Icculus
Windows paint is not too bad for a quickie. Its got circles, rectangles. lines. text, selection of colours, rub out, go back, fill.
You can get one done in 10 min if you are quick. The default paint window is a pretty good size for here so you dont have to mess around resizing.
First time you save, select "save as" from file menu and before you save set the file type box to .jpg
Windows paint is not too bad for a quickie. Its got circles, rectangles. lines. text, selection of colours, rub out, go back, fill.
You can get one done in 10 min if you are quick. The default paint window is a pretty good size for here so you dont have to mess around resizing.
First time you save, select "save as" from file menu and before you save set the file type box to .jpg
Sharp lcd panels in germany ?
hi
maybe someone knows where could i buy a Sharp lcd panel in germany ?
maybe some shop in berlin ? conrad ?
google gives me nothing :-(
thanks
erasmo
hi
maybe someone knows where could i buy a Sharp lcd panel in germany ?
maybe some shop in berlin ? conrad ?
google gives me nothing :-(
thanks
erasmo
fiber optic
yep the expence is one of the problems all right
as for the light this is a flourecent flood light 65w 6000 lums
i may need two but should give me enough light this is the cool light lighting of america sells equal so they say top about 600w haligen
yep the expence is one of the problems all right
as for the light this is a flourecent flood light 65w 6000 lums
i may need two but should give me enough light this is the cool light lighting of america sells equal so they say top about 600w haligen
65w flourecent
ohh ya i can not even look at this light when on very very bright and projects the light well to the screen. very coooool
ohh ya i can not even look at this light when on very very bright and projects the light well to the screen. very coooool
chukie1 flourscent lights are not point sources which means it will not look good. As not enough light will reach the panel. How are you going to get a fiber all over that? Sure it may look bright now but people are complaning that 49,000 lumen metal halides aren't cutting it.
well just doing a simple stand the light in a box put a fresnel in front and focus lens in front of lcd i have a decent pic so even if i must go to two bulbs at 12,000 lums and these are wall mounted with case flood lights i think it will work okay .ya the fiber optic idea does have it's draw back as in amount of fibers needed that is one of mt reasons maybe not to use it not sure yet.
the point sourceness of it all isnt really that big a deal in his idea because the fiberoptics parallel-ize (word?) the light for him...
Fiberoptics can get expensive... however... what about small glass rods? They can be found pretty cheap every now and again..and a stack of them might do the trick?
Anyone have any input?
Fiberoptics can get expensive... however... what about small glass rods? They can be found pretty cheap every now and again..and a stack of them might do the trick?
Anyone have any input?
jvisaria,
fiber-optics don't parallelize incoming light.
1. Light is coupled into the fiber within a certain angle of acceptance(probably wrong translation?) and is coming out as a light cone. No parallel light here! Exeption: laser light in a monomode fiber!
2. If you have no parallel light coming out you have the same problems as already discussed with multiple LED light. Each ending of the fiber should have it's own condensor and must additionally point to the objective. (lens array)
xblocker
fiber-optics don't parallelize incoming light.
1. Light is coupled into the fiber within a certain angle of acceptance(probably wrong translation?) and is coming out as a light cone. No parallel light here! Exeption: laser light in a monomode fiber!
2. If you have no parallel light coming out you have the same problems as already discussed with multiple LED light. Each ending of the fiber should have it's own condensor and must additionally point to the objective. (lens array)
xblocker
NEWBIE ALERT!!!!!!!
I have read EVERY SINGLE post in both the old and existing threads for the DIY projectors. I gotta tell you, you guys are too much! It's like following a soap opera every day, waiting to find out what's next. It's been great!
I have finally embarked on my DIY projector and am using the following design:
Light Source - Condenser Lense - Fresnel - 5" LCD - Fresnel
Light source is 250Watt MH with no reflector, light tube or cone. Just a big old bulb burning my eyesockets out while I'm working... Condenser is from inside of Delta IV CRT projector lense (it's the middle lense when you disassemble the lense assembly), two fresnels (page magnafiers from staples) and the 5" LCD is from Parts Express.
It is set up in prototype right now (that means I have a disaster waiting to happen on my project desk😱 )and I gotta tell you, I'm getting one heck of a picture???
I'm projecting about 12 feet onto the wall, the room is FULL of ambient light from the MH bulb, and I'm not using an objective lense, simply the second fresnel after the LCD and focusing with it.
