Header banner

MF3D-group Conversations Photos Files All groups About
<< Previous Thread DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS Next Thread >>

Subject: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-18 19:08:10
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Group,
 
Perhaps a few of you know me.  I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable.  I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel.  I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions.  I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
 
At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length.  I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
 
Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry Heyda
 
 
www.freewebs.com/larryeda
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 07:10:21
From: David W. Kesner
Hello Larry,

> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Will your design accept both the cardboard mounts and the 3DWorld plastic
mounts?

Thanks,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA
www.dddphotography.com
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 07:26:42
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi David,
 
Yes, I'd like to make the viewers so they will accept all mounts. It would help me if someone could send me one sample of each mount other than the 3DWorld mount, which I have.  I aim to please, and I want this viewer to appeal to the widest audience.
 
I can give my address to anyone who can send me any alternative mount they'd like to use in this viewer.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:10 AM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

Hello Larry,

> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Will your design accept both the cardboard mounts and the 3DWorld plastic
mounts?

Thanks,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA
www.dddphotography.com

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 09:21:47
From: Don Mattox
Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGG
I use a keystone Visual Survey Telebinocular (the same as used for drivers tests) for viewing stereo prints. It could easily be used to view transparencies with the addition of a back lighted holder. The optics are great and the mechanism is very adaptable.

I got the viewer at a garage sale for $5. They are on eBay under telebinocular.

Don
--
Donald M. Mattox
Management Plus, Inc.
71 Pinon Hill Place NE
Albuquerque, NM  87122-1914

Telephone 505/856-6810
FAX 505/856-6716
E-mail donmattox@mpinm.com
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 09:34:40
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Don,
 
I also have a Visual Survey Telebinoclur.  It is the very best viewer for stereoviews!
 
I never considered using it for medium format, so this is a new idea. I suspect some MF folks might say that the prism-style lenses used in the large format viewers like this one might not be as good as the round lenses used for the 3DWorld style viewers, but I don't really know if this is true.
 
Might it not be best to use round lenses when you can, instead of lenses that spread your vision?  I don't know the answer to this question.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Mattox
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

I use a keystone Visual Survey Telebinocular (the same as used for drivers tests) for viewing stereo prints. It could easily be used to view transparencies with the addition of a back lighted holder. The optics are great and the mechanism is very adaptable.

I got the viewer at a garage sale for $5. They are on eBay under telebinocular.

Don
--
Donald M. Mattox
Management Plus, Inc.
71 Pinon Hill Place NE
Albuquerque, NM  87122-1914

Telephone 505/856-6810
FAX 505/856-6716
E-mail donmattox@mpinm.com

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 09:52:50
From: Bob Aldridge
Yes, the telebinocular is designed for stereoviews with infinity spacing of around 3 1/2 inches whilst medium format views tend to have an infinity spacing of nearer 2 1/2 inches...

I'm sure many people can view MF slides with the optics in a telebinocular, but large circular lenses have tended to be the way with MF viewers.

The large optics, have allowed many viewers to dispense with an interocular adjustment, though there have been many people making a case for including the mechanism anyway...

Bob Aldridge

On 19/09/2012 16:34, Lawrence Heyda wrote:
 

Hi Don,
 
I also have a Visual Survey Telebinoclur.  It is the very best viewer for stereoviews!
 
I never considered using it for medium format, so this is a new idea. I suspect some MF folks might say that the prism-style lenses used in the large format viewers like this one might not be as good as the round lenses used for the 3DWorld style viewers, but I don't really know if this is true.
 
Might it not be best to use round lenses when you can, instead of lenses that spread your vision?  I don't know the answer to this question.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Mattox
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

I use a keystone Visual Survey Telebinocular (the same as used for drivers tests) for viewing stereo prints. It could easily be used to view transparencies with the addition of a back lighted holder. The optics are great and the mechanism is very adaptable.

I got the viewer at a garage sale for $5. They are on eBay under telebinocular.



Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 09:55:16
From: George Themelis
> Might it not be best to use round lenses when you can, instead of lenses
> that spread your vision? I don't know the answer to this question.

Well, it is really simple: Do you need to "spread your vision"? In medium
format slides you do not, because the spacing of the images is equal or less
to the spacing of the eyes. So the "round" lenses are perfectly fine. In
stereoviews you do (because the spacing of the images is wider than the
spacing of the eyes), so you need the prismatic lenses.

George
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 10:05:35
From: Linda N
Hi, Larry. I am very glad to hear that you are working on this, especially since the 3D world lighted focusing viewer is no being made. I believe that there are only two overall sizes of MF stereo mounts, the larger plastic ones and smaller cardboard foldovers (white or black with various size apertures). Which version of the 3D world mount do you have? I could send you some sample mounts if you need them. I understand that the earliest 3D world mounts and the Holga mounts are no good, but the two more recent versions of the 3D world mounts are fine (with revisions recommended by Sam Smith). -Linda
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Lawrence Heyda <larryeda@nc.rr.com> wrote:
 
Hi David,
 
Yes, I'd like to make the viewers so they will accept all mounts. It would help me if someone could send me one sample of each mount other than the 3DWorld mount, which I have.  I aim to please, and I want this viewer to appeal to the widest audience.
 
I can give my address to anyone who can send me any alternative mount they'd like to use in this viewer.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 9:10 AM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

Hello Larry,

> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Will your design accept both the cardboard mounts and the 3DWorld plastic
mounts?

Thanks,

David W. Kesner
Boise, Idaho, USA
www.dddphotography.com


Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 10:58:37
From: John Thurston
On 9/18/2012 5:09 PM, Lawrence Heyda wrote:
> Hi Group,
> ... I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts . ..

errmm. I'm very flattered, Larry, but that label isn't
really justified. There are many here with just as much (and
in many cases more) experience and knowledge than I have.
I'm sure that bringing your query here to the list will be a
tremendous gain to your project. I'm not aware of any other
similar internet gathering point for MF3Ders.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 10:58:58
From: John Thurston
On 9/19/2012 8:05 AM, Linda N wrote:
> Hi, Larry. I am very glad to hear that you are working on this, especially
> since the 3D world lighted focusing viewer is no being made. I believe that
> there are only two overall sizes of MF stereo mounts, the larger plastic
> ones and smaller cardboard foldovers (white or black with various size
> apertures).

I have a sample around here of one sent to me from Europe.
It is, as I recall, an all metal mount and much smaller than
80x132. I'll try to find it and take its dimensions.

To those Europeans among us, do y'all already have that
information handy?

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 11:19:53
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi John,

There may be others, John, but you have been the most generous with your
copious outpourings of internet material complete with instructions,
pictures, sources, etc. Where else would one turn to get detailed
information on the guts of the 3DWorld viewers?

Hope you are right about the 75mm focal length-- I'm about to spend big
money on 50 lenses! (minimum order!) Yikes!

Many thanks!

Larry


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Thurston" <juneau3d@thurstons.us>
To: <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS


> On 9/18/2012 5:09 PM, Lawrence Heyda wrote:
>> Hi Group,
>> ... I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a
>> steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the
>> expert of experts . ..
>
> errmm. I'm very flattered, Larry, but that label isn't
> really justified. There are many here with just as much (and
> in many cases more) experience and knowledge than I have.
> I'm sure that bringing your query here to the list will be a
> tremendous gain to your project. I'm not aware of any other
> similar internet gathering point for MF3Ders.
>
> John Thurston
> Juneau, Alaska
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 14:28:20
From: Ted
This is great news Larry. Thanks! I met you in Atlanta a few years ago when you visited and gave a demo of the 3DAdvantage to the Atlanta Stereographic Association. It was a very informative and well presented demonstration.

I would like to see an interocular adjustment with the viewer. I didn't think that I would ever need that feature on a MF viewer, but I got Lasik surgery about 4 years ago and all of that changed. I used to be nearsighted and after the surgery, I had a harder time diverging my eyes. Some of my own views, which I had no problem viewing before, were noticably less easy to view. I could get away without that feature but it would be a nice-to-have.

