Header banner

MF3D-group Conversations Photos Files All groups About
<< Previous Thread Medium Format 3D printed slide holder Next Thread >>

Subject: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 11:09:42
From: espressobuzz
A friend of mine just made this.
120 3D Slide Holder (Holga Pattern) by schlem

 

He's new to 3D, so go easy on him.  :)   He says its still untested.
He's already designed and made some 2D pinhole cameras with his 3D printer.  If you have a 3D printer, you can make one yourself. 
Check out his stuff at http://www.thingiverse.com/schlem/designs



 

. 


Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 11:30:36
From: John Thurston
On 10/23/2015 9:09 AM, espressobuzz@yahoo.com [MF3D-group]
wrote:
> A friend of mine just made this.
> 120 3D Slide Holder (Holga Pattern) by schlem http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
. . .
> He's new to 3D, so go easy on him. :) He says its still untested.

A printed stereo mount is an interesting item and I applaud
the effort! But please do the world a favor and _do not_
reproduce the Holga's aperture spacing. I have railed
against the Holga mounts in the past and will continue to do
so. The aperture spacing is _totally unusable_.
http://stereo.thurstons.us/content/?page_id=168

The 3D World mounts have their problems, but the newer ones
are not fundamentally wrong like the Holga mounts :) If you
are solid printing, it should be a simple edit to decrease
the aperture spacing of your design to 63mm (or some would
argue even a bit closer). I think you'll like it better that
way.

--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us
Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 11:57:03
From: espressobuzz
I passed that on to him.  I'll give him a cardboard mount next time I see him.
Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 12:21:13
From: Timo Puhakka
This is an excellent concept. I suppose we could download it and modify it to specific needs, such as custom shaped apertures and send it for solid printing. Very interesting possibilities.

Timo

On 23-Oct-15, at 1:30 PM, John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:

 

On 10/23/2015 9:09 AM, espressobuzz@yahoo.com [MF3D-group]
wrote:
> A friend of mine just made this.
> 120 3D Slide Holder (Holga Pattern) by schlem http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
. . .
> He's new to 3D, so go easy on him. :) He says its still untested.

A printed stereo mount is an interesting item and I applaud
the effort! But please do the world a favor and _do not_
reproduce the Holga's aperture spacing. I have railed
against the Holga mounts in the past and will continue to do
so. The aperture spacing is _totally unusable_.
http://stereo.thurstons.us/content/?page_id=168

The 3D World mounts have their problems, but the newer ones
are not fundamentally wrong like the Holga mounts :) If you
are solid printing, it should be a simple edit to decrease
the aperture spacing of your design to 63mm (or some would
argue even a bit closer). I think you'll like it better that
way.

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


Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 12:27:38
From: Todd Schlemmer
"
Hi. My design. 
In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations. 
Is 54x54  63mm spacing a preferred pattern?
Todd


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Timo Puhakka tpuhakka@ymail.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

This is an excellent concept. I suppose we could download it and modify it to specific needs, such as custom shaped apertures and send it for solid printing. Very interesting possibilities.


Timo

On 23-Oct-15, at 1:30 PM, John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:

 

On 10/23/2015 9:09 AM, espressobuzz@yahoo.com [MF3D-group]
wrote:
> A friend of mine just made this.
> 120 3D Slide Holder (Holga Pattern) by schlem http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
. . .
> He's new to 3D, so go easy on him. :) He says its still untested.

A printed stereo mount is an interesting item and I applaud
the effort! But please do the world a favor and _do not_
reproduce the Holga's aperture spacing. I have railed
against the Holga mounts in the past and will continue to do
so. The aperture spacing is _totally unusable_.
http://stereo.thurstons.us/content/?page_id=168

The 3D World mounts have their problems, but the newer ones
are not fundamentally wrong like the Holga mounts :) If you
are solid printing, it should be a simple edit to decrease
the aperture spacing of your design to 63mm (or some would
argue even a bit closer). I think you'll like it better that
way.

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



"
Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 12:57:37
From: John Thurston
On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
[MF3D-group] wrote:
> Hi. My design.
> In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?

We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)

I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
see 62.5 or even 62mm.

