New moving ground glass mechanism

Dan Diaconu · March 17th, 2005, 08:54 AM

I can not upload clips over 2M on my site. In avi, that would be a very short time and it does not take them in avi. I will export something in avi on that free share thing. I'll post the link.

Dan Diaconu · March 17th, 2005, 10:56 AM

http://rapidshare.de/files/903215/web_demo.avi.html
27Mb, 7?-8? seconds

Dan Diaconu · March 17th, 2005, 10:03 PM

OK,...
200 readers from post to post, 14 downloads (less mine) and no comments. Does any of the 14 that saw the clip care to share impressions?

Steev Dinkins · March 18th, 2005, 12:02 AM

Dan I checked it out. I see some camera shake, but that doesn't matter - i know it's a test. What does matter is that your footage looks great. If I had the money, I'd buy your thang.

Dan Diaconu · March 18th, 2005, 12:20 AM

Thanks Steev,
If I'd had a "thang", I wouldn't sell it (whatever zeat is) lol...
...long day... I am pushed to do it for HD (Z1 and F900) others R saying "make a movie"..... to show what can be done.... I sink I'll make it for Z1 and shoot something ....(or someone....lol)....looong day........

Steev Dinkins · March 18th, 2005, 12:26 AM

Heh. You know I mean no disrespect towards your device. I think it's the best thing around besides the P+S. Long day here too..

zzzzzzzzzzz

Dan Diaconu · March 18th, 2005, 10:23 AM

I know Steev, I know....
if you (or anyone else reading/replying) would have half the fun I have on this great forum, you'd live ten years longer....... trust me on zeat.

Steev Dinkins · March 18th, 2005, 10:50 AM

I think your Zeat is like my Voot. And this could signify the end of the thread. What more is there to say?

VOOT

Dan Diaconu · March 18th, 2005, 02:22 PM

well...how about further comments on the sample clip? Obin? Les? Sarena? Frank? anyone? Still not good enough? Roughly 200 reader from post to post out of which only 23 have seen the clip. Are the others not interested? slow internet? If that is the case, what am I to expect...... But those that SAW the clip and do not care to share their impressions.......
oh well... you were right Steev.

Jeremie Galan · March 18th, 2005, 02:30 PM

i have to say that i m most impressed by your footage than the "micro 35" ones from that "the ancien" film posted on the micro 35 forum.
the only thing that bother me is that vibrating sound haha.
But maybe one of the best "test" footage i ve seen for an adapter.

Les Dit · March 18th, 2005, 04:20 PM

Dan, the clipped looked pretty good, but it's getting hard for me to evaluate WebCam resolution footage these days. :-)
You never responded to my concern about the image shifting laterally as the groundglass focusing screen moves. If you take any simple lens of any kind and form an image on a piece of paper, then move the lens sideways a little, the image on the paper moves as well. Perhaps you are only moving it a fraction of a millimeter, which doesn't blur the already blurry DV image? Your two megapixel image seem to be fairly sharp, however. Comments?

<<<-- Originally posted by Dan Diaconu : well...how about further comments on the sample clip? Obin? Les? Sarena? Frank? anyone? Still not good enough? Roughly 200 reader from post to post out of which only 23 have seen the clip. Are the others not interested? slow internet? If that is the case, what am I to expect...... But those that SAW the clip and do not care to share their impressions.......
oh well... you were right Steev. -->>>