Good luck!

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Group,
>
> Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
>
> At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
>
> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry Heyda
>
>
> www.freewebs.com/larryeda
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 14:35:13
From: narjan@pipeline.com
The following is probably TOO much of a challenge,
BUT, there are a number of us who may have MF images
on PAIRS of Gepe mounts, which, even if overlapped
slightly, have wider centers than the dual MF mounts
most commonly encountered.

Go for it !

Best Wishes,
John Billingham
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 17:04:02
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Ted,
 
Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would probably satisfy aklmost every IPD, I thought, "Why go to the trouble? (and trouble it will be with such big lenses).  So, at this point, I'm thinking not to design for adjustable.  If I hear more votes in favor.of it, I could be persuaded to change my mind, though.  At least the steal the light viewer will NOT be adjustable, and I'll make those first, so if you get one and try it, maybe you'll find that it works fine for you with the 50mm lenses.  They are SO much bigger than the lenses on the 3DWorld viewer.  You might find them easy to use.
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Ted
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:28 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

This is great news Larry. Thanks! I met you in Atlanta a few years ago when you visited and gave a demo of the 3DAdvantage to the Atlanta Stereographic Association. It was a very informative and well presented demonstration.

I would like to see an interocular adjustment with the viewer. I didn't think that I would ever need that feature on a MF viewer, but I got Lasik surgery about 4 years ago and all of that changed. I used to be nearsighted and after the surgery, I had a harder time diverging my eyes. Some of my own views, which I had no problem viewing before, were noticably less easy to view. I could get away without that feature but it would be a nice-to-have.

Good luck!

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Group,
>
> Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
>
> At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
>
> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry Heyda
>
>
> www.freewebs.com/larryeda
>

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 17:07:19
From: Lawrence Heyda

Hi John,
 
I just knew somebody would come up something way different. A challenge indeed.  Hmm...maybe I can make a special version for those who really want to use the Gepe pairs.  If you can send me a sample, it will help.
 
Knd regards,
 
Larry
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

The following is probably TOO much of a challenge,
BUT, there are a number of us who may have MF images
on PAIRS of Gepe mounts, which, even if overlapped
slightly, have wider centers than the dual MF mounts
most commonly encountered.

Go for it !

Best Wishes,
John Billingham

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 18:12:16
From: imn23dru
Hi Larry,

Great to hear you are interested in making a viewer. I'm confident whatever design you end up with will be a winner.

I no longer shoot MF3D but of course have many, many images I would like to share in the future. A better mousetrap is always welcome.

That said you know you will never please everyone. As my collection includes not only modern images but vintage ones, a design that is adaptable is a preference for me. I also would like to consider using an iPhone or similar device to switch from true film images to digital side-by-side. Having the back/holder interchangeable would be a benefit.

Wish you the best of luck. If you need more lenses or back panels I still have some left from my Regal MF3D viewer run a few years ago.

Best of Luck,

Sam Smith

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Group,
>
> Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
>
> At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
>
> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry Heyda
>
>
> www.freewebs.com/larryeda
>
Subject: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 18:37:30
From: Philip Steinman
Hi Group,

Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.

At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Kind regards,

Larry Heyda

Sounds like you are off to a great start Larry.

I have and built the famous Saturn Viewer, which
I love, because it is so beautiful and delivers
great images.  Then I progressed to the 3DWorld
viewer which stumped me because I bought
several of them from John Hart (when he came
back from one of his China visits).  For only
$30 (China true cost.. thanks John!)
this has to be the best 3D viewer for the cost
ever.  (Because it's MF it's even a better viewing experience
than my Comby 35mm 3D viewer.. one of the best built
viewers ever..
http://www.dewijs-3d.com/Combi_viewer/Combi_UK.html
 
The 3DWorld lenses are great, better than my Saturn
achromatics, and it takes both the thick plastic mounts
I get in the MF folios and the cardboard ones I use.
If you can improve this viewer with some thought
about suggestions you get here, you'll have a winner.
Those that didn't get the 3DWorld viewer when it was
available really missed out.

Be sure to check out some of the old posts on this
group, especially when the 3DWorld viewer debut'd in '08
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MF3D-group/messages/2319?viscount=-30&l=1

and I still love my Saturn viewer because I built it ;-)
Nothing quite like telling people, I made this 3D MF image,
and built the viewer (great design.. thanks Alan Lewis!)

Cheers,
Philip
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 19:26:08
From: Lawrence Heyda
SAM!
 
So good to hear from you!  And thank you for the encouragement!  You are one of my very favorite 3D people.  Maybe it's because you are also an artist and love creating fascinating viewers that not only work well but are aesthetically exciting?  Anyway, so good to get your email.
 
Another new option--make it adaptable with an IPhone.   Wow, I had no idea there would be such a wide range of suggestions.  Bill G's ideas REALLY blew me away.  He was talikng about giant 5 and 6 element lenses for a viewer in the $7K range!
 Quite a stimulating idea.
 
Sure apprciate your confidence in me.  I hope I can meet your expectations.
 
Here is where I am so far:
 
I have a company in China ready to make 50mm diameter 75mm fl achromats BBAR coated for much less than Edmund, and I have a company in CA ready to build a LED edge lit panel like the 3DWorld one for around $30 each.  I think I'm going with this, unless I hear any major objections.  The Chinese company already sent me 3 samples of their achromats and they look very good.  I can't really test them for tolerances, though.  Do you think I would have to build in adjustable IO if the lenses are 50mm diameter?
 
Thanks for your offer to sell me some of your extra lenses and panels.  This is very generous of you, but I am getting locked into this 50mm size, and I need to design my viewer for only one size lens, so I better stick with that.
 
I have been getting into jewelry combined with sculpture. Last year I teamed up with a business partner in India and designed a jeweled automoton of Hanuman, one of the heroes in the Indian epic Mahabharat.  The figure is 5" high, and almost all gold, with diamonds,rubies, sapphires, etc.  We have sold two so far.  The wholsale price is $80,000.  I'm making the second one right now for the customer.  You can see a photo gallery of the piece on our website:  www.divineheritagecollection.com  I would like to utilize the techniques I learned doing this piece to make a very high end viewer some day.....
 
What are you doing now?  Would love to hear more about you.
 
Kindest regards,
 
Larry
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: imn23dru
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:12 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

Hi Larry,

Great to hear you are interested in making a viewer. I'm confident whatever design you end up with will be a winner.

I no longer shoot MF3D but of course have many, many images I would like to share in the future. A better mousetrap is always welcome.

That said you know you will never please everyone. As my collection includes not only modern images but vintage ones, a design that is adaptable is a preference for me. I also would like to consider using an iPhone or similar device to switch from true film images to digital side-by-side. Having the back/holder interchangeable would be a benefit.

Wish you the best of luck. If you need more lenses or back panels I still have some left from my Regal MF3D viewer run a few years ago.

Best of Luck,

Sam Smith

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Group,
>
> Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
>
> At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
>
> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry Heyda
>
>
> www.freewebs.com/larryeda
>

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 19:56:58
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Phillip,
 
Great to hear your enthusiastic praise for the 3DWorld viewer.  I also thought it was really well designed when I borrowed one three weeks ago.  A lot of thought went into that baby.  Of course, since then I've tempered my opinions after hearing some high level critiques from John Thurston and others, but I'm still very impressed by the overall look of it, the light weight and the clever engineering inside.  This viewer, coupled with the many helpful suggestions from group members, has inspired me a lot, and I feel pretty well equipped now to make something that might appeal to the MF shooters and viewers out there.  Let us hope the muse won't abandon me...
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
 
 ----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 8:37 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

Hi Group,

Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.

At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions.

Kind regards,

Larry Heyda

Sounds like you are off to a great start Larry.

