Patrick Cooper

I might go back to the original idea of using ground glass between the light source and the slide. It might be safer for the slide compared to opaque plastic. Though I do have another query. Would there be much of an issue if there is some empty space on the left and right sides of the ground glass and above it as well? It would basically mean that there is some undiffused light passing around the ground glass into the lens. If this would likely cause issues, I guess I could place fill up that empty space with black foam. When sourcing glass, I could grab a cheap picture frame. Then convert it to ground glass.

Oh yea I'm sure that the polyethylene would have a limited life span being subjected to the heat. Though as I mentioned before, it wouldn't take much to replace it. Additionally, I'm planning to add a fan. I'll cut a small opening in the side of the rear box right next to the light and blow cold air directly in there. My only concern is ambient light getting into that opening (although obviously, I'll do the projecting in a darkened room.) I'll try and place the slide as far away from the light as possible while still getting a focused image. Ive just discovered that you can buy little compact battery operated fans. One or two of these could be placed inside the box. Though I'm not sure how powerful they are. They may only be very mild with their output but that's just a guess.

Good point about the perspex. Speaking of heat tolerance, do you think it would be risky to use the type of opaque plastic that some orange juice bottles are made of? By the way, this DIY slide projector is only a short term project. I doubt I'll use it for much more than a few slide shows. Maybe less. And the slide shows themselves would be relatively short with a small number of transparencies projected. I guess I could always replace the opaque plastic with another piece if it's affected by the heat. I think I might use alfoil for the reflector. .

I see the prices for ground glass are quite reasonable at Edmund Scientific. Looks like it's not quite straight forward to find small sheets of regular glass online. I wonder how perspex would fare if I rubbedd some silicone carbide powder on it. Over an hour ago, I did some testing with the Takumar 55mm f2 lens - projecting slides on to a white painted door with a small LED light. I'm quite impressed with this old M42 mount lens. Ive never mounted it on a camera but I like what I see with it's performance as a projection lens. Nice and sharp with good detail. But I can only see so much with the amount of ambient light around (not really a dark room.)

Unless I get one of those vertical stands for a light bulb with no shade = light in all directions.

Actually, ground glass and / or heat absorbing glass is going to raise the budget quite significantly for what was originally going to be a dirt cheap DIY project. Though I do know that some people convert regular glass to ground glass like this example here: Though he doesn't really mention if he does the other side of the glass or not. And actually, I was just thinking - a reflector behind the light may not be that effective in my set up. I would likely be using a desktop lamp which would be very directional. A lot of the light would be aimed in one direction - towards the slide.

Dan, the double convex lens I have certainly does have a larger diameter than the slide I'm projecting. Though yea the more simple approach is more attractive to me. And yes, I did consider the fire risk with the baking paper! I was once on set as an extra on the Australian movie Hey Hey It's Esther Blueberger and I could see smoke coming from a nearby light with a coloured gel attached. I could try and locate some ground glass. Do you reckon the gg could be effective in reducing heat from the light source? And yes, a good idea about having a reflector behind the light - just like with a conventional slide projector. I did manage to locate that Takumar 55mm lens but it turns out that it's f2 rather than f1.8 (my memory must be placing tricks on me.)

Previously, I made a camera obscura out of cardboard with a double convex lens. So I used that convex lens as a condenser lens last night for the DIY slide projector. I experimented with placing the slide and 50mm lens at different distances from the convex lens and got decent results. I couldn't see any difference when I varied the distance in small increments. Though when I removed the convex lens from the set up, I got a larger projected image (with just the 50mm lens and slide - moved closer to the light source.) The heat potentially damaging my Canon FD lens does have me concerned. I think I'll stop using it for this project. Somewhere I do have a Takumar 55mm lens that Ive never used. I could employ the Takumar for this project (if I can find it.) I think it might be the f1.8 version if I recall correctly. Though I haven't seen it in ages.

Ah yes, Ive just had a look online about slide projector components and indeed, a condenser lens is needed. Yea I could look online for a spare one or one from a broken projector. I guess I could purchase a convex lens from an online store (magnifying glass etc) though I guess it would need to be the right focal length. And I see that a diffusion panel is not required. Though I do plan on having a rather short, casual slide show with some family members fairly soon so my crude setup will have to do in the meantime. It does project a slide on a wall so that's the main thing. Obviously, the output won't be as good as a commercially made slide projector. I'll probably use a regular household bulb in a desktop lamp. I am a little worried that the slide will be positioned very close to the light. I guess having a short projection duration with each individual slide would be wise. I notice a lot of commercially made slide projectors have built in fans for the bulb. Would that simply be to extend the life span of the bulb or reduce the heat on the slide (Or both)?

