It's likely one or both of the glasses warped during heating and bent back afteer cooling causing the delamination. Thinner glass which can be held bent by the wax adhesion might solve it.

Did you remount your wax glass in a metal frame after making it. If so, that may also had had something to do with it. I would use three small drops of resilient glue to immobilise the gg and leave the clamping ring a quarter turn loose.

Slightly divergent, I changed my method of dressing the oharadisks in the groundglassing tumbler to mounting them with wax to the center of a larger glass disk which fits in the rear of the tumbler. I was originally using the large disk as a dressing surface and mounting the oharadisks in a rolling thick metal holder with the wax and rolling the small disk across the larger one.

The larger disk had a AO5 finish from previous grindings upon it. I placed it on the stove (ceramic cooktop) set the heat to low, placed the oharadisk on top in center then dropped a few wax shavings in the center hole of the oharadisk. The wax melted and crept out to the circumference with not one bubble. At face to face glass contact, the wax sheet is too thin as a projection surface alone, but there is an interesting effect.

The effect is to apparently smoothen or make finer, the existing groundglass texture and it becomes more transparent. I can't use it for image tests as the back of the big disk is also partially groundglassed and scratched and it is too thick anyway. Through the few transparent bits I can look through, it appears the combination of thin wax and one groundglass face and one smooth face, yields a workable finer texture than the thicker wax or groundglass alone. How it would hold up for resolution I don't know and I have not yet repeated the exercise. It might be worth a try if anyone else feels like making the effort. The A05 is a little too fine. I would start with a coarser grade finish and work down.

I tried something similar when I was working with the WAO glass. I smeared petroleum jelly over the ground surface of the glass. All this did was make it transparent and thus unusable for catching intermediate images.

However, your idea of using wax - I don't see why it wouldn't work. In fact, wouldn't the melted wax distribute more evenly over the ground/diffuse glass as opposed to a clean glass surface?

I wonder whether it might enable a coarser gg to be used, the opaque wax smoothing out the image a little but also acting as a gg itself. The coarser grade finish would enable a measured wax thickness if two glass disks were kept hard together which would elimate the variable density problem for spinners. It may soften the image a little too much but that's the thought.

That sounds like a good idea. I'd like to know the results if you try that! I envision it smoothing the image out (minimizing the grain).

Update:

I bought a couple of 2" x 2" picture frames from a local dollar store earlier today and made a really nice adapter out of them. What I was trying to do was get a larger area so that I wouldn't have to zoom in so much. (On the GL2, you get pretty noticeable vignetting once zoomed in, I think due to the stops lowering in telephoto.)

I haven't had a chance to shoot some daytime footage due to the time change (it's dark when I get off work), but I went ahead and shot some inside stuff. After I export the video footage, I plan on bringing it to my work computer on CD and putting it on my webserver there. I'll hopefully have something for you guys tomorrow!

I have put up some framegrabs and sample footage here:

http://209.214.235.122/mwtest/

Contents (so far):
- 4 frame grabs (BMP)
- 2 video clips:
( 1 720x480 24p uncompressed - 168 MB )
( 1 352x240 30p uncompressed - 71 MB )

These are some big files, and I'm on a T1 line (1.5Mb/s) so I'm not sure how this'll do, especially with multiple connections, but we'll give it a try.

(Also: The two video clips are actually different shots - not just two versions of the same shot.)

Thanks!

According to the log, I've had several downloads (mainly of the .BMP framegrabs). The big 168MB clip has been downloaded by a few different people already, so I'm glad to see that it's not completely choking.

I'm curious to know what transfer rate some of you are getting.

I plan on shooting some outside stuff this weekend. If there's a continued interest, and the server is handling things well for you guys, I'd be glad to post some more stuff.

Let me know.

Thanks!

I downloaded both clips and got a decent rate. I can't remember precisely though.

Anyway... both clips won't play on my computer. I'm not sure if it's just me or if the clips are corrupt etc. Could you check?

Just finished d/l'ing the smaller clip, and it played fine. Looks good! I'm getting 114k/sec down.

Today I'll have my first shot at re-attempting the microwax screen -- hopefully it will turn out as good as yours, Frank.

Thanks for sharing!

- jim

Frank, what method did you use to apply the wax?

How transparent is the final product and how thick?

I'm thinking about giving some fine waxed paper a try as an imaging plate... not sure how that will turn out but I'll post if anything decent comes from it.