I have and built the famous Saturn Viewer, which
I love, because it is so beautiful and delivers
great images.  Then I progressed to the 3DWorld
viewer which stumped me because I bought
several of them from John Hart (when he came
back from one of his China visits).  For only
$30 (China true cost.. thanks John!)
this has to be the best 3D viewer for the cost
ever.  (Because it's MF it's even a better viewing experience
than my Comby 35mm 3D viewer.. one of the best built
viewers ever..
http://www.dewijs-3d.com/Combi_viewer/Combi_UK.html
 
The 3DWorld lenses are great, better than my Saturn
achromatics, and it takes both the thick plastic mounts
I get in the MF folios and the cardboard ones I use.
If you can improve this viewer with some thought
about suggestions you get here, you'll have a winner.
Those that didn't get the 3DWorld viewer when it was
available really missed out.

Be sure to check out some of the old posts on this
group, especially when the 3DWorld viewer debut'd in '08
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MF3D-group/messages/2319?viscount=-30&l=1

and I still love my Saturn viewer because I built it ;-)
Nothing quite like telling people, I made this 3D MF image,
and built the viewer (great design.. thanks Alan Lewis!)

Cheers,
Philip

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 20:16:56
From: Ted
I have one of those Regal viewers. I'm so glad that I took the plunge and got one when they were available. It's my favorite viewer. The Saturn is awesome too but the Regal is well... regal.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "imn23dru" wrote:
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> Wish you the best of luck. If you need more lenses or back panels I still have some left from my Regal MF3D viewer run a few years ago.
>
> Best of Luck,
>
> Sam Smith
>
Subject: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 21:48:55
From: tpuhakka@ymail.com
The only thing I want to add, to what others have already mentioned, would be a little more immersive (shorter focal length?) experience then I get with the Saturn viewer or the 3D World viewer. Zoom would probably be way too much to ask for, but I'll mention it anyway. If you're gonna dream, dream big.

Timo


--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Phillip,
>
> Great to hear your enthusiastic praise for the 3DWorld viewer. I also thought it was really well designed when I borrowed one three weeks ago. A lot of thought went into that baby. Of course, since then I've tempered my opinions after hearing some high level critiques from John Thurston and others, but I'm still very impressed by the overall look of it, the light weight and the clever engineering inside. This viewer, coupled with the many helpful suggestions from group members, has inspired me a lot, and I feel pretty well equipped now to make something that might appeal to the MF shooters and viewers out there. Let us hope the muse won't abandon me...
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-19 22:08:03
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Timo,
 
I appreciate your suggestion for a shorter focal length.  I also discussed this with John Thurston, who told me he had shown John Hart (Colorado) a viewer with lenses shorter than 75mm and he was very impressed with the immersive quality of the view. I'm tempted to go below 75mm, but I fear some users might find it harder to see the corners of the images without swirling their eyes around too much.  Also John Thurston told me that mounts with even wider apertures are becoming available, and I'm guessing these might require at least 75mm to be viewable.  So, to be safe, I'm not dropping below 75mm on the first run of viewers.
 
Zoom.  That's another very interesting proposal.  hmmm...I'll think about it.  Lemme get something standard made first.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry.
 
 
.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:48 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

The only thing I want to add, to what others have already mentioned, would be a little more immersive (shorter focal length?) experience then I get with the Saturn viewer or the 3D World viewer. Zoom would probably be way too much to ask for, but I'll mention it anyway. If you're gonna dream, dream big.

Timo

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Phillip,
>
> Great to hear your enthusiastic praise for the 3DWorld viewer. I also thought it was really well designed when I borrowed one three weeks ago. A lot of thought went into that baby. Of course, since then I've tempered my opinions after hearing some high level critiques from John Thurston and others, but I'm still very impressed by the overall look of it, the light weight and the clever engineering inside. This viewer, coupled with the many helpful suggestions from group members, has inspired me a lot, and I feel pretty well equipped now to make something that might appeal to the MF shooters and viewers out there. Let us hope the muse won't abandon me...
>

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 05:12:07
From: saturnscope
> "Lawrence Heyda"
> Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the >viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would >probably satisfy...

I probably have forgotten a lot of details about my SaturnSlide MF viewers but:

I had considered adjustable interocular lenses on the SaturnSlide MF viewer and made a few with it for trial. I don't think it is worth the design and manufacturing complexity involved.

My philosophy (much debated) was that adjustable interocular is only needed for those who want to mount to the window and let infinity end up wherever it does. I designed my viewers to be for mounting to infinity, or at least controlling infinity to not exceed the viewer lens spacing distance. Works like a charm except for those who don't like the infinity mounting standard.

Choosing the fixed lens spacing is critical, research that before commiting to a design. What infinity standard to choose? I used the MF mounting template infinity distance.

I also favored large diameter achromatic lenses, 46mm dia X 78mm f.l. I felt this gave an immersive field of view and made a comfortable viewing experience with the fixed lens spacing. I still feel that way when viewing my old slides.

For accepting the single GEPE mounts I arrived at the conclusion that they can't be side by side due to the excessive infinity spacing that resulted. The only practical way I figured out to fit this into the standard size viewer was to overlap the two slides on the inner edges, reducing the infinity spacing to not exceed the lens spacing. I don't think the slight offset/angle formed by the overlap would be objectionable.

But I never got that idea in production, so it is just an opinion.

Alan
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 07:01:00
From: Ted
Are you going to be able to dictate the specifics of the lenses beyond 50mm diameter and 75mm focal length? I ask, because years ago when I was taking the first steps towards building my own viewer, I bought a variety of surplus lenses from Anchor Optical in NJ I think it was. I found that the 46X78 lens that Alan Lewis used in his Saturn viewer was the best of the bunch, both sides of the lens were convex and offered a nice even view of the slide. The 50X78 lens that I got had a flat side. There was extreme pinchushioning and it was unusable. I can take a photo of it if you want. I don't want you to order 50 sets of lenses and get something that you can't use.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Ted,
>
> Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would probably satisfy aklmost every IPD, I thought, "Why go to the trouble? (and trouble it will be with such big lenses). So, at this point, I'm thinking not to design for adjustable. If I hear more votes in favor.of it, I could be persuaded to change my mind, though. At least the steal the light viewer will NOT be adjustable, and I'll make those first, so if you get one and try it, maybe you'll find that it works fine for you with the 50mm lenses. They are SO much bigger than the lenses on the 3DWorld viewer. You might find them easy to use.
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ted
> To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:28 PM
> Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
>
>
>
> This is great news Larry. Thanks! I met you in Atlanta a few years ago when you visited and gave a demo of the 3DAdvantage to the Atlanta Stereographic Association. It was a very informative and well presented demonstration.
>
> I would like to see an interocular adjustment with the viewer. I didn't think that I would ever need that feature on a MF viewer, but I got Lasik surgery about 4 years ago and all of that changed. I used to be nearsighted and after the surgery, I had a harder time diverging my eyes. Some of my own views, which I had no problem viewing before, were noticably less easy to view. I could get away without that feature but it would be a nice-to-have.
>
> Good luck!
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Group,
> >
> > Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
> >
> > At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
> >
> > Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Larry Heyda
> >
> >
> > www.freewebs.com/larryeda
> >
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 07:32:17
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Alan,
 
I really appreciate getting your opinion on all of this.  I'm glad to hear you felt that adjustable IO was unnecessary.  Sure saves a lot of hassle and expense.
 
Getting feedback from the experienced MF folks is critical for me because I'm not that knowledgeable about infinity spacing, MTF, HFOV, etc.  So, hearing from you and so many others has really helped me. Mike Davis has written to me that the optimum lens separation is 65mm, and the optimum lens/film distance is 65.1mm when using a 75mm lens.  Because I don't know much about these things, I'm inclined to just go with his judgement on this.
 