What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
size does not have to fit all. You could place your
apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

Asymmetrical apertures can be used to create a "floating"
or "Becker" window. I remember being astounded with Hubert
Becker's work with windows when I first saw it in 2002 (or
was it '03). Since then I've run across several slides which
I've thought would benefit from such framing. I just haven't
done the work to create the masks necessary. With solid
printing, it could be a lot less complicated.

--
John Thurston
Juneau Alaska
http://stereo.thurstons.us
Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 21:43:10
From: Brian Reynolds
John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:
> On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
> [MF3D-group] wrote:
> > Hi. My design.
> > In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> > the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> > Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?
>
> We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)
>
> I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
> start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
> see 62.5 or even 62mm.
>
> What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
> size does not have to fit all. You could place your
> apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
> couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
> aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
> oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

The Rocky Mountain Memories cardboard mount I just measured is
132x80mm overall with 50x50mm front apertures on 62mm spacing.

As I recall the 6x4.5 mounts were 50x40mm and 40x50mm apertures.

I don't recall what the panorama mounts were.

--
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: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-23 22:44:15
From: Todd Schlemmer
Update

I have modified the source files to have 54mm square apertures with 63mm aperture spacing. This will work well with a pinhole camera I am designing / 3Dprinting that has 56mm frames and 61mm frame spacing. 
Thanks for clarifying the bestest dimensions. 

The modified files are in the same location: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
Disclaimer: in the time that it takes to 3Dprint a single frame, you could easily cut six frames out of cardboard with an Xacto knife. 
They're open source, do what you want with them, but no selling.
Todd


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brian Reynolds mf3d@reynolds.users.panix.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:
 > On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
> [MF3D-group] wrote:
> > Hi. My design.
> > In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> > the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> > Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?
>
> We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)
>
> I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
> start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
> see 62.5 or even 62mm.
>
> What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
> size does not have to fit all. You could place your
> apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
> couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
> aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
> oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

 The Rocky Mountain Memories cardboard mount I just measured is
132x80mm overall with 50x50mm front apertures on 62mm spacing.

As I recall the 6x4.5 mounts were 50x40mm and 40x50mm apertures.

I don't recall what the panorama mounts were.

--
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: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-24 09:31:50
From: Timo Puhakka
Thank you so much. Now I need to learn to customize it and find a place that will print these up for me.

Timo

On 24-Oct-15, at 12:44 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com [MF3D-group] wrote:

 

Update

I have modified the source files to have 54mm square apertures with 63mm aperture spacing. This will work well with a pinhole camera I am designing / 3Dprinting that has 56mm frames and 61mm frame spacing. 
Thanks for clarifying the bestest dimensions. 

The modified files are in the same location: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
Disclaimer: in the time that it takes to 3Dprint a single frame, you could easily cut six frames out of cardboard with an Xacto knife. 
They're open source, do what you want with them, but no selling.
Todd


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brian Reynolds mf3d@reynolds.users.panix.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:
 > On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
> [MF3D-group] wrote:
> > Hi. My design.
> > In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> > the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> > Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?
>
> We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)
>
> I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
> start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
> see 62.5 or even 62mm.
>
> What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
> size does not have to fit all. You could place your
> apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
> couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
> aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
> oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

 The Rocky Mountain Memories cardboard mount I just measured is
132x80mm overall with 50x50mm front apertures on 62mm spacing.

As I recall the 6x4.5 mounts were 50x40mm and 40x50mm apertures.

I don't recall what the panorama mounts were.

--
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: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-24 09:50:48
From: Todd Schlemmer
Timo

Start with Tinkercad.com. It is a deceptively simple tool for 3D print design that has sophisticated capabilities. Shapeways.com can print from STL file formats, but a 3D printed part is not going to be comparable in price to cardboard. 
HTH
Todd


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Timo Puhakka tpuhakka@ymail.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

Thank you so much. Now I need to learn to customize it and find a place that will print these up for me.


Timo

On 24-Oct-15, at 12:44 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com [MF3D-group] wrote:

 

Update

I have modified the source files to have 54mm square apertures with 63mm aperture spacing. This will work well with a pinhole camera I am designing / 3Dprinting that has 56mm frames and 61mm frame spacing. 
Thanks for clarifying the bestest dimensions. 

