Hi,

I'm working on an "installation" with the new 3D World viewers. I
measured the LED strips at 2.85 volts and 150ma. I'm gunna try 3.0V
direct to the strips - i.e. not thru the voltage regulator. Any
cautionary tales?

Also, has anyone used these in a permanently on mode? I doubt that at
0.3 watts anything is going to get hot, but still, any cautions?

Thanks,

John

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "John Hart" wrote:

>

0.3 watts anything is going to get hot,

errrrrr I meant ~0.5 watts....

John

John Hart wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm working on an "installation" with the new 3D World viewers. I
> measured the LED strips at 2.85 volts and 150ma. I'm gunna try 3.0V
> direct to the strips - i.e. not thru the voltage regulator. Any
> cautionary tales?
>
> Also, has anyone used these in a permanently on mode?

I would expect no problem running them in constant-on mode.

How are you going to mount them (or are you)?

Why would you bother to bypass the regulator?

Check the list archives for my tale of woe concerning the
upper-end voltage to apply.
--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:

> I would expect no problem running them in constant-on mode.

Right. Good.

> How are you going to mount them (or are you)?

On goosenecks a la Franklin Londin....... (not quite as fancy a base
though). 8 units. Probably will bring it to NSA2009 (you should come
:-).

> Why would you bother to bypass the regulator?

Because I have a 12 volt supply (via an external disc drive), and it
seems wasteful to step down to 5 volts at 1.2 amps. So I can put 2 x
4 in series with just a little current draw (.3 amps). Plus the
panels unplugs from the regulatosr and I can then plug them directly
into my power input cables - just a little cleaner, maybe.

Thanks, John

John...

Silly question: why not go with the rotary 10 view rig??

ron labbe
studio 3D

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "John Hart" wrote:
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:
>
> > I would expect no problem running them in constant-on mode.
> Right. Good.
>
> > How are you going to mount them (or are you)?
> On goosenecks a la Franklin Londin....... (not quite as fancy a base
> though). 8 units. Probably will bring it to NSA2009 (you should come
> :-).
>
> > Why would you bother to bypass the regulator?
>
> Because I have a 12 volt supply (via an external disc drive), and it
> seems wasteful to step down to 5 volts at 1.2 amps. So I can put 2 x
> 4 in series with just a little current draw (.3 amps). Plus the
> panels unplugs from the regulatosr and I can then plug them directly
> into my power input cables - just a little cleaner, maybe.
>
> Thanks, John
>

ron labbe wrote:

>John Hart said he would mount his viewers...
>> On goosenecks a la Franklin Londin....... (not quite as fancy a base
>> though). 8 units. Probably will bring it to NSA2009 (you should come
>> :-).

> Silly question: why not go with the rotary 10 view rig??

While I am not the John of whom the question was asked, I
can think of a couple reasons, Ron.

A) The rotary viewer is non-focusing
B) The gooseneck arrangement permits simultaneous viewing by
as many people as there are viewers
C) I question the robustness of the rotary viewer and it's
ability to maintain alignment over the long-term.
D) Gooseneck-mounted viewers look kewler than the rotary
E) The gooseneck-mounted viewers can accommodate more
viewing heights and angles.

--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:

>
> John...
>
> Silly question: why not go with the rotary 10 view rig??
>
> ron labbe
> studio 3D

Because they are butt ugly ;-).

Or, I really liked the design of having multiple stations so people
don't have to stand and wait, the MF viewers can be focused, cost is
similar, etc.

John

John and John...

You (both) state that focus ability of the lighted MF hand viewer is a
plus, but in public I view it as a MINUS. Joe plumber will look in,
see an out of focus image and move on. Few will figure out that the
image can be focused. You want to give those viewing the least
options: no focus, no interocular. AND, the rotary viewer stand does
go up and down at the touch of a button (sort of). AND for 10 images
there is only ONE pair of lenses to keep clean. If the "ugly" factor
is too high, I'd work on that! (black paint?)

ron labbe
studio 3D

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "John Hart" wrote:
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:
> >
> > John...
> >
> > Silly question: why not go with the rotary 10 view rig??
> >
> > ron labbe
> > studio 3D
>
> Because they are butt ugly ;-).
>
> Or, I really liked the design of having multiple stations so people
> don't have to stand and wait, the MF viewers can be focused, cost is
> similar, etc.
>
> John
>

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:

> AND, the rotary viewer stand does
> go up and down at the touch of a button (sort of).

I agree with everything else you said, but the stand does not go
easily up and down. I can see someone knocking it down trying to play
with that mechanism. A better approach would be to install an
adjustable chair in front of the unit. A still better approach would
be for 3D World to move the viewer to a 45 degree angle.
Steve

A guy here in Cleveland Ohio, has added weights in the stand and the
viewer is a lot sturdier.