Regarding the focal length, John Thiurston has stressed 75mm or less in order to get a nice immersive experience.  I'm also incliined to accept his opinion because he has been such a staunch MF guy for so many years.  In truth, I'm just trying to gather the best information from the experts in this field and build a viewer that comes the closest to those specifications.
 
My questions right now concern the internal baffles.  John really complained about these on the 3DWorld viewer and even cut away some of the internal edges.  So this is still a mystery to me that I'll have to solve as well.  But I guess you know all the hurdles.  :-)
 
Thanks again for your input.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 7:12 AM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

> "Lawrence Heyda"
> Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the >viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would >probably satisfy...

I probably have forgotten a lot of details about my SaturnSlide MF viewers but:

I had considered adjustable interocular lenses on the SaturnSlide MF viewer and made a few with it for trial. I don't think it is worth the design and manufacturing complexity involved.

My philosophy (much debated) was that adjustable interocular is only needed for those who want to mount to the window and let infinity end up wherever it does. I designed my viewers to be for mounting to infinity, or at least controlling infinity to not exceed the viewer lens spacing distance. Works like a charm except for those who don't like the infinity mounting standard.

Choosing the fixed lens spacing is critical, research that before commiting to a design. What infinity standard to choose? I used the MF mounting template infinity distance.

I also favored large diameter achromatic lenses, 46mm dia X 78mm f.l. I felt this gave an immersive field of view and made a comfortable viewing experience with the fixed lens spacing. I still feel that way when viewing my old slides.

For accepting the single GEPE mounts I arrived at the conclusion that they can't be side by side due to the excessive infinity spacing that resulted. The only practical way I figured out to fit this into the standard size viewer was to overlap the two slides on the inner edges, reducing the infinity spacing to not exceed the lens spacing. I don't think the slight offset/angle formed by the overlap would be objectionable.

But I never got that idea in production, so it is just an opinion.

Alan

Subject: 3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)
Date: 2012-09-20 07:38:37
From: George Themelis
> The 3DWorld lenses are great, better than my Saturn achromatics, and it
> takes both the thick plastic mounts I get in the MF folios and the
> cardboard ones I use. If you can improve this viewer with some thought
> about suggestions you get here, you'll have a winner. Those that didn't
> get the 3DWorld viewer when it was available really missed out.

Some comments from my experience as a seller and user of this viewer....

I sold this viewer for a couple of years, at the very attractive price of
$85. (To be clear, Philip mentioned a much lower price bought directly in
China, but 3D World only uses Express Mail to mail their products and many
times the cost of shipping is more than the actual cost of goods.)

I was involved in giving 3DWorld feedback about this viewer.... Even though
the viewer has adjustable interocular and focus, they are not centered
around the optimal range. I have to push the focus and interocular all the
way out, to make the viewer work well for me. 3DWorld was not convinced
that the range needs to be shifted and said that my presbyopia is the
problem :). Still, it is nice to have these features, vs. the fixed
interocular/focus available-light viewer (for which the focus is also off,
geared to myopic eyes vs. the healthy eyes of a 50 year old adult.)

The design of the viewer is interesting but not robust, and often the focus
rack will get out of alignment. This was a serious problem at first. Half
of the viewers arrived to me out of alignment. 3DWorld took care of this by
reinforcing the packing of the viewers with extra cylindrical rings around
the lenses. The viewer can be opened and realigned, so it was not a big
deal. There were some other quality problems, sometimes with the light
(uneven), etc. It is possible that these issues contributed to the decision
to discontinue the viewer.

Despite these shortcomings, at $85 the viewer was a bargain.

But, it was a very slow-selling item for me. About half a year ago, I was
asked to sell the remaining of my inventory, which I did (at a discount),
thinking that I can get more. BUT, 3DWorld decided not to make any more
viewers! Since then, I have had several people ask for this viewer. Which
makes me wonder. When this viewer was available, no one was buying it. Now
that it is discontinued, everyone is looking for it. Why don't people buy
something when it is available? Most likely because they think that it will
always be available. Anyway, 3DWorld has made it crystal clear that they
will not be another run of these viewers.

I agree that the achromatic lenses in this viewer are excellent. The
available-light viewer uses the same lenses. You can buy these viewers for
$35 from me. Here is the link in ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=221090671500

At this price, I think you are paying for the lenses and getting the viewer
for free! At some point I was able to get (from 3DWorld) a stock of the
lenses only. Another slow-moving item. I eventually sold my small stock
and cannot get any more.

PS. Another fact about the lighted viewer, the first run of these viewers
used a slightly different design. One advantage of this design was that the
lenses were easily accessibly and could be replaced if desired. Some people
replaced them with lenses with shorter FL to get a more immersive view.

George Themelis
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 07:45:10
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Ted,
 
I'm glad you wrote that about the flat-sided lens.  The company that will make these for me wants to custom design the lens to my specifications.  Unfortunately I'm not an optical engineer, so I can't give them much useful information except to tell them "no flat sides."  That doesn't sound like nearly enough information (in fact it makes me sound pretty dumb) , so I'm appealing to folks on this list to see if anyone can provide some sort of optical drawing for me.  This is what the manufacturer has requested from me.  I never knew it would get this complicated.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Ted
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:00 AM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

Are you going to be able to dictate the specifics of the lenses beyond 50mm diameter and 75mm focal length? I ask, because years ago when I was taking the first steps towards building my own viewer, I bought a variety of surplus lenses from Anchor Optical in NJ I think it was. I found that the 46X78 lens that Alan Lewis used in his Saturn viewer was the best of the bunch, both sides of the lens were convex and offered a nice even view of the slide. The 50X78 lens that I got had a flat side. There was extreme pinchushioning and it was unusable. I can take a photo of it if you want. I don't want you to order 50 sets of lenses and get something that you can't use.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Ted,
>
> Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would probably satisfy aklmost every IPD, I thought, "Why go to the trouble? (and trouble it will be with such big lenses). So, at this point, I'm thinking not to design for adjustable. If I hear more votes in favor.of it, I could be persuaded to change my mind, though. At least the steal the light viewer will NOT be adjustable, and I'll make those first, so if you get one and try it, maybe you'll find that it works fine for you with the 50mm lenses. They are SO much bigger than the lenses on the 3DWorld viewer. You might find them easy to use.
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ted
> To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:28 PM
> Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
>
>
>
> This is great news Larry. Thanks! I met you in Atlanta a few years ago when you visited and gave a demo of the 3DAdvantage to the Atlanta Stereographic Association. It was a very informative and well presented demonstration.
>
> I would like to see an interocular adjustment with the viewer. I didn't think that I would ever need that feature on a MF viewer, but I got Lasik surgery about 4 years ago and all of that changed. I used to be nearsighted and after the surgery, I had a harder time diverging my eyes. Some of my own views, which I had no problem viewing before, were noticably less easy to view. I could get away without that feature but it would be a nice-to-have.
>
> Good luck!
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Group,
> >
> > Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
> >
> > At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
> >
> > Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Larry Heyda
> >
> >
> > www.freewebs.com/larryeda
> >
>