This does not seem like it should work at all. I have tried to use the objective lense (again, from the Delta IV) but it is a real pain to focus (and not the ouside edge stuff that was talked about earlier, that was fixed by taking out the first SUPER planoconcave lense that is at the begining of the lense barrel). The focusing problem is from the two fresenels overlapping pictures onto each other and then trying to converge them with the objective. That's why I just started using the fresnels. Has anyone else had any experiences with this?
P.S. when you put the condenser lense RIGHT NEXT TO the light bulb - make sure it doesn't touch!!! I'll be heading out to get another Delta IV to scavenge the condenser out of tomorrow. The bulb BOILED surface and now I have a big spot with a bunch of little bubbles. (yes, it's glass and not plastic...) Teach me not to pay attention
😕
I have read EVERY SINGLE post in both the old and existing threads for the DIY projectors. I gotta tell you, you guys are too much! It's like following a soap opera every day, waiting to find out what's next. It's been great!
I have finally embarked on my DIY projector and am using the following design:
Light Source - Condenser Lense - Fresnel - 5" LCD - Fresnel
Light source is 250Watt MH with no reflector, light tube or cone. Just a big old bulb burning my eyesockets out while I'm working... Condenser is from inside of Delta IV CRT projector lense (it's the middle lense when you disassemble the lense assembly), two fresnels (page magnafiers from staples) and the 5" LCD is from Parts Express.
It is set up in prototype right now (that means I have a disaster waiting to happen on my project desk😱 )and I gotta tell you, I'm getting one heck of a picture???
I'm projecting about 12 feet onto the wall, the room is FULL of ambient light from the MH bulb, and I'm not using an objective lense, simply the second fresnel after the LCD and focusing with it.
This does not seem like it should work at all. I have tried to use the objective lense (again, from the Delta IV) but it is a real pain to focus (and not the ouside edge stuff that was talked about earlier, that was fixed by taking out the first SUPER planoconcave lense that is at the begining of the lense barrel). The focusing problem is from the two fresenels overlapping pictures onto each other and then trying to converge them with the objective. That's why I just started using the fresnels. Has anyone else had any experiences with this?
P.S. when you put the condenser lense RIGHT NEXT TO the light bulb - make sure it doesn't touch!!! I'll be heading out to get another Delta IV to scavenge the condenser out of tomorrow. The bulb BOILED surface and now I have a big spot with a bunch of little bubbles. (yes, it's glass and not plastic...) Teach me not to pay attention
😕
fluorex rules !! 65 watts, 6285 Lumen
i used 2 Fluorex bulbs 65 watts each and 6285 Lumen
so about 11.000 Lumen if you deduct the 10 pct efficiency loss.
i have some pics for those who might be interested
by the way, ZARK rules and those who do ot believe it, i will let you see my project copied from the Master himself!
i used 2 Fluorex bulbs 65 watts each and 6285 Lumen
so about 11.000 Lumen if you deduct the 10 pct efficiency loss.
i have some pics for those who might be interested
by the way, ZARK rules and those who do ot believe it, i will let you see my project copied from the Master himself!
Attachments
Hi Daveb,
when you use parabolic reflector, it suppose to produce parallel light and it should have a size slightly bigger than LCD panel.
Xblocker is right, see my rough sketch below.
Hi Multiplexor,
please try printable version of this thread (part 1 & 2) and search for chromatic and spherical abberation, you will find lot of this topic then.
Hi chukie1,
please try printable version of this thread (part 1 & 2) and search for fluorecent light or LOA, you will find lot of this topic before you start your shoping...
Good luck.
when you use parabolic reflector, it suppose to produce parallel light and it should have a size slightly bigger than LCD panel.
Xblocker is right, see my rough sketch below.
Hi Multiplexor,
please try printable version of this thread (part 1 & 2) and search for chromatic and spherical abberation, you will find lot of this topic then.
Hi chukie1,
please try printable version of this thread (part 1 & 2) and search for fluorecent light or LOA, you will find lot of this topic before you start your shoping...
Good luck.
Attachments
Gunawan,
I see what you're saying (and drawing). And maybe it's time I change my optics. Here's my dilemma:
The optics I'm using come from an overhead projector, and the native distance from the surface (where your transperency would go) to the lens assembly is 12.5". So far as I know, to get a focused image (projecting 12' across the room) using this lens then the object being projected MUST be at this distance from the lens.
