold the adaptor against the camera, and found it hard to keep everything straight). But it works! I love the highlights in Ally's hair. So what if half the picture is tape and wax, it's the content that counts, right?

August 8th, 2005, 04:43 PM	#418
Matthew Wauhkonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 285	Weird... I did some capillary action tests between microwax and beeswax. The microwax cooled evenly, while the beeswax cooled in an ugly, very uneven pattern that would not be useable. But the grain pattern was MUCH finer for the beesax. Odd. It transmits considerably more light, too, although I'm not sure if the thickness is the same.

July 29th, 2005, 09:15 PM	#406
Stephen Finton Major Player Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 344	Use earwax for a nice sepia effect. :)

July 31st, 2005, 04:20 AM	#407
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Bill, I'm sitting on an IKEA chair right now. And we have those hotdogs too at the exit.

July 31st, 2005, 04:51 PM	#409
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Scott, it's probably not the same, but an additive like stearine or Vybar, but who knows, maybe it's even better. I think no one here has tested it before. If you do a quick test, look at it with a magnifying glass. I you see the grain without it, than it's not as good as micro wax.

August 2nd, 2005, 08:48 AM	#411
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	No, but maybe the hotdogs were.

August 2nd, 2005, 11:49 AM	#414
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Frank, it's not real HD, but I'll put a wax glass in my 'double cam' (two camera's split the image in two and create 1080 x 720 image). I start on that this month if I have some time. Keith, good to hear from you again. If something does not work, let me know.

August 2nd, 2005, 11:55 AM	#415
Frank Ladner Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Poplarville, MS Posts: 453	Thanks, Oscar! That doublecam is something else, by the way. :-)

August 7th, 2005, 09:42 PM	#417
Bill Porter Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ventura, California, USA Posts: 751	Good job! Glad to see one more person having some fun with their adapter.

August 8th, 2005, 05:00 PM	#419
Matthew Wauhkonen Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 285	I stopped down to f22 and didn't see any "grain" per se, even when shooting at the evenly white sky, although there was tons of dust and the wax had waves and junk in it. I also cooled it rapidly which probably resulted in both the waves and small grain pattern. Anyhow, I'll do more tests in a week or so when I get back from my vacation.

August 8th, 2005, 05:08 PM	#420
Oscar Spierenburg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: (The Netherlands - Belgium) Posts: 735	Matthew (reply to your first post), that's why I don't use capillary action. The wax has to 'suck' through a very small space and it looks like it widens(spread) the grain structure. One of the reasons I put the glass horizontal and flip the second glass on top is because it compresses the wax structure in a way. And you can make it as thin as you like.