Working on a project at the moment where I'm making a very basic, crude DIY slide projector with a few parts found around the home. Nothing fancy or elaborate. Sort of like a MacGyver slide projector (if he ever needed to make one.) A cardboard box with a circular hole cut out of it will be used to house the Canon FD 50mm f1.4 lens. I'll also make a cardboard stand for the slide to stand up vertically.Though I'm curious about the light source. Obviously, I want a nice, bright image projected. But I don't want a light that is so bright that it would cause harm to the slide. Most people know what happens when the film gets stuck in the gate of a movie projector. The stationary frame will burn. That actually happened to me once with a super 8 movie projector. I was running a film of mine where I had shot a time lapse sunset and I watched one of the frames freeze on screen and then burn. I stopped the projector straight away.Although I have used slide projectors in the past, Ive never taken a look inside them. Ive checked online and I notice some of them use 150w and 300w globes. Would there be any kind of diffusion panel to help project the slide? There's a youtube video on how to make a basic slide projector and they say one of the parts you need is a ground glass. But they don't actually mention how the ground glass is used. I'm assuming that the ground glass would be placed between the light source and the slide. I wonder if baking paper could be used instead as an alternative.The slide has to be very close to the light in order to get a focused image with the lens so it would be a pretty tight space for a diffusion panel.

Nic Cupac, a grip in the camera crew of the Indiana Jones 5 production, has died on location in Morocco. Apparently, he was found dead in his hotel room. https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/upcoming-movies/indiana-jones-5-crew-member-found-dead-on-location/news-story/621061f64797f3d302b93cd3cc4e809d

A really horrible ordeal. According to one report, Halyna Hutchins said that she couldn't feel her legs after the shooting. So clearly, she was conscious for some time after being shot.

The armorer and assistant director on the Rust production had both demonstrated unsafe work practices on previous films. Hannah Gutierrez fired a gun close to Nicholas Cage without any prior warning. Not surprisingly, the sound gave him a real shock. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/27/entertainment/armorer-rust-set/index.html And Dave Halls the AD had previously been fired on another film over gun safety issues. A crew member was injured in that incident. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59055138 So with those two fools being recruited in addition to the fast paced shooting schedule and the availability of live rounds for 'off hours' target practise, all the elements were there for a potentially tragic outcome. it was like an accident waiting to happen.

This article explains more. https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/prop-gun-used-by-alec-baldwin-was-used-by-crew-for-fun/news-story/ce9ced9ac9612921f2f67691dd43805c I'm sure this is going to haunt Alec Baldwin for the rest of his life.

It's been confirmed that members of the cast and crew were using a gun for target practise after hours. Hence the live rounds on set. Apparently, there were three guns on standby when the fatal accident occurred. And one of those guns was still loaded with live rounds (from the target practise.) The assistant director grabbed that particular gun (thinking it was 'cold') and handed it to Baldwin. And yea I know that blanks can be dangerous in certain circumstances. There was an actor who died from a shooting involving blanks on the set of an Australian music video a few years ago. But I don't think there's any doubt that real bullets were used in this latest accident on the Rust production. After all, the projectile passed right through the cinematographer (Halyna Hutchin) and then hit the director (Joel Souza) who was standing behind her.

I was wondering if there were many magazines around these days that accept submissions of short stories for payment? I know that during the 1970s, Stephen King submitted many short stories to adult mens magazines. Though I don't know if this is a thing anymore. The industry is somewhat different these days. I do have an interest in writing suspense and horror etc so I guess I would need to target publications that favour those kinds of themes.

Some disturbing news coming from Western Australia at the moment. A four year old girl has gone missing from a family's tent at a remote wilderness area by the coast. Apparently, the mother confirmed the girl was still inside the tent at 1:30am (when she was asking for a glass of water.) Though at 6.00am (when they woke up) they discovered that she was gone along with her sleeping bag. A massive search of the area was conducted by police and volunteers and no trace of the girl or the sleeping bag were found. She's been missing for about a week now and police are suspecting she may have been abducted. The WA premiere is offering $1 million to anyone with information about the missing girl. There were other people camping around the same area at the time of the disappearance who were questioned by police and they saw nothing unusual. It's like she vanished. https://www.news.com.au/national/western-australia/cleo-smiths-mum-ellie-makes-a-desperate-new-social-media-plea-for-missing-daughter/news-story/e75f0fa7c3811981e2dd9d158a881172 Edit: Something recent has come up. A car was spotted around 3:00am headed towards Carnarvon (where the family were camping. )

It sounds like there was another related accident on set prior to the fatal shooting. Earlier in the week, two rounds were accidentally fired by Alec Baldwin's stunt double from a gun that was thought to be 'cold' - in other words no live ammo was supposed to be in that weapon at the time. The state of gun safety on that set was obviously shocking.

Not really. The focal length doesn't really change. A 100mm lens will remain a 100mm lens regardless if it's mounted to a 70mm camera, 35mm camera or 16mm camera. What does change is the angle of view of the lens. Though I would agree that a 50mm lens (intended for a 35mm camera) would be considered a telephoto lens when mounted on a 16mm camera. And as to the original question, the film format has no bearing on what f stop or t stop you use. Just use your light meter like normal.