Glad they're downloading ok!

Aaron: Hrm...I tested them and they played ok. They may play a bit laggy on some computers since they're uncompressed, but they're not playing at all on your computer? Can you try maybe opening them in QuickTime? That's what I play them in here at work.

Jim: Thanks! Please keep us posted on how it goes!

About the setup:
Well, it's kinda funny. This time I just bought a couple of cheap picture frames and sorta did a rush-job on it.

Here's what I did:

- Formed an aluminum foil cup

(double-layered -and heavy-duty is best because it's easy for a
glass corner to puncture the foil, and you don't want a hot-wax leak)

- Created spacers

(( SCOTCH TAPE this time - not aluminum ))
This was done by folding the tape pieces longways, sticky side out. This was placed inbetween the edges of the glass pieces, except for the top side. The excess tape sticking out was folded back over. This formed somewhat of a seal, but mainly a spacer (albeit not-so-precise). I then put more tape around the edges.

- Melted the wax in a pot.

- Put the glass sandwich in the aluminum cup.

- Poured (carefully) the hot wax in the aluminum cup, making sure the glass was submerged.

- After that I held the cup with an oven mit, making sure the glass was standing straight up in the wax and that the bubbles were escaping.

- After it cooled a bit (the wax goes from clear to white), I began slowly peeling the aluminum foil from around the sides. I removed the wax (which was then in a mushy state) from around the glass and put it back in the pot.

- I cleaned the outsides of the glass and examined the wax layer to find that there was still a small bubble trapped inside.

- I taped the sides up some more and put a hair dryer to the glass, tilting it upright (open side on up) with the oven mit, allowing the bubble to move up and out.

(I really advise that you figure out a good way to seal your wax inside the glass so that you can simply re-melt it in cases like this. It's so much easier.)

I think that's about it. Let me know if I need to clarify anything.

Aaron: I can't say exactly the thickness of the wax in precise units, but it's however thick a piece of scotch tape is folded twice.
;-)

It is maybe not transparent enough. It really wants a lot of light, but I don't have as bad of a hotspot problem. It seems to distribute more evenly.

Aaron: I've heard the wax paper mentioned before. Not sure if there's been any success with it, though. Seems like the paper bits or whatever would show up. It is worth a try, though.

Hrm...I wonder if you could use something that light in conjunction with a piezo element to get a quick vibration that maybe isn't possible with a comparitavely heavy piece of glass.
You would just have to be sure the paper vibrates in a uniform fashion and stays straight.

Hey guys!

I'm glad there are still people downloading the footage! I was afraid that the computer and connection wouldn't be able to handle it.

I just got back from a hobby store, where I purchased some more cheap picture frames and some paraffin wax. I have only used microcrystalline wax for this application so paraffin is a first. I just melted it and poured it in a cup w/ the prepared glass sandwich and it is now cooling. I've been checking back on it periodically and it looks like the stuff takes a lot longer to cool than microcrystalline. Seemed to take longer to melt, also. Maybe next go around I can time it.

Anyhow, if this works as well as the microcrystalline I'll be quite happy since it is a lot more readily available.

How are you guys coming along?

frank that footage is great...i was just abut to finish my mini35 design and u show me this!!!...:)

is it possible u send another footage in the outside and another in the dark...so we can see the responce of the grains to light?

Thank you for the compliment, Dogus!

I have already shot some more footage with the adapter and will try to have it ready to upload in the next day or so.

Thanks for the interest!

Also, in my previous post I mentioned trying paraffin wax. Well I don't think it will work for this purpose. The grain is very noticeable as compared to microcrystalline.

hmm interesting Frank. Could you post a few grabs of the grain associated with the Paraffin wax?

Aaron: In the next day or two I'll try and put up some pictures of the adapter, and a framegrab w/ the paraffin.

Hi, somoene did more tests on the wax solution ??
Where did you buy the wax ? (I wasn't able to find any online shop with clear specifications except the one posted in this thread).

I got another idea for the wax solution, what about spray wax, the one used for car maintenance ??
MAYBE this could be created without using two pieces of glass, but MAYBE is it possible to just spray one side of a UV filter and get a reasonably accurate film... "shooting" staying quite distant from the lens...

What do u think ?? That polishing wax is quite cheap so it won't be a problem doing some tests....