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 09:01:34
From: Ted
Here's a starting point. I don't know what to tell you from here, but I'm certain that these are the specs/numbers that they're expecting you to fill in:

http://www.anchoroptics.com/images/products/opt015a.gif

http://www.anchoroptics.com/catalog/product.cfm?id=415



--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Ted,
>
> I'm glad you wrote that about the flat-sided lens. The company that will make these for me wants to custom design the lens to my specifications. Unfortunately I'm not an optical engineer, so I can't give them much useful information except to tell them "no flat sides." That doesn't sound like nearly enough information (in fact it makes me sound pretty dumb) , so I'm appealing to folks on this list to see if anyone can provide some sort of optical drawing for me. This is what the manufacturer has requested from me. I never knew it would get this complicated.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ted
> To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:00 AM
> Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
>
>
>
> Are you going to be able to dictate the specifics of the lenses beyond 50mm diameter and 75mm focal length? I ask, because years ago when I was taking the first steps towards building my own viewer, I bought a variety of surplus lenses from Anchor Optical in NJ I think it was. I found that the 46X78 lens that Alan Lewis used in his Saturn viewer was the best of the bunch, both sides of the lens were convex and offered a nice even view of the slide. The 50X78 lens that I got had a flat side. There was extreme pinchushioning and it was unusable. I can take a photo of it if you want. I don't want you to order 50 sets of lenses and get something that you can't use.
>
> --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ted,
> >
> > Just yesterday I was committed.to building an adjustable IO into the viewer, but after hearing from Mike Davis that the 50mm lenses would probably satisfy aklmost every IPD, I thought, "Why go to the trouble? (and trouble it will be with such big lenses). So, at this point, I'm thinking not to design for adjustable. If I hear more votes in favor.of it, I could be persuaded to change my mind, though. At least the steal the light viewer will NOT be adjustable, and I'll make those first, so if you get one and try it, maybe you'll find that it works fine for you with the 50mm lenses. They are SO much bigger than the lenses on the 3DWorld viewer. You might find them easy to use.
> >
> > Larry
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Ted
> > To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:28 PM
> > Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
> >
> >
> >
> > This is great news Larry. Thanks! I met you in Atlanta a few years ago when you visited and gave a demo of the 3DAdvantage to the Atlanta Stereographic Association. It was a very informative and well presented demonstration.
> >
> > I would like to see an interocular adjustment with the viewer. I didn't think that I would ever need that feature on a MF viewer, but I got Lasik surgery about 4 years ago and all of that changed. I used to be nearsighted and after the surgery, I had a harder time diverging my eyes. Some of my own views, which I had no problem viewing before, were noticably less easy to view. I could get away without that feature but it would be a nice-to-have.
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > --- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Group,
> > >
> > > Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
> > >
> > > At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
> > >
> > > Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Larry Heyda
> > >
> > >
> > > www.freewebs.com/larryeda
> > >
> >
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 11:17:31
From: Boris Starosta
All I can say is, I'm happy to hear someone else is excited enough about MF3d to continue investing in it.  Kudos to Larry!  I've made a considerable (for me) investment in film this year, and so hope to keep shooting MF3d color for a few more years yet.  Thereafter, I would hope to keep shooting MF3d B+W slides, if emulsions and chemistry remain available.

My biggest problem with viewers, being that I'm a starving artist, is cost.  While I would love to acquire a few lighted viewers, sadly I missed my chance, sitting on my hands, when they were available.  It would be nice to have an affordable viewer, because to expand the audience for MF3d (i.e. to sell it to collectors), a good introductory viewer is essential.  I suppose the non-focussing STL viewer from 3D World fits that bill very well.  For me, having a focussing STL option would be nice, if it saves cost.

I think only once a collector has acquired, say, a thousand dollars worth of slides, would they then consider spending a comparable amount on a viewer.  But I really wouldn't know since I'm an art maker, not so much an art consumer.  (and very, very few people are buying MF3d slides from me).

What has been the experience of others in this regard?

thanks,

Boris



PS
though I'm a great fan of FILM, the suggestion that the viewer be made useable with digital displays is also a great idea.  Apple's Retina display, surely not the last of its kind, is amazing.  That technology will continue to improve probably.  For greatest utility, the viewer optics need only be separable from the lighted back, somewhere near the film plane (need to be able to focus on the glass of the screen, obviously).  If one could then just plunk the optics down on the glass of a display (then secured with gaffer tape!), that would be wonderful.  I think trying to make the device "compatible" with specific iphones or iPods or iPads or other devices is probably a fools errand, because the form factors of those devices keep changing.  For the longest useful life, I recommend making your viewer as flexible as possible for digital screen use.

--

––––

Heretics are the only bitter remedy against the entropy of human thought.

–––– Yevgeny Zamyatin 



Subject: availability of the art [was: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR S
Date: 2012-09-20 11:56:04
From: John Thurston
On 9/20/2012 9:16 AM, Boris Starosta wrote:
- snip -
> My biggest problem with viewers, being that I'm a starving artist, is cost.
- snip -
> I think only once a collector has acquired, say, a thousand dollars worth
> of slides, would they then consider spending a comparable amount on a
> viewer. But I really wouldn't know since I'm an art maker, not so much an
> art consumer. (and very, very few people are buying MF3d slides from me).
>
> What has been the experience of others in this regard?
- snip -

I've never sold anything. (I'm not averse to the idea, it
just seems like too much trouble to chase buyers). I've
traded images with other artists and I've given images as gifts.

When I give (or trade) images to other shooters, I assume
they are bringing their own viewer. When I give images to
non-shooters, I consider the inclusion of a 3D World (STL)
viewer to be part of the package. As such, the $40
price-point of the STL viewer meets my needs. I don't give
away very many images, and when I do I figure the $40 is
less than I'd spend on a frame and glass for a flat print.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 14:02:40
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Boris,
 
I'll try to keep the cost down, but as usual I'm faced with high lens costs, light panel costs, and many tooling up costs for a very small number of viewers.  I wouldn't do his if I were a real businessman. There's just something about catering to the MF enthusiasts that appeals to me.  They are holding out against the digital deluge, and there is every good reason for it.
 
Thanks for your encouragement.
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:16 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

All I can say is, I'm happy to hear someone else is excited enough about MF3d to continue investing in it.  Kudos to Larry!  I've made a considerable (for me) investment in film this year, and so hope to keep shooting MF3d color for a few more years yet.  Thereafter, I would hope to keep shooting MF3d B+W slides, if emulsions and chemistry remain available.


My biggest problem with viewers, being that I'm a starving artist, is cost.  While I would love to acquire a few lighted viewers, sadly I missed my chance, sitting on my hands, when they were available.  It would be nice to have an affordable viewer, because to expand the audience for MF3d (i.e. to sell it to collectors), a good introductory viewer is essential.  I suppose the non-focussing STL viewer from 3D World fits that bill very well.  For me, having a focussing STL option would be nice, if it saves cost.

I think only once a collector has acquired, say, a thousand dollars worth of slides, would they then consider spending a comparable amount on a viewer.  But I really wouldn't know since I'm an art maker, not so much an art consumer.  (and very, very few people are buying MF3d slides from me).

What has been the experience of others in this regard?

thanks,

Boris



PS
though I'm a great fan of FILM, the suggestion that the viewer be made useable with digital displays is also a great idea.  Apple's Retina display, surely not the last of its kind, is amazing.  That technology will continue to improve probably.  For greatest utility, the viewer optics need only be separable from the lighted back, somewhere near the film plane (need to be able to focus on the glass of the screen, obviously).  If one could then just plunk the optics down on the glass of a display (then secured with gaffer tape!), that would be wonderful.  I think trying to make the device "compatible" with specific iphones or iPods or iPads or other devices is probably a fools errand, because the form factors of those devices keep changing.  For the longest useful life, I recommend making your viewer as flexible as possible for digital screen use.

--

––––

Heretics are the only bitter remedy against the entropy of human thought.

–––– Yevgeny Zamyatin 



Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-20 18:31:11
From: tpuhakka@ymail.com
I think that it is a very worthwhile endevour. I am still regretting not buying the updated 3D World viewer when I had the chance. I was very fortunate to stumble upon an un-built Saturn viewer kit a couple of years ago. Unfortunately most of my slides are mounted in the plastic mounts that don't fit. Too bad because I really like the Saturn.

What I am trying to say is that, judging by the veritable deluge of interest your project has created in the usually quiet MF 3D list, you can expect an enthusiastic (if rather smallish) following for the final product.

