where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
Soap, the flash is hotter on the bottom than the top. I think that's pretty unavoidable with a single-speedlight, DIY ring flash.
I realize I blew out the 1/1 shot...
You can see from the 1/16, the bottom is hotter than the top. You can see this in the catchlights as well. I really don't know how to avoid such a problem, though, except to perhaps put another layer of diffusing material on the bottom, or to own a second flash and rig it to come from the top (expensive and time consuming, haha).
A million thanks for the two shots.
It's not nearly as uneven as I had feared. I must build one!
Seriously, a million thanks.
EDIT: Did you go all out and use metallic duct tape, or did you go for a white interior?
I am going to build one too, I don't think that 2 flashes will help that much, more power and weight
Pete
I'm likely to 2-flash it, need to see if I can't make a dummy panel to fill the hole for one flash use. I don't want it for macro, rather as a catchlight. Which is why I was particularly concerned regarding its reflected appearance. I sincerely doubt that hot spot would be visible in many lighting situation at all.
About everyone who owns a Fx camera and a 10.5mm f2.8 simultaneously (and nerves of steel) has sawed off the fixed lens hood...
"I tried to make my own Macro light from a round LED camp light, did not have enough power and gave a very blue color to things, wrong white balance."
A friend of mine does video production and he has recently purchased some powerful led's from Japan. They run off a lithium ion battery pack and they have a remote controller that can be used to alter their temperature! He gets hours of use from one charge.
I have made some reflectors/diffusers using white opaque shower curtains stretched over an artist's canvas frame.
They work either as a diffuser when the light shines through and they also reflect.
It's possible to obtain many different colours and effects in this way and it's very budget friendly.
Made the same light from a camping LED lamp and weak and blue color tone
Pete
I made a "Rorslett Ring" - that is I added a chip to an old M extension ring with electronics from a broken AF 20/2.8. This is very handy to use with my old 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor, a bellows, or a telescope. I just set the camera to aperture priority and f2.8 and I can put anything on a D3000 or D90 and it meters just fine ... iTTL flash, too. Looking for some giant lenses to hack to use with this.
I added an F mount to a Rodenstock XR Heligon 68/1.4 for when I want to get really weird up close.
I'm currently building an 8x10 "Hobo" style box camera with a surplus Metrogon 152mm. Looking for the right Packard shutter for that one. Will probably shoot Ortho 25 film and pt/pd print. No darkroom or enlarger needed.
OK, long time without posts here - maybe yous guys are all so rich you don't have to get your hands dirty ;^/
I have yinged and yanged over a pano head for ages and finally decided they are all silly money. This is what $25 in drinking vouchers can get you:
There is a third piece which enables my D90 to fit without removing the MB-D10 but I placed a hole to allow my sweet lil' D5000 to fit using only the two pieces. It is made out of 3/16 stainless and is stiff as heck. The QD plate of my SLIK is useful because it is round and so convenient for rotating around. Shame the tripod is sooo heavy! I have to find a cheap panoramic plate for my lightweight (read twangy) Manfrotto.
C'mon guys - what are you making?
That looks really well done, Andrew. Do you want to sell me one?
I might be eventually modifying a tripod my father found so that it works with cameras.
It's quite heavy, so it might have been used for video at one time. My issue is that there's no ballhead and I'm not home to take photos of it so you guys can share your knowledge with me.
It looks quite sturdy though.
I found a pair of x-ray lenses on eBay and epoxied them onto Nikon extension tubes.
One is a 50mm f/0.75 and the other is a 77mm f/1.1. Neither one can focus so they're essentially dedicated macro lenses. The focal distance is somewhere between 3 and 6 inches. The depth of field on the 50mm f/0.75 is literally paper-thin while the 77 f/1.1 is a little more manageable. With the 50, just breathing will push the subject out of focus!
Because they were never designed for photography, they produce some unique images. I took them to the Botanical Garden in DC and came away with some shots I really love.
http://www.skolnikphotography.com/gallery/botanicalgarden/index.html
x-ray lenses??
I made a Studio set-up years ago out of galvanised electricians conduit, very cheaply.
I made a snoot out of a plastic tractor PTO guard, the farm supply shop gave it to me.
Recently I made a pano' head, although it still needs work and is no where as good as spraynprays. It does enable me to shoot in portrait mode and attaches to my macro focus rail so I can get the nodal point in the right place.
I have made lots of small diffusers for the built in flash of my D300, some out of coffee mugs, but found bubble wrap works best. (Emergency use only).
I have a small macro table... well actually it's quite large, made out of plastic low pressure plumbing pipes and connectors. It has a perspex top and I made it the same size as my 90cm light cube and also I can shine a light up from underneath it. It is also collapsible, I had to colour code the joints as it has cross brackets too to make it really sturdy.
I have lots of assorted clamps for holding small reflectors or keeping flower stems still out doors. I used stiff electrical cable of various diameters and some times had to plait them to make them study enough for larger reflectors.
I needed an LCD magnifier/shade for my D80 and the Hoodman seemed kinda pricey (as well as a bit delicate, according to some reviews), so being the cheapskate that I am I cobbled one together from an old Coastar 35mm slide viewer. I held the viewer and a ruler up to the camera's LCD so I could get a measurement of the focus distance, then just built a skirt of the proper depth out of many layers of shipping labels, It has functioned quite well for the last couple of years and after knocking around in my camera bag it's proved to be more durable than it looks.
heartyfisher said:
x-ray lenses??
As near as I can figure, they were used in an x-ray machine or some other medical imaging device. The ultra-fast apertures picked up just about any light that came their way. They obviously weren't designed with photography in mind. While it certainly limits their use, it also makes them a unique and fun toy to play with.
As far as I know, X-ray machines just consist of an emitter bulb and a sheet of film upon which the shadow is cast... I don't think they use lenses. However, I've seen some overhead projectors with extremely fast, fixed-focus lenses.
bhoveyga said:
As far as I know, X-ray machines just consist of an emitter bulb and a sheet of film upon which the shadow is cast... I don't think they use lenses.
Yes, there is nothing one would recognize as an optical lens which would have any bending effect on the path of x-rays.
An example of the sort of mirror array used to focus x-rays:
Unless you're an EM physicist (I sure as hell ain't) take what you think you know about how light behaves and throw it out the window when talking about the higher-energy forms.
Testing123 said:
Unless you're an EM physicist (I sure as hell ain't) take what you think you know about how light behaves and throw it out the window when talking about the higher-energy forms.
Absolutely true, T123. About ten years ago I worked for a short time in a research group that was making multilayer x-ray optics to work at higher angle of incidence (as opposed to the kind you have posted, which are all designed for grazing incidence). I was helping characterize the junk that would form on the mirrors after they were removed from the sputter system and put in protective cases.
I just talked to someone who spent last summer interning in that same group and they're still at it trying new materials with different dielectric properties, so it was not easy work. I think the group did have one mirror launched on a nasa mission that they made for an instrument from some group in Arizona.
tferroato said:
I've also heard CRT?
I think CRT 'optics' are electron optics (based on electrostatic force from charged plates).
You must log in to post.