Hi
once I found a link
to a guy in France

Yes I'm living there
but not French by the way

who makes a Boscreen
with a liquid something
between parafine and oil
not cheap
but no grain

Can u please try to find the address again ??? it whould be nice form e (living in Italy) :D

sorry but the guy is out of business
so sorry but
it has been 2000 I've spoken to him

Try Strahl and Pitch wax -- they might deliver internationally. Ask them for a sample.

Sorry for my long absence -- just got around to working on a new microwax adapter tonight. The wax is solidifiying as I type this :)

- jim

Just figured out the hard way that fingerprints are a bitch :)

So, as someone already stated and I'm now going to emphasize -- clean both sides of your glass before placing it in the wax -- oil from fingerprints formed on the inside will prevent the wax from taking to the surface evenly.

On a bright note, no bubbles :)

- jim

Initial experiences with my adapter have proven disappointing.

Frank, did you blend the micro wax with paraffin? I ask because the grain of my adapter is significantly greater than that of yours. I'm uploading full res footage now to show you what I mean...

Also, I'm wondering if perhaps I made the gap between filters too wide -- I folded the foil twice over, so it was four pieces thick in the end, and rolled it flat with a rolling pin. Maybe it should be only one or two pieces thick.

More experimentation and footage soon...

- jim

Jim.

I tried the blend suggested some time back of 10% bleached beeswax in paraffin wax when I made the wax composite disks for the spinner. The disks were separated by only one thickness of cooking foil. When put against a strongly contrasted background, the disk could almost be seen through.

The waxdisk*.jpg images in www.dvinfo.net/media/hart came from that. Those I now realise are not valid for a fixed groundglass test.

Another option might be to try your microcrystalline wax and a bleached beeswax blend.

Jim: I have not mixed the different waxes. All my first experiments were of pure microcrystalline. The last thing I tried was paraffin-only, which yielded more grain than the micro-only version.

Bob -- thanks for the ideas.

Frank -- how many layers of tape/foil are you using to separate your filters?

- jim

My first attempts were all with foil (non heavy-duty) strips folded two times.

My last attempt was with masking tape (I think I've been calling it 'scotch' tape the whole time.) as a spacer, which worked well so long as the thing stayed submerged long enough for the tiny air bubbles within the tape to .

Frank, and/or any other Wax Pioneers,

Is there any documentation anyone has done on their process of making a wax focus element for static adapter use?

That's something I've wished for more of on the forums here - documentation. I'd love to improve on my current static adapter design which is documented here:

http://www.holyzoo.com/zoo_updates.php

Otherwise, what are the current thoughts on whether wax is better than ground glass at this point? How would it compare to a high end Focus Screen like one from this company?

http://www.intenscreen.com/

Frank.

You can try using PVC wood glue to hold the foil with one piece between the glasses and wrapped around the edge to the outer face. Only give it a good long time to set.

Once you have got the wax in, you can trim the foil off the outside and dissolve the PVC off with water. The piece of foil between the two sheets is there for keeps of course.

Otherwise, try Loctite 358 UV curing adhesive in very small pinhead drops on the foil both sides, press it together and set the glue off with a UV lamp. That version will be going no place so it had better be right. The upside should be an ability to rework the wax without the glass disks coming apart.

Steev: Hi! I don't really have any documentation, other than what I mentioned here. I don't have the time currently to put one together, but a step-by-step tutorial with pictures would be nice.

First I've heard of the UV-curing glue, Bob! That is definately something to try. Thanks!

Frank,

Two layers of tape then?

Steev,

As soon as my attempts yield great results, I'll put up a tutorial complete with stills and text taking you through the steps necessary.

- jim

Yep. That did the trick for me. Let me know how it turns out.

A tutorial would be excellent!

Jim, awesome. I realize it's still brewing now. I appreciate the sharing of the fruits.

Thanks!

steev

I put a new video clip up on the server. This one isn't really impressive. It's just showing how grain-free the footage is in a microwax adapter even when the lens is nearly closed. (In ground glass adapters, this is where the grain really starts to show.)

My next step is to try and make a larger microwax glass sandwich to be used with medium format lenses, so that I don't have to zoom in so much (because the projected image will be larger), thus lessening the grain pick-up a lot more. I have a feeling that when I get my condensers in, I can use them to get even more of the projected 35mm image (spreading the image brightness out so that I don't have to zoom in on the 'hot' area)

By the way, I'm using a 50mm Pentacon 1:1.8 lens.

http://209.214.235.122/mwtest

The file is called "microwax_outside_test_30p.avi"

It's pretty big at 109 MB, but I don't have any bandwidth limits so you guys can download as much as you please.