George

True, the height adjustment is lame (why I said "sort of"). The best
solution, I think, would be a desktop stand (which could easily be
made). I'd heard that was going to be an option, but so far it hasn't
materialized.

ron labbe
studio 3D

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "coronet3d" wrote:
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:
> > AND, the rotary viewer stand does
> > go up and down at the touch of a button (sort of).
>
> I agree with everything else you said, but the stand does not go
> easily up and down. I can see someone knocking it down trying to play
> with that mechanism. A better approach would be to install an
> adjustable chair in front of the unit. A still better approach would
> be for 3D World to move the viewer to a 45 degree angle.
> Steve
>

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:

>
> John and John...
>
> You (both) state that focus ability of the lighted MF hand viewer

is a

> plus, but in public I view it as a MINUS. Joe plumber will look in,
> see an out of focus image and move on. Few will figure out that the
> image can be focused. You want to give those viewing the least
> options: no focus, no interocular.

I concur with Ron on that point. Some years ago, I had put together
a display at a trade fair and used six Franka viewers that have a
focusing knob on top. Even though I tried to make the knob
difficult to access, some still managed to get to it and and play
with the focus, making the images totally blurry to others who
didn't know how to correct this.

Francois

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogro ups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:
>
> John and John...
>
> You (both) state that focus ability of the lighted MF hand viewer
is a
> plus, but in public I view it as a MINUS. Joe plumber will look in,
> see an out of focus image and move on. Few will figure out that the
> image can be focused. You want to give those viewing the least
> options: no focus, no interocular.

I concur with Ron on that point. Some years ago, I had put together
a display at a trade fair and used six Franka viewers that have a
focusing knob on top. Even though I tried to make the knob
difficult to access, some still managed to get to it and and play
with the focus, making the images totally blurry to others who
didn't know how to correct this.

Francois

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Schlesinger" wrote:

>
> How about using a nice big sign with an arrow that says FOCUS HERE
> :-)

Yikes, I'm not sure Joe the Plumber could figure that out.

John

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "John Hart" wrote:

>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Schlesinger" wrote:
> >
> > How about using a nice big sign with an arrow that says FOCUS HERE
> > :-)
>
>
> Yikes, I'm not sure Joe the Plumber could figure that out.
>
> John
>

You would be surprised how little most peole do figure out when it
comes to anything photographic. You think most people understand
what "focus" means, right ? Well take a look at most pictures on eBay
and you will find they don't !

Francois

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "depthcam" wrote:

> You would be surprised how little most peole do figure out when it
> comes to anything photographic. You think most people understand
> what "focus" means, right ? Well take a look at most pictures on
> eBay and you will find they don't !

I'm not worried about Ebay - macros are hard to make. I forgive the
sellers. Those folks who show up at my intended MF venues will know
how to focus. This has turned into a silly thread (and question, as
Ron originally stated).

BTW, Francois, you never told me where I could buy the TX1 for $170.
Now my Christmas is ruined :-(

John

coronet3d wrote:

>
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogro ups.com
> , "ron labbe" wrote:
> > AND, the rotary viewer stand does
> > go up and down at the touch of a button (sort of).
>
> I agree with everything else you said, but the stand does not go
> easily up and down. I can see someone knocking it down trying to play
> with that mechanism. A better approach would be to install an
> adjustable chair in front of the unit. A still better approach would
> be for 3D World to move the viewer to a 45 degree angle.

An adjustable chair? I think that's pretty dependent on the
installation. In A gallery with people walking around, a bar
stool may not be a welcome item.

And angled viewers? Icky. IMnsHO, the only time a viewer should
be set at an angle is when the camera was set at that angle. To
spend time composing, exposing and mounting images and then
forcing people to view them at the wrong angle seems counter
productive.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska

Ron,

I agree.  I think one reason 3D never took off was the 'fiddle-factor'.  KISS.

I've had someone look in my viewer and sort of give a fake enthusiastic reply.  Then I noticed they had closed their left eye while holding the viewer up to their face.  They said they always do this with binoculars, etc.  Of course they can't see what I am talking about!

Aaron

ron labbe wrote:

John and John...

You (both) state that focus ability of the lighted MF hand viewer is a
plus, but in public I view it as a MINUS. Joe plumber will look in,
see an out of focus image and move on. Few will figure out that the
image can be focused. You want to give those viewing the least
options: no focus, no interocular. AND, the rotary viewer stand does
go up and down at the touch of a button (sort of). AND for 10 images
there is only ONE pair of lenses to keep clean. If the "ugly" factor
is too high, I'd work on that! (black paint?)

ron labbe
studio 3D

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogro ups.com, "John Hart" wrote:
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogro ups.com, "ron labbe" wrote:
> >
> > John...
> >
> > Silly question: why not go with the rotary 10 view rig??
> >
> > ron labbe
> > studio 3D
>
> Because they are butt ugly ;-).
>
> Or, I really liked the design of having multiple stations so people
> don't have to stand and wait, the MF viewers can be focused, cost is
> similar, etc.
>
> John
>