The modified files are in the same location: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1089226
Disclaimer: in the time that it takes to 3Dprint a single frame, you could easily cut six frames out of cardboard with an Xacto knife. 
They're open source, do what you want with them, but no selling.
Todd


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brian Reynolds mf3d@reynolds.users.panix.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] wrote:
 > On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
> [MF3D-group] wrote:
> > Hi. My design.
> > In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> > the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> > Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?
>
> We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)
>
> I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
> start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
> see 62.5 or even 62mm.
>
> What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
> size does not have to fit all. You could place your
> apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
> couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
> aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
> oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

 The Rocky Mountain Memories cardboard mount I just measured is
132x80mm overall with 50x50mm front apertures on 62mm spacing.

As I recall the 6x4.5 mounts were 50x40mm and 40x50mm apertures.

I don't recall what the panorama mounts were.

--
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: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-24 22:03:59
From: Jon Hoggatt
My vote is for 52 X 52 with 62 mm aperture spacing, as all my viewers require 62 mm spacing, and any larger apertures leave no wiggle room, when mounting square chips.
Jon

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 23, 2015, at 1:57 PM, John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
[MF3D-group] wrote:
> Hi. My design.
> In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?

We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)

I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
see 62.5 or even 62mm.

What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
size does not have to fit all. You could place your
apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

Asymmetrical apertures can be used to create a "floating"
or "Becker" window. I remember being astounded with Hubert
Becker's work with windows when I first saw it in 2002 (or
was it '03). Since then I've run across several slides which
I've thought would benefit from such framing. I just haven't
done the work to create the masks necessary. With solid
printing, it could be a lot less complicated.

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

Subject: Re: Medium Format 3D printed slide holder
Date: 2015-10-25 00:12:59
From: Todd Schlemmer
Jon, et al.

I can easily - trivially easily - change the aperture size and spacing in the source files. I can add variations to the same Thingiverse web page, with either a code for the configuration (i.e. "56- 63": 56mm square apertures, 63mm center to center) or a pattern name (Bill and Ted's Excellent 3D Slide Holder). If you really want a certain size available for 3D printing, let me know and I will make it so. 
These are 80X140 and nominally 3mm thick.  I am trying an experiment with 2.5mm frames, they might be perilously fragile. Stay tuned.

T


-- 
.-. .-. . . .   .-. .  . 
`-. |   |-| |   |-  |\/| 
`-' `-' ' ` `-' `-' '  ` 

http://flavors.me/schlem#_

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 7:55 PM, Jon Hoggatt jonhoggatt@mac.com [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 

My vote is for 52 X 52 with 62 mm aperture spacing, as all my viewers require 62 mm spacing, and any larger apertures leave no wiggle room, when mounting square chips.
Jon

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 23, 2015, at 1:57 PM, John Thurston juneau3d@thurstons.us [MF3D-group] <MF3D-group@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

On 10/23/2015 10:27 AM, Todd Schlemmer theschlem@gmail.com
[MF3D-group] wrote:
> Hi. My design.
> In a vacuum of information, I just duplicated what I could find. 63mm is
> the std spacing of frames in 6x6 MF. Easy to modify to recommendations.
> Is 54x54 63mm spacing a preferred pattern?

We in the MF3D community have debated this for years :)

I think the 63mm aperture spacing is a reasonable place to
start. Others consider even that too wide and would like to
see 62.5 or even 62mm.

What's new in this conversation is the possibility that one
size does not have to fit all. You could place your
apertures at 63mm and make a few at 54mm square. Then do a
couple as 50X45 rectangle aperture spaced at 62.5mm. You
aren't even constrained to rectangular apertures (round,
oval, star), or even symmetrical apertures.

Asymmetrical apertures can be used to create a "floating"
or "Becker" window. I remember being astounded with Hubert
Becker's work with windows when I first saw it in 2002 (or
was it '03). Since then I've run across several slides which
I've thought would benefit from such framing. I just haven't
done the work to create the masks necessary. With solid
printing, it could be a lot less complicated.

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