Timo

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Boris,
>
> I'll try to keep the cost down, but as usual I'm faced with high lens costs, light panel costs, and many tooling up costs for a very small number of viewers. I wouldn't do his if I were a real businessman. There's just something about catering to the MF enthusiasts that appeals to me. They are holding out against the digital deluge, and there is every good reason for it.
>
> Thanks for your encouragement.
>
> Larry
Subject: Enthusiasm - how far will it take us? [was: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER-
Date: 2012-09-21 00:30:11
From: John Thurston
On 9/20/2012 4:31 PM, tpuhakka@ymail.com wrote:
- snip -
> What I am trying to say is that, judging by the veritable deluge of interest your project has created in the usually quiet MF 3D list, you can expect an enthusiastic (if rather smallish) following for the final product.

But how many of us will actually translate our enthusiasm
into dollars?
I hope to be an early adopter, but the story was very
different a few years ago when Sam was offering his viewers.
At that time, my budget was much tighter and I missed my
opportunity.
________________________________________
John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us
Subject: Re: 3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)
Date: 2012-09-21 10:23:19
From: Philip Steinman

3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)


Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:38 am (PDT) . Posted by: George T


> The 3DWorld lenses are great, better than my Saturn achromatics, and it
> takes both the thick plastic mounts I get in the MF folios and the
> cardboard ones I use. If you can improve this viewer with some thought
> about suggestions you get here, you'll have a winner. Those that didn't
> get the 3DWorld viewer when it was available really missed out.

Some comments from my experience as a seller and user of this viewer....

I sold this viewer for a couple of years, at the very attractive price of
$85. (To be clear, Philip mentioned a much lower price bought directly in
China, but 3D World only uses Express Mail to mail their products and many
times the cost of shipping is more than the actual cost of goods.)

Just want to say that this is not isolated to us in the 3D world, but
very common in everything.  For instance, I have an interest in
quality FM/AM tuners.  The last really good one made in mass was the
Sony xdr-f1hd.  This little beauty pulled in radio stations far away
clear as day better than any tuner before it or after it, and it had HD radio too.
It costs only $99 when it sold, and Sony offered a $50 discount coupon
for almost a year, so many people, myself included ;-), got the tuner for only $50. 
Now these tuners sell regularly on ebay for $200-$300+
because Sony discontinued the tuner and offered no replacement over a year ago,
so I guess this is the true value of a quality tuner.

George, your comments and insight on the 3DWorld viewer are, as always, top notch.
With everyone here Larry will be an informed MF viewer builder,
and frankly we're lucky to have him doing this for such a small market
that has mostly moved ahead to the digital era of imaging.

Cheers,
Philip
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-22 15:08:58
From: Bob Venezia
Hi Larry,

I too want to applaud this effort - I think it's a great idea.

I own a Sam Smith Regal viewer, a 3D World powered and focusing viewer, and a few 3D World STL viewers. There are good and bad points to all of them.

The Regal is like a piece of art and gets lots of comments. The light panel works well when it's plugged in but with batteries it will not stay at full brightness for long. I think the lamps are compact fluorescent. It also does not accommodate the 3D World plastic slides -- the slot is too small. It has no interocular adjustment but luckily it's not a problem for me.

The 3D World powered and focusing viewer gets a lot of use. It accommodates all the sizes of slides. It is lit with LEDs so the batteries last forever. It has a very small interocular adjustment (so small you wonder why they did it!).

The light panel is problematic. If you look in the viewer with no slide you'll see a series of LED "footlights." So the views are noticeably brighter on the bottom than they are on the top. Sometimes I'll look at a view that seems underexposed on top, will turn it upside down in the viewer, and voila, it's beautifully exposed. But now the bottom is too dark!

And both the Regal and the 3D World powered viewers are pretty useless if you're outside on a bright day.

The focusing is okay on the 3D World powered viewers but it has (rarely) gone out of whack so the lenses get twisted at an angle.

The great thing about the STL viewer is that the light source couldn't be better when you aim it at that whatchamathingy at the center of our solar system. Not so great in many other conditions, especially if your under lamps that have color problems (warm fluorescent, sodium vapor, etc). And there's no focusing.

For me the ideal viewer would have a bright, evenly lit panel using many LEDs, and focusing. A real plus would be a light panel that could be easily removed (on the Regal viewer it's held on with magnets) and replaced with a frosted translucent piece for STL viewing. There are some high-end 35mm viewers that have this option (I'm thinking of the De Wijs and I believe there are others).

Interocular would be great. but you should probably poll your likely customer base. If the cost of a particular design feature drives up the cost to the point where you would sell fewer units you'd have to weigh that.

Anyway, I wish you all the best in your effort and can't wait to hear what you come up with. You've definitely created a buzz!

cheers,
Bob Venezia
Seattle, Washington



It would be great to have a supply of
On Sep 18, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Lawrence Heyda wrote:

> Hi Group,
>
> Perhaps a few of you know me. I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable. I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel. I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions. I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
>
> At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length. I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
>
> Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Larry Heyda
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-23 10:20:58
From: Philip Steinman
>The light panel is problematic. If you look in the viewer with no
>slide you'll see a series of LED "footlights." So the views are
>noticeably brighter on the bottom than they are on the top.
>Sometimes I'll look at a view that seems underexposed on top, will
>turn it upside down in the viewer, and voila, it's beautifully
>exposed. But now the bottom is too dark!

This is very good critique of the short comings of the 3DWorld viewer.

>And both the Regal and the 3D World powered viewers are pretty
>useless if you're outside on a bright day.

For that, there is the Saturn viewer.. super!

>For me the ideal viewer would have a bright, evenly lit panel using
>many LEDs, and focusing. A real plus would be a light panel that
>could be easily removed (on the Regal viewer it's held on with
>magnets) and replaced with a frosted translucent piece for STL
>viewing. There are some high-end 35mm viewers that have this option
>(I'm thinking of the De Wijs and I believe there are others).

Agree with this.. love the Hugo De WIjs combi viewer to convert to
steal the light

Nice input Bob,
Cheers,
Philip
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-23 10:42:56
From: Lawrence Heyda
I'm listening!
 
Larry Heyda
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-23 11:43:49
From: JR
I usually mount my MF stereo pair slides individually in Wess plastic mounts.  These are available in a variety of sizes, including 6 x 4.5, 6 x 6, and 6 x 9.  By using these (2D) mounts, I can project them in lantern slide projectors, which is very convenient for my 6 x 9 slides.   For viewing, I currently use the Keystone Correct-Eye Scope viewer, and the clamp-type slide holder permits their placement side-by-side, even though left and right eye views are in separate mounts.   The capability for accepting individual mounts in a side-by-side configuration is very useful in a medium format stereo viewer.  Another consideration for non-square sizes is the capability for orienting them in either the portrait (vertical) or landscape (horizontal) directions.   This can be a real challenge when designing a "universal" slide holder.

JR
stereoscope3d@gmail.com


On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Lawrence Heyda <larryeda@nc.rr.com> wrote:
 

Hi Group,
 
Perhaps a few of you know me.  I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable.  I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel.  I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions.  I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
 
At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length.  I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
 
Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry Heyda
 
 



--


Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-25 10:04:16
From: Brian Reynolds
I've used a variety of viewer with MF3D. The three most common are
the Saturn viewer (I had an early one from Joel and used Surplus Shed
lenses in it), the 3D World focusing/lighted viewer, and the folding
steal the light viewer that Sam Smith sold several years ago.

The 3D World viewer's benefits are that it is self contained (I never
did get around to building the lighting unit for my Saturn), my
eyesight has changed enough that I can use it without glasses at the
extreme end of its focusing range, and it was readily available.

That last point is unfortunately no longer true. The 3D World viewer
also seems to be a dust/dirt magnet. I haven't dared to crack mine
open in order to try to thoroughly clean it.

The Saturn viewer's biggest drawback was that its focus range wasn't
enough for me to be able to use it without glasses. To it's advantage
I could see the entire slide with my glasses on.