I just ran some tests with my latest wax system and they don't hold up well against the same images from a WAO5 ground glass -- the wax adapter proves easier to focus on, better at retaining detail, but there's a steep trade-off where exposure is concerned.

I have to use a gain of 9 to get the same exposure as no gain on the WAO glass. This is with a wax density of two layers of masking tape -- cooking up a test of one layer thickness as I type this :/

Check out this comparison (http://ideaspora.net/mwax.jpg) between my two glasses -- the wax is on the left, the WAO5 on the right.

- jim

Thanks for posting, Jim!

Yeah, light loss is one downside to the wax adapters. However, you should find that the hotspot problem is reduced significantly with it. The number one benefit, in my opinion, is the practically-no-grain aspect. (none that a SD camera can see, anyhow)

I'm just planning on using a lot of light for any shooting I do with it, but for something like documentary shooting, I don't think it would work as well as a ground glass adapter.

Jim.

I think you could afford to reduce the thickness of the wax layer. This should also sharpen up the image due to less diffusion into the surrounding wax being visible because you don't then have to crank up the video gain so much.

The wax thickness I preferred was no more than one layer of cooking foil. It may well have come out even thinner than that in places because of the irregularity of my two glass disks which caused the wax layer thickness to vary and created the flicker problems. There was a see-through problem with this thickness subjectively somewhere between a fresh AO5 dressing and an overwork/partial backpolish of the A05.

Bob,

I think you're correct.

I experimented with the wax adapter with the glass separated by one thickness of masking tape today and it's *just* too thick that its diffuse properties are prohibitive -- but a great improvement over two layes of tape. Two layers requires a gain of 9, one layer, a gain of 3 under "typical" lighting conditions -- a single, 60w overhead light in a windowless room.

Tomorrow I'm going down to one layer of foil and this should be optimal. It's great to see results this good so far -- the grain is noticably less obtrusive than the WAO5 and focusing is much better.

Once I get tomorrow's completed, I'll post some footage.

- jim

I am also going to try and get a smaller layer of wax using just a single strip of tape or foil.

My 2 condensers came in and hopefully those, combined with a thin layer will give me a bright & even screen.

Frank,

How's things?

At one layer of foil, these things are hard to crank out with relatively minor/unnoticable flaws. However, I've gotten one together today that looks good "enough" and am currently rendering out footage using what I hope is a good approximation of Chris Rubin's trick using Vegas's internal "Mask Generator" set to "Luminance," with the "invert" box checked. I've applied some desaturation, gaussian blur and brightness/contrast to the grain image before hand -- we'll see how it works out, I guess. Dunno if the blur was a mistake, or if I should've gone the other way with an sharpen filter.

Otherwie, watching raw footage on my NTSC monitor and I'm picking up things that I bet only a trained eye would notice -- the grain is so small as to give me a grin for all my hard work :D

Thanks for your tips all along, BTW.

Footage coming in about a half hour...

- jim

I went out and bought a whole assortment of cheap picture frames of various sizes and started experimenting with getting a thinner layer of wax.

I was afraid of using just one strip of unfolded aluminum because it looked like such a thin space inbetween the glass that I didin't know if the wax could seep through. Anyway, I went ahead and tried it and was very pleased. I now have a wax surface suitable for low(er)-light inside shooting.
(However, it still wasn't completely bubble-free. In fact, I believe that it is harder to get a bubble-free THIN layer of wax than it is for thicker layers.)

We must've been typing at the same time. LOL!

Thanks for the update! Looking forward to some footage! :-)

When I was playing with AO5 ground glass adapters, I would do the following trick with the footage to reduce grain:

(In After Effects)

- Scale the footage (assuming 720x480) to 1620x1080
- Apply the Median filter set to around 3
- Render back out with the resize option set to 720x480

This trick works better with closeup footage where you have a large surface area of the same tone or color.

In fact, I believe that it is harder to get a bubble-free THIN layer of wax than it is for thicker layers.