Meanwhile, the fresnel which came with the projector has a native focal length of about 5.5" (the distance at which you can burn a hole in the picnic table by shining sunlight through it)
If these two things are true, then I propose it's impossible to place the objecive lens within the focal length of the fresnel.
PLEASE tell me I'm wrong, and this can work. Otherwise, it's time for new lenses all around, I think.
dave.🙁
I see what you're saying (and drawing). And maybe it's time I change my optics. Here's my dilemma:
The optics I'm using come from an overhead projector, and the native distance from the surface (where your transperency would go) to the lens assembly is 12.5". So far as I know, to get a focused image (projecting 12' across the room) using this lens then the object being projected MUST be at this distance from the lens.
Meanwhile, the fresnel which came with the projector has a native focal length of about 5.5" (the distance at which you can burn a hole in the picnic table by shining sunlight through it)
If these two things are true, then I propose it's impossible to place the objecive lens within the focal length of the fresnel.
PLEASE tell me I'm wrong, and this can work. Otherwise, it's time for new lenses all around, I think.
dave.🙁
Attachments
daveb,
Your situation may not be as dire as it sounds...
If your fresnel is from an OHP, then the trick to remember is that it is (probably) really TWO fresnels, each with a focal length of around 12" arranged so that the first one collimates diverging light from a point source into a parallel beam, and the second one condenses that parallel beam into a cone.
When you focussed parallel rays from the sun, you will have been treating the combined fresnels as a single lens with a focal length roughly half of the focal length of each fresnel.
If this is the case, then, with a parabolic reflector producing parallel light, you will not need the first half of fresnel doublet, because its work is already being done by the reflector.
In that case, you would be left with a single fresnel with a focal length compatible with your primary objective...
Bill.
Your situation may not be as dire as it sounds...
If your fresnel is from an OHP, then the trick to remember is that it is (probably) really TWO fresnels, each with a focal length of around 12" arranged so that the first one collimates diverging light from a point source into a parallel beam, and the second one condenses that parallel beam into a cone.
When you focussed parallel rays from the sun, you will have been treating the combined fresnels as a single lens with a focal length roughly half of the focal length of each fresnel.
If this is the case, then, with a parabolic reflector producing parallel light, you will not need the first half of fresnel doublet, because its work is already being done by the reflector.
In that case, you would be left with a single fresnel with a focal length compatible with your primary objective...
Bill.
Bill,
An interesting approach. However, I do believe that my fresnel is a single, not a double. I've taken it out, and it's got one side smooth (the side towards the bulb) and one ridged (toward the lens).
Perhaps the right thing to do is to replace it with a different Fresnel. Any idea of the typical focal length of the "page magnifier" available at Stapes et al?
The one from the ohp is plastic, so I don't think I'll feel like I'm wasting it if I don't use it.
dave.
An interesting approach. However, I do believe that my fresnel is a single, not a double. I've taken it out, and it's got one side smooth (the side towards the bulb) and one ridged (toward the lens).
Perhaps the right thing to do is to replace it with a different Fresnel. Any idea of the typical focal length of the "page magnifier" available at Stapes et al?
The one from the ohp is plastic, so I don't think I'll feel like I'm wasting it if I don't use it.
dave.
staples page magnifier
the focal length of the 2x staples magnifier i got from staples seems to be ~14"
the focal length of the 2x staples magnifier i got from staples seems to be ~14"
Hi Guys,
If the focal length is 14" then all is well.
I have never tested mine, and my memory is not good tonight, but I seem to remember that generally for a lens, their magnifying power is equal to the number of times their focal length will divide into 25cm (about 10").
It is something to do with near point of the eye and the amount by which the magnifying glass pushes the virtual image away from the viewer...
If I am right, then with a 2x lens, you will see a 5" (12.5 cm) focal length.
Here's a link I found that might help clarify my ramblings...
http://acept.la.asu.edu/PiN/rdg/elmicr/optical.shtml
Bill.
If the focal length is 14" then all is well.
I have never tested mine, and my memory is not good tonight, but I seem to remember that generally for a lens, their magnifying power is equal to the number of times their focal length will divide into 25cm (about 10").
It is something to do with near point of the eye and the amount by which the magnifying glass pushes the virtual image away from the viewer...
If I am right, then with a 2x lens, you will see a 5" (12.5 cm) focal length.
Here's a link I found that might help clarify my ramblings...
http://acept.la.asu.edu/PiN/rdg/elmicr/optical.shtml
Bill.