My favorite viewer is the folding viewer from Sam Smith. The optics
are excellent. The form factor, and packaging are great. It came
with a small belt pouch that holds the viewer, a diffusing screen, and
a couple of mounted slides. When I go out in public to shoot stereo I
try to always bring this viewer, and some relevant slides. If a
museum staffer, park ranger, or some other official sees what I'm
trying to do I don't have any hassles, and sometimes I can get better
access to what I'm trying to shoot. It's only disadvantage is that it
is no longer available.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-25 10:05:29
From: Brian Reynolds
I wrote:
>
> I've used a variety of viewer with MF3D.

By the way, I should mention that I only use cardboard mounts.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-25 10:13:54
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Brian,
 
Thanks for your input.  Yep, Sam Smith made some great viewers.  You're not the only one who has told me this. 
 
I hope my viewer will appeal to this very sophisticated stereo audience.  We'll see.  I'm trying to gather as many tips as possible from everybody.
 
Linda Nygren sent me some cardboard mounts, so I'll be sure and accomodate those in the design.
 
Sure apppreciate your comments.
 
Kind regards.
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

I wrote:
>
> I've used a variety of viewer with MF3D.

By the way, I should mention that I only use cardboard mounts.

--
Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
reynolds@panix.com | You push some buttons and see
http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
NAR# 54438 |

Subject: Learnings (was Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-27 21:42:00
From: imn23dru
Larry and all,

It's very refreshing to see the creative juices flowing again on this lively discussion. I tuned out for a week and came back with a barrage of interesting posts. Thanks to all who have mentioned my past viewer projects, it's very encouraging that they are still in active use after so many years.

I too played with the multiple format/interocular adjustment designs, however the majority seemed to prefer fixed formats and lens spacing over the additional cost. I absolutely adored the embossed designs and mother-of-pearl inlays of the early French and Brewster hand viewers, and I used these as my inspiration. Casting resin and acrylic was my material of choice, as it was both durable and lightweight.

I had hoped to make a few viewers knowing they were expensive and time-consuming to make, then make up by refining the design and production later on. Unfortunately the next step never happened, as I could not find a way to cut down production costs and materials. Rather then reducing the effort, each new viewer took more time to make due to fixing or replacing damaged molds.

What did I learn? Great fun working on a viewer design and watching it develop from idea to finished piece. Someone who already has most of the tools and skills at hand could certainly take this on as a sideline, however it is only a niche market of very few . Even if I had an order for 1000 viewers I could never have produced them. It was more a labor of love I guess.

Advice is cheap and easy to come by, but pockets are only so deep. Remember the days when everyone made their own viewers from a few basic plans? Those were fun times. I'm glad there's still some creative minds out there who don't mind getting their hands dirty as well.

Please keep the discussions going. There's a creative bunch of people in this group, it should be a great resource.


Sam Smith
Subject: Re: Learnings (was Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGEST
Date: 2012-09-27 22:10:18
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi SAm,
 
Always good to hear from you.  Your classicly artistic viewers have always inspired me.  I would like to explore this tiny niche myself, once I get a good lens and light panel setup established.  I'm very attracted to the designs used on French Sevre pottery.  It would be great to make some viewers with that motif and color scheme.
 
I'm glad I brought so many experts out of hiding to give mesome valuable tips.  I hope I can make some viewers that they will want to use, i.e. buy.  :-)
 
Larry
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: imn23dru
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 11:41 PM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Learnings (was Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS)

 

Larry and all,

It's very refreshing to see the creative juices flowing again on this lively discussion. I tuned out for a week and came back with a barrage of interesting posts. Thanks to all who have mentioned my past viewer projects, it's very encouraging that they are still in active use after so many years.

I too played with the multiple format/interocular adjustment designs, however the majority seemed to prefer fixed formats and lens spacing over the additional cost. I absolutely adored the embossed designs and mother-of-pearl inlays of the early French and Brewster hand viewers, and I used these as my inspiration. Casting resin and acrylic was my material of choice, as it was both durable and lightweight.

I had hoped to make a few viewers knowing they were expensive and time-consuming to make, then make up by refining the design and production later on. Unfortunately the next step never happened, as I could not find a way to cut down production costs and materials. Rather then reducing the effort, each new viewer took more time to make due to fixing or replacing damaged molds.

What did I learn? Great fun working on a viewer design and watching it develop from idea to finished piece. Someone who already has most of the tools and skills at hand could certainly take this on as a sideline, however it is only a niche market of very few . Even if I had an order for 1000 viewers I could never have produced them. It was more a labor of love I guess.

Advice is cheap and easy to come by, but pockets are only so deep. Remember the days when everyone made their own viewers from a few basic plans? Those were fun times. I'm glad there's still some creative minds out there who don't mind getting their hands dirty as well.

Please keep the discussions going. There's a creative bunch of people in this group, it should be a great resource.

Sam Smith

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-29 08:04:09
From: bob_karambelas
One thing about cardboard mounts, at least some of them... the mounting window is not centered vertically. If the slide is mounted with the wide strip at the top and viewed in a 3DWorld lighted viewer, the bottom of the slide doesn't get lit, there's a dark band. In the STL viewer they look okay.

I guess the lesson is to make sure the illumination window can reach any edge of any mounting window.

It's easy to mount them a certain way going forward, but some of my older stuff was mounted differently, some was done by third parties, and there's no correct orientation that people observe universally.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thanks for your input. Yep, Sam Smith made some great viewers. You're not the only one who has told me this.
>
> I hope my viewer will appeal to this very sophisticated stereo audience. We'll see. I'm trying to gather as many tips as possible from everybody.
>
> Linda Nygren sent me some cardboard mounts, so I'll be sure and accomodate those in the design.
>
> Sure apppreciate your comments.
>
> Kind regards.
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brian Reynolds
> To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
>
>
>
> I wrote:
> >
> > I've used a variety of viewer with MF3D.
>
> By the way, I should mention that I only use cardboard mounts.
>
> --
> Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
> reynolds@... | You push some buttons and see
> http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
> NAR# 54438 |
>
Subject: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-29 10:00:13
From: bob_karambelas
Can I suggest an interchangeable lens plate, regardless of which lenses you choose? For that matter, consider selling some without lenses. Plenty of experimenters out there.

I'm with others who say that interocular is not important, and far too complicated to build. Focusing is highly desirable.

Come to think of it, maybe you could have a 35mm slide insert and an appropriate lens option.


--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Timo,
>
> I appreciate your suggestion for a shorter focal length.
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-09-29 10:24:59
From: Lawrence Heyda
Hi Bob,
 
Very good point.  I'll make sure the light panel on the adjustable viewer stretches vertically up and down to light up ant type of slide.
 
Thanks,
Larry
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 10:04 AM
Subject: [MF3D-group] Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS

 

One thing about cardboard mounts, at least some of them... the mounting window is not centered vertically. If the slide is mounted with the wide strip at the top and viewed in a 3DWorld lighted viewer, the bottom of the slide doesn't get lit, there's a dark band. In the STL viewer they look okay.

I guess the lesson is to make sure the illumination window can reach any edge of any mounting window.

It's easy to mount them a certain way going forward, but some of my older stuff was mounted differently, some was done by third parties, and there's no correct orientation that people observe universally.