Dan Diaconu · March 18th, 2005, 05:09 PM

Thanks Jeremie, the sound is from on board camera mic and does not concern me for the purpose. When I will shoot something "for real" and NEED the sound, I will use a boom operator or wireless lavaliere. Otherwise, this whole contraption is an imaging device. With the GG static (without the buzz)I heard (at playback) the lens movement and other noises that are not available when shooting just video. Please note that some camcorders have AUX mic and have configured the mic mount as far and isolated from the camera body (and their tape moving mechanism is pretty damn quiet (but still!) What do you expect when a fly fights a spider?.....
Les. When did the Web Cam came to play? I used the same GS200 as always. If that was a joke, then :-)<
>>>If you take any simple lens of any kind and form an image on a piece of paper, then move the lens sideways a little, the image on the paper moves as well.<<<<
True.
But my lenses do not move sideway (relative to camcorder). They only go in and out as I roll focus. I am not shaking the lens Les!
As for the screen, if I was to move it 5 or 10mm or 50mm sideways, or even rotate it as a spinning CD, the image from the lens will still appear in the very same spot, relative to the SLR lens AND the camcorder's lens, so..... how much the screen moves, round or elliptical is not relevant. As long as the movement is PLANE, and the camcorder points to the back of the lens at all times nothing changes (except you see a motion blur of the grain instead of individual grains) How is your device coming together anyway?

Les Dit · March 18th, 2005, 05:26 PM

Dan,
Maybe I'm under the false impression that the focusing screen fresnel component is acting like a lens, specifically similar to a condenser lens. Isn't the type of focusing screen , you are using doing some kind of lens function? I didn't mean that you were moving the actual camera lens. Optically isn't the focusing screen like a condenser lens that is flat with a diffuser surface on one side? I guess that's the heart of the matter, optically speaking.
I'm joking when I say WebCam! I use the term loosely to describe WebCam resolution. (Regular SD resolution)

-Les

Dan Diaconu · March 18th, 2005, 06:05 PM

>>>Optically isn't the focusing screen like a condenser lens that is flat with a diffuser surface on one side?<<<
Yes, that what it is.
I am moving on to HD for that's where the money is. PD, DVX....... gs... good enough but.. times are changing and so must we.
The SD market does not pay/need this quality (beyond hobby level). HD pro summer will get jobs available only for today's pro cameras due to increased quality and shrinking budgets. No-budget-indie-work is fun but still no-budget. No point in pursuing it (imo)

Cosmin Rotaru · March 18th, 2005, 06:07 PM

Hey Dan, finally a full resolution clip! Very nice!

March 18th, 2005, 06:07 PM	#255
Cosmin Rotaru Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Romania, Timisoara Posts: 453	Hey Dan, finally a full resolution clip! Very nice! __________________ Cosmin Rotaru

March 17th, 2005, 08:54 AM	#241
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	I can not upload clips over 2M on my site. In avi, that would be a very short time and it does not take them in avi. I will export something in avi on that free share thing. I'll post the link.

March 17th, 2005, 10:56 AM	#242
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	http://rapidshare.de/files/903215/web_demo.avi.html 27Mb, 7?-8? seconds

March 17th, 2005, 10:03 PM	#243
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	OK,... 200 readers from post to post, 14 downloads (less mine) and no comments. Does any of the 14 that saw the clip care to share impressions?

March 18th, 2005, 12:02 AM	#244
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	Dan I checked it out. I see some camera shake, but that doesn't matter - i know it's a test. What does matter is that your footage looks great. If I had the money, I'd buy your thang.

March 18th, 2005, 12:20 AM	#245
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	Thanks Steev, If I'd had a "thang", I wouldn't sell it (whatever zeat is) lol... ...long day... I am pushed to do it for HD (Z1 and F900) others R saying "make a movie"..... to show what can be done.... I sink I'll make it for Z1 and shoot something ....(or someone....lol)....looong day........

March 18th, 2005, 12:26 AM	#246
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	Heh. You know I mean no disrespect towards your device. I think it's the best thing around besides the P+S. Long day here too.. zzzzzzzzzzz

March 18th, 2005, 10:23 AM	#247
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	I know Steev, I know.... if you (or anyone else reading/replying) would have half the fun I have on this great forum, you'd live ten years longer....... trust me on zeat.

