I have this little thing that fits in a SLR camera shoe, for the purpose of placing a diffuser in front of the pop-up flash.
It was a useful thing on my old camera, I'd use it for softer lighting and less harsh shadows:
With diffuser:
Without:
The problem is, my new camera has a little button in the shoe which disables the pop-up flash when something is plugged in.
Here's my solution, make one side shorter so it doesn't hit the little button:
Proof it works: I used it to take the "with diffuser" picture!
Now, I have 3 problems. 1) I measured the distance between the posts on the device I was replacing, and not the holes on the diffuser. I need to bend the fairly brittle arms out to put them in the hole. 2) The reason why the original is curvy is because the straight arms slightly interfere with the popup flash. 3) My printer sucks at supporting material, and the bottom edge is rough.
1 and 2 can be fixed by making the whole thing wider, or curvy like the original. 3 is a problem I may be able to fix by getting better software, a better printer, or a better user.
If you're careful, you can bend your prints by warming them up. I've used one of those electric hot air guns that you use for paint stripping and the like, but even a powerful hair dryer might work. I've also done it by putting the parts in a low oven for a while.
Use gloves to avoid getting burned and experiment with some scrap prints before you try to bend the real thing.
I don't like automatically generated support material, but sometimes I build some thin support struts into my designs - it's pretty easy to add them if you use openScad, and you can place them where they're easy to cut off once the print is done.
And it made me look up Numpy, which is a pretty cool python library thingy. And what I know about Mandlebrot sets comes from the book The Mathematical Tourist by Ivars Peterson. Complex numbers in a simple polynomial.
__________________
Last edited by S.Vashti; 10-17-2015 at 02:34 PM.
Reason: added stuff
Update: I took your suggestion by removing the legs, *AND* the camera (which would definitely hit, without them), and it flies amazingly well without, and doesn't tumble top-heavily on landing any more. Now hover-mode can actually *HOVER* instead of being restricted to 'plummet' and 'escape'. Also helps deal with the weakening battery...
I think it was factory-calibrated without them, since it'd been acting like it was hauling lead all this time.
I've been experimenting with cameras and FPV* on multicopters. This was last Sunday - amazing weather for November.
* stands for 'first person view' - there is a little video camera on the model with a transmitter that sends the live video back to the ground - the pilot wears video goggles while flying so it's almost like being on-board the multicopter/plane/whatever.
It pays to sit down or lean against something for the first few flights. Once you get used to it then it's not so bad and you can stand up while flying. This is better when flying planes that need a throw to begin the flight (most of them don't have wheels).
I don't know what the depressions in the field are - some people say they are bomb craters, but they seem too big for that and nowhere near circular enough. I also heard the theory that they were clay pits dug in medieval times - but there are no nearby houses or signs that there were ever people living very close nearby. It's a mystery.
I've been experimenting with cameras and FPV* on multicopters. This was last Sunday - amazing weather for November.
I'm pretty sure this is what everyone is imagining when they buy a quadcopter with a camera only to grunt and scuff their feet when they realize it only records for later, sterile viewing of their quadcopter blundering into every blunt structure in range.
You have one of these little video cameras mounted on the front of the quad:
Hooked up to a little video transmitter like this one:
You can power them both from the same battery that powers the quad usually, though you may need a voltage regulator or booster depending on what batteries your quad uses.
It transmits in the (no licence needed) 5.8GHz band. You can use a simple wire antenna but something like this gives more range.
Then on the ground I use a receiver like this one:
But I have a similar 'cloverleaf' antenna to the one on the quad - for receiving we use four-leaf ones instead of the three-leaf transmitter ones - I'm not sure why.
And it's wired to video goggles.
You can get the goggles now with a built-in receiver, but I don't have those.
Again, you usually swap the cheap supplied antennas for some better ones to give more range.
There are about 8 legal video channels in the UK, but more in other countries, so you can have several FPV quads and/or planes flying at the same time. You can get half-a-mile range pretty easily and legally we're not supposed to fly that far away anyway. You can also fly behind trees and stuff without losing the video providing you are fairly close by.
Most of the gear is pretty cheap. The total cost of the airborne video equipment is about $50. The receiver is only $30 or so, but the goggles are still quite pricey - around $300. Some people use a much cheaper 'goggle' which is just a 7-inch screen mounted in a foam box that you strap to your head - and it has a Fresnel lens between the screen and your eyes to get the focus about right. This 'goggle' costs about $40. I have one hooked up in parallel with my goggles so that when I'm flying other people can look into it and get a taste of what FPV flying is like.
I thought you were going for a landing in the car boot at the end there. That would have been handy.
I chucked one of my car's rubber mats on the ground to take off from (the propellers are close to the ground so using a mat keeps them out of the grass).
You can see the mat in the take-off shot. I did land back on the same mat, but a little close to the edge so you can't see the mat after the quad has touched down.
Continuing in my tradition of watching math videos and then going out and making a crappier version of what they already did, I give you whatever this is:
(spoilered for epileptics)
(fyi, it goes up to 200 before repeating)
I forgot to mention a while ago that I made a gearbox to push filament for my printer because my original one, a direct-drive-on-a-stick, didn't work so well.
As before, it's something I built to make do with all the wrong parts -- wrong pusher gear, wrong motor, wrong bearings. It needs gear reduction to get enough force, and I found one that worked on thingiverse. I derived the extruder from one for the "Kossel" printer, but had to completely redo it, so I called it the "Kossack".
It's a teensy bit complicated.
There are at least 2 other Kossacks in the world right now built by people who also had to make do with the wrong pusher gears.
Mine has been working hard printing these for the season.