DIY photo turntable

[Cranky Dog]

Other notes:

• Burst mode is unlikely to be a good method, as most cameras will fill their buffers quickly and then slow down their burst rate. If you're using a 1DX or a D4S with a high-end memory card, this probably won't be a problem. (So for only $7K or so ....)

Unless you insist on using RAW format, which is overkill IMO if it's to post on the web, burst mode will work.

 

If you stick to JPEG (a much smaller file size), most camera buffers will be able to handle the task.

 

Ok, got a clock machine. Left only the second tab. Glued a large Bones KS plastic base that fitted the now empty clock face perfectly.

 

Its strength is soooo feeble it won't even cope with the base weight, won't move just like... shiver there. Shessh, I mean no harm to you, cheap chinese clock!

 

Little chinese thing is sentient it seems, and clings to the battery I used to test it... can't remove it. It's alive and won't go into darkness again.

I noticed on Amazon that there is such a thing as "high torque" clock mechanisms. The kind that is designed for grandfather type clocks with heavier/longer hands.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Cranky Dog

[Pragma]

 

Ok, got a clock machine. Left only the second tab. Glued a large Bones KS plastic base that fitted the now empty clock face perfectly.

 

Its strength is soooo feeble it won't even cope with the base weight, won't move just like... shiver there. Shessh, I mean no harm to you, cheap chinese clock!

 

Little chinese thing is sentient it seems, and clings to the battery I used to test it... can't remove it. It's alive and won't go into darkness again.

 

Don't give up! It's true the clock motors are extremely weak. One of the advantages of the lego setup I am using is that the clock motor doesn't bear any weight, which helps it turn. Even then it sometimes gets stuck if you look at it funny.

 

As for the batteries, I'm not sure why they make it so hard to get the batteries in and out. Fortunately, it uses so little power that there is not a big problem with just leaving the thing running.

[Pragma]

I recently got an arduino kit in the mail, and it included a tiny stepper motor. I have just started putting together turntable version 3.0! Now I can control the rotation to a precision of 4096 steps per rotation. And I can run it from my computer, so I can the turntable sync up with the camera. And the motor is more powerful, so there is no problem photographing larger stuff!

Now I just need a new finished mini to photograph with it ...

[Cranky Dog]

You have now reached the point where you can take "The Next Step".

3D animated GIFs!

Just find a way of positioning the camera a little bit to the left, then a little bit to the right, stitch them together, cross/uncross your eyes, give yourself a massive headache, and voilà. Magnificent high-res, full 360^o pictures, where you will see every little flaw in glorious detail from every angle and hate it for the rest of your life!

 

P.S. I want one too.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Cranky Dog

[Pragma]

That's genius! You're right, I think it wouldn't be too hard to make a pair of animations just by moving the camera. I could try the cross-uncross method, but I am tempted to try the red/blue glasses style.

[Cranky Dog]

Though red/blue 3D does work, for our hobby it will give horrendous colour rendering. And unless you (and everyone) has a properly calibrated monitor, and tinted glasses at hand, it just won't work well.

 

This is why I prefer the cross-eyed method. It may screw your peripheral vision while you're at it, but picture quality is undeniable (assuming the original images have the exact same lighting conditions).

 

Lets stick with the single view 4096 steps of rotation first.

[Pragma]

Okay, okay, one thing at a time. I tried the new turntable with 512 steps, the next step up from that (1024) I think would be overkill. The result of my first test wasn't quite perfect; I think there is a bit of vibration from the motor that causes the turntable to drift. I also forgot to set the camera to manual, so there is some flicker from the automatic exposure. So I'll try to find a way to anchor the turntable better, set my camera up properly and try again. I'll post pictures once I've resolved those issues.

[Pragma]

Strangely, I find it extremely difficult to view cross eyed 3d images, but I have no problem with the other kind where you focus your eyes beyond the screen. It's just so much more natural to uncross my eyes than to cross them.

[Pragma]

Here is the fixed up result with 512 frames. I increased the framerate to 60 fps, so it should look smoother. And it seems the new forum can embed it directly ... spiffy!

 

 

[Pragma]

So I finally taught myself how to view cross-eyed 3d. Good suggestion, I think it works really well!

 

[Cranky Dog]

It works!

 

It's pretty amazing that you were able to do it so quickly. However, it doesn't seem to "pop out" like other 3D pictures can.I can't say if it's because of the distance between both images, the angle, the focal distance, the lack of background reference point (needs more Sir Forscales), or whatever. But this is already way ahead of what I expected.

 

If you're still interested in the technique, there are plenty of guides online concerning stereoscopy.

[Pragma]

I think that's because I cheated :). I didn't actually move the camera, I just had both of the sides render the same video, with a relative delay of a few frames. That way it shows the mini from a different angle in each eye. But unfortunately it means the angle of the background doesn't change, so the background is not receding the way it should.

 

Of course, the right way is to take photos from two separate angles. And perhaps having a background that isn't just one solid colour. Unfortunately, it takes a very long time to shoot 512 frames, so I haven't had a chance to do a proper stereo photo. I'll see if I can find an online guide.

 

 

[Cranky Dog]

11 minutes ago, Pragma said:

I think that's because I cheated :). I didn't actually move the camera, I just had both of the sides render the same video, with a relative delay of a few frames. That way it shows the mini from a different angle in each eye. But unfortunately it means the angle of the background doesn't change, so the background is not receding the way it should.

That *is* an actual 3D technique, but it needs more movement of the whole picture to be effective.

 

It's still very impressive that it's doable with a relatively simple setup.

 

[Suddenly dreaming of ReaperCon with stereoscopic pictures of all contest entries on a turntable]

[Pragma]

1 hour ago, Cranky Dog said:

[Suddenly dreaming of ReaperCon with stereoscopic pictures of all contest entries on a turntable]

 

If I ever make it to ReaperCon, I'm definitely bringing my little photo turntable.

[Ludo]

I need dis.....