March 18th, 2005, 10:50 AM	#248
Steev Dinkins Major Player Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 613	I think your Zeat is like my Voot. And this could signify the end of the thread. What more is there to say? VOOT

March 18th, 2005, 02:22 PM	#249
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	well...how about further comments on the sample clip? Obin? Les? Sarena? Frank? anyone? Still not good enough? Roughly 200 reader from post to post out of which only 23 have seen the clip. Are the others not interested? slow internet? If that is the case, what am I to expect...... But those that SAW the clip and do not care to share their impressions....... oh well... you were right Steev.

March 18th, 2005, 02:30 PM	#250
Jeremie Galan New Boot Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 11	i have to say that i m most impressed by your footage than the "micro 35" ones from that "the ancien" film posted on the micro 35 forum. the only thing that bother me is that vibrating sound haha. But maybe one of the best "test" footage i ve seen for an adapter.

March 18th, 2005, 04:20 PM	#251
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Dan, the clipped looked pretty good, but it's getting hard for me to evaluate WebCam resolution footage these days. :-) You never responded to my concern about the image shifting laterally as the groundglass focusing screen moves. If you take any simple lens of any kind and form an image on a piece of paper, then move the lens sideways a little, the image on the paper moves as well. Perhaps you are only moving it a fraction of a millimeter, which doesn't blur the already blurry DV image? Your two megapixel image seem to be fairly sharp, however. Comments? <<<-- Originally posted by Dan Diaconu : well...how about further comments on the sample clip? Obin? Les? Sarena? Frank? anyone? Still not good enough? Roughly 200 reader from post to post out of which only 23 have seen the clip. Are the others not interested? slow internet? If that is the case, what am I to expect...... But those that SAW the clip and do not care to share their impressions....... oh well... you were right Steev. -->>>

March 18th, 2005, 05:09 PM	#252
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	Thanks Jeremie, the sound is from on board camera mic and does not concern me for the purpose. When I will shoot something "for real" and NEED the sound, I will use a boom operator or wireless lavaliere. Otherwise, this whole contraption is an imaging device. With the GG static (without the buzz)I heard (at playback) the lens movement and other noises that are not available when shooting just video. Please note that some camcorders have AUX mic and have configured the mic mount as far and isolated from the camera body (and their tape moving mechanism is pretty damn quiet (but still!) What do you expect when a fly fights a spider?..... Les. When did the Web Cam came to play? I used the same GS200 as always. If that was a joke, then :-)< >>>If you take any simple lens of any kind and form an image on a piece of paper, then move the lens sideways a little, the image on the paper moves as well.<<<< True. But my lenses do not move sideway (relative to camcorder). They only go in and out as I roll focus. I am not shaking the lens Les! As for the screen, if I was to move it 5 or 10mm or 50mm sideways, or even rotate it as a spinning CD, the image from the lens will still appear in the very same spot, relative to the SLR lens AND the camcorder's lens, so..... how much the screen moves, round or elliptical is not relevant. As long as the movement is PLANE, and the camcorder points to the back of the lens at all times nothing changes (except you see a motion blur of the grain instead of individual grains) How is your device coming together anyway?

March 18th, 2005, 05:26 PM	#253
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Dan, Maybe I'm under the false impression that the focusing screen fresnel component is acting like a lens, specifically similar to a condenser lens. Isn't the type of focusing screen , you are using doing some kind of lens function? I didn't mean that you were moving the actual camera lens. Optically isn't the focusing screen like a condenser lens that is flat with a diffuser surface on one side? I guess that's the heart of the matter, optically speaking. I'm joking when I say WebCam! I use the term loosely to describe WebCam resolution. (Regular SD resolution) -Les

March 18th, 2005, 06:05 PM	#254
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	>>>Optically isn't the focusing screen like a condenser lens that is flat with a diffuser surface on one side?<<< Yes, that what it is. I am moving on to HD for that's where the money is. PD, DVX....... gs... good enough but.. times are changing and so must we. The SD market does not pay/need this quality (beyond hobby level). HD pro summer will get jobs available only for today's pro cameras due to increased quality and shrinking budgets. No-budget-indie-work is fun but still no-budget. No point in pursuing it (imo)