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Heyda" wrote:
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Thanks for your input. Yep, Sam Smith made some great viewers. You're not the only one who has told me this.
>
> I hope my viewer will appeal to this very sophisticated stereo audience. We'll see. I'm trying to gather as many tips as possible from everybody.
>
> Linda Nygren sent me some cardboard mounts, so I'll be sure and accomodate those in the design.
>
> Sure apppreciate your comments.
>
> Kind regards.
>
> Larry
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brian Reynolds
> To: MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 12:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [MF3D-group] DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
>
>
>
> I wrote:
> >
> > I've used a variety of viewer with MF3D.
>
> By the way, I should mention that I only use cardboard mounts.
>
> --
> Brian Reynolds | "It's just like flying a spaceship.
> reynolds@... | You push some buttons and see
> http://www.panix.com/~reynolds/ | what happens." -- Zapp Brannigan
> NAR# 54438 |
>

Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-01 16:45:48
From: Don Lopp
> Can I suggest an interchangeable lens plate, regardless of which lenses
> you choose? For that matter, consider selling some without lenses.
> Plenty of experimenters out there.
>
> I'm with others who say that interocular is not important, and far too
> complicated to build. Focusing is highly desirable.
Based on my limited viewer building experiences, I disagree with the
suggestion that others install their own lenses, as IMO, installing
viewer lenses is not a job to be left to the amateur.

Sam Smith was kind enough to show me how they should have have been
mounted, after he had peered through one of my MF viewers. My eyes do
require a 2 degree, vertical, prismatic correction, which made viewing
by others to be problematic, as most eyes do not have a prismatic
viewing problem.

Also, I imagine that their would be quite a let down if 35mm 3D slides
were viewed through MF viewer optics, which normally range from 70 to
80mm fl lenses.

The best,

DON
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-01 17:28:05
From: JR
Larry - I just mailed to you a couple of the Wess 6 x 9 MF mounts that I use.   Don raised a good point regarding lens focal lengths, which also is relevant to the field diagonal covered.   For lenses that cover my 6 x 9 format in that same focal-length range, they would have to be wide field lenses as compared to similar focal lengths used to cover 6 x 6.   The Keystone Correct-Eye scope that I currently use is a dual-purpose viewer, designed to cover front-lit (steal the light) stereo cards as well as the rear-lit transparencies.   The light in the model 40 that I have therefore only trans-illuminates through the opal glass from behind.   Functionally, this works quite well.   The reason that I might be interested in a different viewer would mainly be for better lenses (achromats).

JR
stereoscope3d@gmail.com


On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Lawrence Heyda <larryeda@nc.rr.com> wrote:
 

Hi Group,
 
Perhaps a few of you know me.  I have been building and selling the 3DAdvantage digital camera systems for quite some time, but I am now interested in making two new medium format viewers, a steal-the-light and backlit adjustable.  I have been in touch with the expert of experts, John Thurston, about the best design for the "perfect" viewer, and he has given me great advice about the best focal lengths and the best lighting source for the back panel.  I would like to let everyone know I'm working on this and that I welcome your suggestions.  I would like to make a viewer that really appeals to the maximum number of MF users.
 
At this time, I'm going toward using 40mm coated achromats, 77mm focal length.  I also have a source for a perfectly lighted LED edge-lit panel, that will be placed farther back than the one in the 3DWorld viewer.
 
Let me know if you have any other suggestions.
 
Kind regards,
 
Larry Heyda
 
 



--


Subject: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-02 16:50:01
From: imn23dru
I agree with Don. Better stick to one focal length and one general size of image (around 6cm high). Changing the focal length will change the body depth and change the focusing distance.

Sam

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, Don Lopp wrote:

> Based on my limited viewer building experiences, I disagree with the
> suggestion that others install their own lenses, as IMO, installing
> viewer lenses is not a job to be left to the amateur.
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-05 07:38:28
From: coronet3d
I don't think either Wess or Gepe mounts are still in production. I believe all that's being sold now is NOS. As for inter-ocular adjustment, I love the lever on my red button Stereo Realist viewer. I use it all the time.
Steve
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-10 16:10:31
From: lattie_smart
While we debate a new viewer design...I'd still like to hear more about Thurston's and Lopp's other, larger image MF viewers...if I can't get to experience one :-)

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "coronet3d" wrote:
>
> I don't think either Wess or Gepe mounts are still in production. I believe all that's being sold now is NOS. As for inter-ocular adjustment, I love the lever on my red button Stereo Realist viewer. I use it all the time.
> Steve
>
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-10 16:31:14
From: John Thurston
On 10/10/2012 2:10 PM, lattie_smart wrote:
> While we debate a new viewer design...I'd still like to hear more about Thurston's and Lopp's other, larger image MF viewers...if I can't get to experience one :-)

There is little to report on my front. I haven't done
anything on the project since last January. I hope to get
back to it this fall, but may not have the time.

Bob Venezia did bring the Lopp Viewer to the NSA convention
in California (July). Don's is a functioning viewer, while
my effort is still just a glorified lorgnette.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: Re: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS
Date: 2012-10-10 21:29:02
From: lattie_smart
They gotta start having NSA conventions closer to me again! :-)

--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, John Thurston wrote:
>
> On 10/10/2012 2:10 PM, lattie_smart wrote:
> > While we debate a new viewer design...I'd still like to hear more about Thurston's and Lopp's other, larger image MF viewers...if I can't get to experience one :-)
>
> There is little to report on my front. I haven't done
> anything on the project since last January. I hope to get
> back to it this fall, but may not have the time.
>
> Bob Venezia did bring the Lopp Viewer to the NSA convention
> in California (July). Don's is a functioning viewer, while
> my effort is still just a glorified lorgnette.
>
> John Thurston
> Juneau, Alaska
>
Subject: NSA 2013 [was: DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER- LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS]
Date: 2012-10-10 21:59:51
From: John Thurston
On 10/10/2012 7:28 PM, lattie_smart wrote:
> They gotta start having NSA conventions closer to me again! :-)

Next year is in Michigan. How's that for you?

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska
Subject: 3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)
Date: 2012-10-14 17:36:24
From: coronet3d
--- In MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com, "George Themelis" wrote:
> But, it was a very slow-selling item for me. About half a year ago, I was
> asked to sell the remaining of my inventory, which I did (at a discount),
> thinking that I can get more. BUT, 3DWorld decided not to make any more
> viewers! Since then, I have had several people ask for this viewer. Which
> makes me wonder. When this viewer was available, no one was buying it. Now
> that it is discontinued, everyone is looking for it. Why don't people buy
> something when it is available? Most likely because they think that it will
> always be available. Anyway, 3DWorld has made it crystal clear that they
> will not be another run of these viewers.
>
Dr. T,
Do you think they would do a run if they had a large enough order? Now you know how Kodak must've felt when they announced the discontinuation of Kodachrome and ran out in a couple of months.
Steve
Subject: Re: 3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)
Date: 2012-10-14 19:21:09
From: George Themelis
> Dr. T,
> Do you think they would do a run if they had a large enough order?

I suggested it, but they made it perfectly clear that they will not make
another run, no matter how many viewers I order....

George
Subject: Re: 3D World Lighted Viewers (Re:DESIGNING NEW MF VIEWER)
Date: 2012-10-14 20:41:51
From: Geoffrey S. Waldo
Sounds like a job for 3D printing, either extrusion or powder-bed! The main work would be CADing the shape files. If we can find a member or friend with one of these printers, or go to the "Make" community.
We might think of some designs. Maybe we could get a group together at the next 3D con or Skype earlier with a fab team, even print some designs on site!
G


Geoffrey S. Waldo, PhD
Mail Stop M888
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Los Alamos, NM 87545

Tel:  505-667-8161                 email: waldo@LANL.gov
Fax: 505-665-3024
Cell: 505-204-6979


Los Alamos Fluorescent Proteins Website: http://www.lanl.gov/projects/gfp/
•Superfolder, Folding Reporter, Split Proteins
•Tools for engineering protein folding, stability, and solubility
•Protein interactions, tagging, and detection

ISFI Integrated Center for Structure and Function Innovation web site: http://techcenter.mbi.ucla.edu

__________________________________________
Consulting 
Cell: 505-204-6979

On Oct 14, 2012, at 7:19 PM, "George Themelis" <george@drt3d.com> wrote:

 

> Dr. T,
> Do you think they would do a run if they had a large enough order?

I suggested it, but they made it perfectly clear that they will not make
another run, no matter how many viewers I order....

George