A new chemically engineered GG

[Forrest Schultz]

Tony, if you plan to create rotating gg option, then 90mm diameter would be a perfect choice. it can be mounted to a cd player motor or a pc motor and have the perfect amount of area left for a 36mm by 25mm frame. that way, your not wasting space by making a much larger cd sized disk.

the only reason people used cd-r sized gg was because thats what was avaible. it in no way needs to be that big. take the Sg35 for instance.

[Tony Relph]

Due to the middle and outer seals we would have to extend the diameter slightly to ensure that a 36 x 24 screen can be captured as the seals are quite wide due to the ultra, ultra thin glass.

[Bob Hart]

Tony.

Just a thought. If people are going to use the GGs dynamically in a spinner design, you might need to consider matching pairs of your glass layers. Maybe your lasercutting process is good enough to get the precision where this is not needed.

I found with what I called composite wax disks, that it was very hard to get a good balance and that I needed to spin pairs "dry" on a hub and motor to match them first beforehand and even then there was no guarantee.

There is also a tendency, however slight for each disk to slip offset relative to the other. Just a fraction of a mm was enough. Bot would still go on the hub no problem.

The wax composite disks were quieter than a single glass disk. I think they would have greater resistance to breakage in the way a laminated car windscreen does.

I gave up on wax disks because arriving at a solution was beyond my technical precision skills.

[Tony Relph]

To ensure accuracy, two sheets of glass are sandwiched together and one pass is made to cut the glass therefore the glass underneath is near perfect to the top piece. O-rings are added to the seal to ensure no movement or separation occurs. The composition of our GG does not consist of any form of wax.

All the GG that we will supply is for a static solution, not rotation is needed. We are only providing a rotating GG to fit rotating adapters as our standard GG for the DiGi35 adapter is of a different size. This is to be a solution for people who already have an adapter but dont want to shell out money for another.

[Wayne Kinney]

Tony,
How 'grainless' is the GG? Are you able to stop down the SLR lens without grain? Also, how about its diffussion level? This directly relates to the bokeh produced. Only reason I ask is since most grainless static solutions do not produce a very nice bokeh (wax seems to be the exception).

[Tony Relph]

Hi Wayne,

Im going to email you a still that we made using a piece of GG that we made half coated to compare the difference.

[Tony Relph]

Wayne - Sent.

[Wayne Kinney]

Tony,

OK, i got the email and attached image. I must say im not sure what messege your attempting to get aross with this image, but I must say im a little confused. I feel it fair to post your email here along with the image you sent me, as it sounds a little fishy and think people here should make their own minds up.

Originally Posted by Tony Relph via email to Wayne Kinney

The attached still is to show you the difference between the GG and no GG.
The image was made using a piece of half coated GG.

I will ask my business partner exactly how this still was taken with regards
to setup. Do to bandwidth the image is low res. High res samples will be at
digi35.co.uk shortly.

Thanks,



Tony Relph.

Attached Image: http://www.sgpro.co.uk/GGTest307.jpg

I wont say more since you maybe genuine, and I dont want to be unfair if you are, but that image is obviously half guassian blurred in post.

[Tony Relph]

At the time we did not have the correct equipment to carry out tests so we used a half coated GG for comparision. Complete footage and stills will be available in approx 2 weeks.

[Tony Relph]

I see what you mean. I didnt take the image, it was my partner. I was emailed it. I must say that the actual image itself gives it away as where we live there is no house like that. It does look a little to perfect. My actual view would be that the right side would be out of focus is this correct?.

As I said previously I am no expert in cameras etc but I think I have some logic. I have a half coated piece of GG that I can send you if you like, the diameter is 94mm, is this OK.

I also just lined up the line between the two halves and it is too straight. The hlaf coated GG I have is nowhere near a straight as the pic.

This is why I want to have tester do the tests for me to ensure fair images are taken.

I SHALL NOW GO OFF AND HAVE WORDS WITH A CERTAIN SOMEONE NOW!

By doing this can put a reputation down the toilet before it has even started, so all I can do is apologise. 10 GG samples will be sent out shortly so everyone can decide then.

[Wayne Kinney]

Tony,

So what exactly is the deal with that image you sent me?

[Tony Relph]

I cant say yet, I have just left a voicemail for him to call me back, should call back within the hour. Again all I can do is apoligise if this is the case. I dont know what to look for in these tests until they are pointed out to me, Im still learning. My main part in the project is to design the adapter and seals to enclose the GG and lenses. I have as much experience in this field as a virgin does in the Karma Sutra which isnt much.

As you are local can you email me an address to send a GG sample.

[Bob Hart]

Tony.

Some alternative relay devices can now just come up to 850 TV lines of horizontal resolution off a groundglass image about 30mm wide. That's the benchmark your groundglass must be able to achieve before the marketplace will come hammering at your door.

But if you do develop the genuine article with good bokeh ( quality of soft areas of image ) and the hotspot problem solved, then hammering at your door by customers may reach the desperate intensity of that of the ancient throng at the apothecary seeking the cure for the plague.

As for the .jpg image, if the "clear" area is supposed to be the groundglassed area, it demonstrates a basic misconception of just what these adaptors do. They do not clarify the image but degrade or soften it slightly.

The direct-to-camera portion of the image should be clear, the groundglass portion should be softer. The softer area of your image as posted would suggest a performance inferior to the projects already completed.

There is also no evidence of the differential focus (my words probably not correct here) in the "softer" area of the image, which is the purpose for which these adaptors are made.

That nice sharp edge down the division of the image between soft and sharp can be accepted if the .jpg is a composite or stitch of two separate images representative of the two sections of panel. If this is so, it would have been better to title it as such.

I have published test pattern frame grabs in such a manner.

I think to be credible, you may have to do the hard yards, build this glass into an adaptor yourselves, create the images in realworld conditions and publish the results in a transparent and verifiable manner.

There is a goodwill ethos by and large in this community of tinkerers and engineers in that a sort of open-source process of information sharing goes on.

[Forrest Schultz]

Tony, for having alot of logic, couldnt you obviously see yourself the image was just a photoshop picture with the guassian blur as Wayne stated. It doesnt take an optical expert to find a fake photo.



here i made a quick groundglass test...
it shows one side coated while one side is not:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...ctuureblur.jpg

see how easy that was, it took me a minute to find a picture, and do the blur. who would beleive this was shot of some sort of gg?

[Wayne Kinney]

Lets not flame Tony, as this could have been a misunderstanding. I live an hour away from him and he says he is sending me a sample of this GG. If it arrives, I will test and confirm his credibility...