Month: February 2006

Lex 35/Vivitar T100 crapcam disassembly instructions

Nicolai Grossman Leave a comment

Eben Ostby posted step-by-step disassembly instructions, with photos, for the Lex 35/Vivitar T100 toy camera. Check it out in this thread in the Trashcams group on Flickr.

Lest you be tempted to splurge for the Vivitar T100 for US $7.50, be aware that it’s the same camera as the Lex 35 except that it has a tripod mount and says Vivitar on the front. While I don’t think that’s worth the extra 6 bucks, it does mean that Eben’s instructions apply to it as well.

The Lex 35 is available for a whopping US $1.50 from American Science & Surplus in the Optics -> Optical Devices section. (Sorry, can’t link directly.)

Blog commenting now works in IE

Nicolai Grossman Leave a comment

Imagine that!

The old ThinkPad that I used for browser testing finally died, so I didn’t pick up on the problem. Sorry!

Tech note: apparently IE has a problem where it doesn’t allow you to manipulate a form field named "author" with JavaScript if you have an "author" meta tag. Yet another reason to switch from the steaming pile of shit that is IE to something sane, like Firefox. Hell, lynx would be an improvement. At least it has deterministic rendering!

Non-tech note: IE sucks. Firefox is free and does not suck. Please consider switching.

2 on DIY ring flashes

Nicolai Grossman Leave a comment

Ring flashes are circular flash units that mount around the lens and produce flat, even lighting. They’re generally used for macro photography and were popular for fashion photography in the 90s. As they’re quite expensive, these two articles on how to make your own are quite handy. Both have solid step-by-step instructions.

First is a how-to from DigiHack about making an adaptor rig for an existing flash unit. Cheap and easy.

Then there’s one from Robots Kick Ass on how to make a ring flash from scratch using LEDs.

Via MAKE Blog.

Washing soda film developer test drive: coffee and vitamin C

Nicolai Grossman 2 Comments

Justin Ouellette took two washing soda-based DIY film developers out for a test: coffee (aka caffeinol or folgernol) and vitamin C, with Rodinal as a reference.

I tried coffee once and got no development whatsoever. While this seems uncommon as I’ve never heard or read about this happening to anyone else, it does illustrate the [hopefully obvious] point that testing weird developers on rolls that you actually care about is a bad idea. Against that hope of obviousness, I tested it on a roll I was really excited about and learned the lesson the hard way. Dumbass. I haven’t tried it again, but Justin’s results are inspiring enough to make me want to give it another go.

Check out the comparison at chromogenic.net

Bill creeping through US Congress limits artistic expression

Nicolai Grossman Leave a comment

Edward Greenberg of StockPhotographer.info writes,

"The Act contains certain anti-speech aspects which will directly affect illustrators, photographers and others.

"It will serve to eliminate the current protection for non-commercial speech currently contained in the Lanham Act. It will prevent businesses (artists)and consumers from invoking famous trademarks to explain or illustrate their discussion of public issues.

"For example, using the phrase "Where’s the Beef" could be actionable. Although you might use it in a non-commercial way, the (very) famous Wendy’s slogan when used to comment might not be protected by the fair use exception…"

Continue reading the article, which provides further explanation and contact info for who to write to to express your concern. Please check this out and take action—it has potentially catastrophic effects for artists as well as free speech and fair use in general.

Via Boing Boing