I have an abomination that I printed years ago that adapts an Instax SQ1 to Hasselblad lenses (and has an RB67 focusing screen on a viewfinder next to the Instax for composing and focusing).
It's sooooo impractical but the results are so fun.
The process is to compose, focus, put ND filter on, swap from finder to film body, half-fire the shutter, pull out the dark slide, fully fire the shutter, push in the dark slide, eject the film, rewind the shutter, and go back to the finder.
Watching Kyle McDougall[0] take his medium format photos is a soothing experience (but I know full well I would not have the patience for medium format.)
I’ve been wanting to build one of these for awhile. Did you follow a plan/blog or design your own? I already have donor instax and Polaroid bodies not sure what to put it as a back on
Have any of you printed/used an Infidex or other 35mm panoramic camera? How was final assembly? Were you able to lock in the focus mechanism correctly? I shoot a fair bit of 35mm and a few rolls of 120 every year, but so far, it's all on vintage mid-range cameras (Super Ikonta IV, assorted 1960s-70s fixed lens rangefinders).
One brings to mind the common misconception of the young that all physical media (including dad's CDs) is analogue, and that 'digital' refers only to 'computer' data.
All of these had previously had a digital component to them. It was just the proximal user-facing part being digitised (or the introduction of a computer) that gave the marketing department license to use the word 'digital'. Maybe it was over-cooked a bit.
What about a reflex camera with a CCD? It’s mechanical in that it moves the mirror out of the way to expose the digital censor. I’d call that a digital camera because the output is digital.
ETA: AAMOF, we called them Digital Cameras when they first arrived.
I learned the word 'analogue' as meaning something like 'there is a change in the medium in proportion to the signal being recorded'. And digital as 'the signal being recorded is transformed into a numerical value which is stored on the medium'. The consequence being that changes to the medium in the analogue domain (tape wear, attenuation etc) directly affects the signal, whereas in the digital domain the signal can potentially be re-created with no loss of fidelity.
I think chemical film process fits with that description.
Many of the film cameras that people 3D print essentially outsource that stuff to off-the-shelf focusing helicoids which are readily available, along with medium or large format lenses which are traditionally mounted in a leaf shutter anyway. So the hard parts (lens, aperture, focusing mechanism, shutter) are not part of the 3D print itself. You're right that 3D printing a serious shutter mechanism for anything other than a pinhole camera isn't really feasible (yet?). It's the light tight box and the film transport that are completely reasonable to print.
Pinhole cameras can be nothing but a soda can and a hole in it. Large format and some medium format folding camera shutter lens units just need a round hole to slip into and all the controls are external and built in
Only if you want a fairly compact camera supporting various shutter speed including some very fast ones, high speed films and lenses, and the kind of subjects that you want to take picture of. Once you are going much slower things can be less precise.
You can make a camera out of a cardboard box really. That won't do for a wildlife or olympic games professional photographer obviously.
RTFA. It clearly shows typical camera lenses in use on most of the cameras. The lens from a large format "press camera" (1) is often used because they'er available for reasonable money and usually have full manual controls, including the shutter release.
I have an abomination that I printed years ago that adapts an Instax SQ1 to Hasselblad lenses (and has an RB67 focusing screen on a viewfinder next to the Instax for composing and focusing).
It's sooooo impractical but the results are so fun.
The process is to compose, focus, put ND filter on, swap from finder to film body, half-fire the shutter, pull out the dark slide, fully fire the shutter, push in the dark slide, eject the film, rewind the shutter, and go back to the finder.
Watching Kyle McDougall[0] take his medium format photos is a soothing experience (but I know full well I would not have the patience for medium format.)
[0] https://www.youtube.com/@KyleMcDougall/videos
I’ve been wanting to build one of these for awhile. Did you follow a plan/blog or design your own? I already have donor instax and Polaroid bodies not sure what to put it as a back on
Have any of you printed/used an Infidex or other 35mm panoramic camera? How was final assembly? Were you able to lock in the focus mechanism correctly? I shoot a fair bit of 35mm and a few rolls of 120 every year, but so far, it's all on vintage mid-range cameras (Super Ikonta IV, assorted 1960s-70s fixed lens rangefinders).
I had no ideas this was a thing and now I can almost endlessly scroll through possibilities. Another reason for a 3d printer.
"analog" cameras?
One brings to mind the common misconception of the young that all physical media (including dad's CDs) is analogue, and that 'digital' refers only to 'computer' data.
I don't know if "the youth" are doing this, but if they are, the generation before probably bears a lot of the blame!
Digital Tax! Digital camera! Digital marketing! Digital distribution! Digital radio! Digital TV! Digital download!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/Digital
All of these had previously had a digital component to them. It was just the proximal user-facing part being digitised (or the introduction of a computer) that gave the marketing department license to use the word 'digital'. Maybe it was over-cooked a bit.
Analog in the sense that they are mechanical objects. I have never heard of analog CDs. Analog would be vinyl
> I have never heard of analog CDs.
Laserdiscs are analog.
No, analog in that they shoot in film, an analog chemical reaction - not digital
What about a reflex camera with a CCD? It’s mechanical in that it moves the mirror out of the way to expose the digital censor. I’d call that a digital camera because the output is digital.
ETA: AAMOF, we called them Digital Cameras when they first arrived.
The sensor is not mechanical. That's why it is digital
Your comment has just proven my point!
But what's analog then? I don't think it's a misconception. If it's not digital (and film photography isn't) then it's analog.
CDs are digital because data is encoded as bits (square wave) that are read digitally. 0 and 1
Yes, these are all analog cameras, are they not?
I learned the word 'analogue' as meaning something like 'there is a change in the medium in proportion to the signal being recorded'. And digital as 'the signal being recorded is transformed into a numerical value which is stored on the medium'. The consequence being that changes to the medium in the analogue domain (tape wear, attenuation etc) directly affects the signal, whereas in the digital domain the signal can potentially be re-created with no loss of fidelity.
I think chemical film process fits with that description.
What’s at the focal point? Film? Analog camera. CCD? Digital camera.
No. They are film cameras.
[dead]
Film cameras should require metal parts and high precision shutter mechanism. How about those? I doubt it can be printed.
Many of the film cameras that people 3D print essentially outsource that stuff to off-the-shelf focusing helicoids which are readily available, along with medium or large format lenses which are traditionally mounted in a leaf shutter anyway. So the hard parts (lens, aperture, focusing mechanism, shutter) are not part of the 3D print itself. You're right that 3D printing a serious shutter mechanism for anything other than a pinhole camera isn't really feasible (yet?). It's the light tight box and the film transport that are completely reasonable to print.
Pinhole cameras can be nothing but a soda can and a hole in it. Large format and some medium format folding camera shutter lens units just need a round hole to slip into and all the controls are external and built in
Only if you want a fairly compact camera supporting various shutter speed including some very fast ones, high speed films and lenses, and the kind of subjects that you want to take picture of. Once you are going much slower things can be less precise.
You can make a camera out of a cardboard box really. That won't do for a wildlife or olympic games professional photographer obviously.
RTFA. It clearly shows typical camera lenses in use on most of the cameras. The lens from a large format "press camera" (1) is often used because they'er available for reasonable money and usually have full manual controls, including the shutter release.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_camera
Ever heard of a Holga? The only metal parts in one of those are a single spring and some clips to hold it together.
> should require
Thats just like, your opinion, man.
Ignoring the other comments, if you want to make a film camera that isn’t a pain in the ass, yes. Otherwise you can get away with quite a bit.
You’re not going to get 1/1000+ shutters and all that though.