I had a really strong urge to get into large format quite a while ago but never took the plunge. I do admit there is amazing image quality with 4 x 5. I had the impression that field cameras were a lot more expensive than studio cameras? Yea there is great versatility with view cameras with the ability to attach MF backs etc. Though if I was shooting specifically MF film, I think I'd prefer a camera that was more compact - especially if I was travelling interstate or overseas.

So I haven't shot medium format film for a long time. In the past, I used a Yashica D TLR with Yashinon lenses and a Koni Omega Rapid. They were both obtained very cheaply and allowed me to get into medium format on a very small budget. Both cameras have produced some nice images but they do have their limitations. I had a large print of a landscape image produced by the Koni Omega that won Second Prize in a 2008 art exhibition and also sold at the same exhibition. That same image also won a competition in a photography magazine. Though I admit that I have sort of a love / hate relationship with this camera. I have had reliability issues with it which has led to some very frustrating experiences. I am on the lookout for an MF camera that will offer me more versatility and is also reliable as well. I think Ive decided on an SLR. I would really like to make use of the 6 x 7cm format to have that edge with image quality (especially when doing enlargements.) The two obvious choices for SLRs with that particular film size would be the Pentax 67 and the Mamiya RB67. Unfortunately, the prices are still insanely high on the used market. So I may have to consider something else. What other options would there be? I could consider 6 x 6cm. To be honest, I'm not very keen on 6 x 4.5cm because of that smaller frame size. Then again, when you crop 6 x 6cm to a rectangle, you'd end up with something very close to 6 x 4.5cm so maybe I'm being a bit silly. Even so, 6 x 4.5cm would be very low down in my preferences. Apart from the single lens reflex design, some of the other features I would like are a selection of good quality optics (interchangeable lenses), mirror lock up and a B or T setting with a mechanical shutter. I would also like a wide angle lens which has roughly the equivalent field of view as a 24mm in 35mm format. So for 6 x 7cm, that would be about 45mm and for 6 x 6cm, it would be about 40mm. I have looked at the Bronica SLR cameras. Though a lot of them appear to have electronically controlled shutters. I would be happier with a mechanical shutter because I would be doing lots of long exposures and it would be nice to do so without batteries. I don't suppose there would be any Bronica models that would have a mechanical shutter in addition to mirror lock up? I haven't really looked at Hasselblad because I would imagine they would still be crazily expensive. Regardless, I do realise that with whatever camera system I get, a MF wide angle lens with the equivalent fov of a 24mm is going to be fairly pricey.

Today, in my family's kitchen, I discovered a large glass bowl tucked away in a cupboard which has a nice curvey shape. Very deep too. It looks roughly about 50cm in diameter or close to that. I think this thing has potential.

You do see satellite dishes on the occasional roof here in Australian suburbs. Though I don't think Ive ever seen one in thrift stores or garage sales. The only scond hand ones Ive seen have been on eBay. Yea those solar cookers are really tempting. And I see some of them are reasonably priced. Though the only possible downside with them is that I notice the focal point is often outside of the dish. And obviously with sound recording, it would be preferable to have the focal point inside the dish to protect against wind noise and other extraneous sounds. Though I guess that's always a risk with adapting any item for this kind of application. There's always the chance that the focal point could be outside of the dish. I'm not sure of the maths involved for working out the focal point for any random curved object. I guess it's a combination of the diameter and the depth.

Thanks for the replies and suggestions. There is a youtube videos which shows someone testing their cardboard parabolic dish. The guy did a comparison test with and without the dish (recording audio of white noise.) And there was a very noticeable boost in amplification with the cardboard dish vs without. I'm not sure about the presence of low frequencies with that kind of sound source. Though yea harder material would be even better, I would imagine. The fibreglass suggestion sounds like a good one. Ive actually never worked with this stuff before. Is it straight forward to apply? Yea I would need a mold of some kind. There was another guy on youtube who used a mound of rocks and then layed cement over that and shaped it.Probably overkill. I wonder if I could use clay instead though that would probably require a huge amount of clay. The yoga exercise ball is also a good idea.

I'm thinking of getting hold of a parabolic dish for recording the sounds of nature outdoors like bird calls. Though instead of purchasing a commercially made one, I'd like to go the low budget DIY route and obtain a cheap house old item that has the same basic shape and convert that. I thought locating such an item would be quite easy but I'm having a hard time finding something suitable. Ive spent ages looking on eBay and although Ive found a number of items on there that have the shape of a parabolic dish, they are all very small. The largest one I found was a lid for a kitchen pot but it was only 40cm in diameter. Ive also considered trash can lids but they tend to be cone shaped rather than curved. Any suggestions for other items to look out for that would do the job? I am in Australia by the way so there might be some things here available here that could be suitable. Ive also looked at second hand satellite dishes on eBay but a lot of them are not very deep and in some cases, almost flat. Plus many are sold interstate and are 'pick-up only' with regards to payment transactions. If all else fails, I could try making a parabolic dish out of thick cardboard though obviously, that wouldn't be as good as one made of stiffer / harder material. I would probably use an omnidirectional microphone with it.