This is exactly right. I've done some crazy things in attempts to get the bubbles out -- even went so far as to separate a single strand of wire from a bundle of wire attached to a 9v batery adapter (stripping the insulation and pulling the bundle apart), then using that to slide it in between both filters :D Yesterday, I used a straight razor to lightly pry the two pieces of glass apart while tapping their surfaces with a coffee stirrer...

It looks like it might've payed off, too.


- jim

Frank,

Here's an idea that maybe the two of us can work on and come up with a solution -- would you think it possible to assemble the wax sandwich in a pool of already melted wax?

Using tweezers, tongs, foil and whatnot, I could get the glass lined up ontop of one another, but I'm then confused about how to keep them together. Perhaps the solution would be to lay them ontop of one another in a very shallow pool of wax -- then get them lined up and let the wax cool completely, and then cut the glass out.

This way, bubbles should pose too great a problem -- if you find one, just separate the glasses or move them around until it's gone.

My worries are what might come of the glass given that there's nothing providing pressure sufficient to keep them together, and together in a way that is even across their surfaces.

But...it's a thought.

- jim

Well after all that trouble I hope it pays off for you.

If only there was some sort of "Do It Yourself Bubble-Free Wax Adapter Kit" you could buy at the hobby store. LOL!

Wonder if you could take a thin strand of wire like you describe, form a squared "U" shape with it (well, that depends on your glass shape - circle or square), slip it inbetween the two pieces of glass, THEN submerge it. After the wax fills into the glass, you could pull the wire up, dragging any bubbles with it.

I'd thought of that exact thing but haven't had the chance to try it -- the wire I have here is a bit too short.

Another piece of advice/experience -- I find that dipping the glass into the wax verrry slowwwwly curtails a lot of bubble troubles. Doesn't eliminate them completely, but helps.

- jim

My previous post applies to the post before your last post. LOL! (Unless you post a post before I post this post.) :-)

Using that method would definately help eliminate the bubble problem but, as you mentioned, the difficulty would be keeping the glass together. I think it could be done in a shallow dish. One of the glasses would need the foil spacers "stuck" to it in some way. With distances this small, even glue would throw the spacing off. The best thing might be to have a large piece of aluminum - enough to form a "jacket" around the glass, leaving two sides folded over onto the top of the glass, providing the two spacer strips. The aluminum could be attached to the back of the glass some kind of way, leaving the two side strips just as they are.

Then you could just set that in the wax, aluminum side down, and set the top piece of glass over it. You would need to dip the top piece in such a way that it doesn't trap bubbles underneath. Then you would just set it over the top of the other glass so that it is alighed properly.

What would be nice in this type of setup is a pre-shaped holder (one that could be submerged in hot wax) that would keep the glass pieces in alignment.

Jim: I bet that's where I'm messing up. I'm just dropping the glass in there and hoping that the bubbles escape before the wax cools. THANKS! Easing the glass in slowly makes perfect sense.

You've got some good ideas there.

I was thinking that I could get the aluminum into the wax no problem -- I'd cut it in large enough pieces that I'd just have to move it to the edge of the bottom glass, and I'd then use the top glass to clamp down on the foil and flatten it out.

Then, it'd be a matter of using something weighted, with the approximate diameter of the glass pieces and with a soft surface so as to not scratch the glass -- place this ontop of the glass and let the wax harden.

I'm thinking I'd like to do all this in a tempered glass baking dish -- like the ones they advertise on TV that show food being cooked through a transparent surface. A small dish would be prefect.

With the pieces of glass separate of one another, I'd put them in the wax and then move them around, inspecting for bubbles before sandwiching it all together.

Hmmm... I need some more money to try all this out and the holidays have tapped me out until middle of next week.

- jim

Here's the initial, raw footage -- with minor color curves and correction, flipped (this is uploading now and I have to leave for work -- will be finished in about 1/2 hour):

http://ideaspora.net/grainless/wax_reference.avi

Here is my initial grain pattern image:

http://ideaspora.net/grainless/grain_pattern.png

I have a theory as to how Chris's technique can be replicated in Vegas, but haven't had the time to test it fully:

Three tracks.

On the top most, Copy 1 of a clip. In the middle, the grain pattern, inverted with heavy contrast to isolate the brighter parts and make the darker parts opaque. On the bottom, another copy of the same clip on the top track.

Use the mask generator so the top most track "punches through" the grain pattern where it is lightest to the footage below. Adjust the brightness 'til it looks right.

Render out.

Done.

- jim