A little more context:

The exposure time for each line is a maximum of 30 ms. That number comes from dividing the amount of lines over the time a scan takes. Factoring in overhead from read-time and actually incrementing the sensor, I guess the sensor is open for maybe 15-20 ms.

As I said above, flickering sources are an issue. They manifest as periodic lines of darker and brighter streaks, kind of like venetian blinds. The LED sources I sometimes use are meant for film, so they’re either continuous, or on fast enough duty cycles so it doesn’t really matter, fluorescent sources powered from mains are from my experience most likely to mess things up.

The lights used here are continuous sources. Flickering sources show up as evenly spaced streaks across the whole image. Kind of like video of an old CRT TV.

Thats really Cool! Thanks for letting me know, this might be the impetus I needed to go back to working on the 220 camera!

Hi!

I’ve only ever managed to get the lide30 to play nice. I have destroyed one 110 and two 220-scanners in my efforts to build a more versatile rig.

What happens if you drop the prism back in?

I’ve also speculated about there being som calibration and automatic gain control going on in these newer models. I believe it could be used to normalize the values coming off of the individual sensor segments.

On my latest attempt at a 220 scanner, I actually built a small dimmable LED circuit that I attached externally to try and influence the calibration I thought was happening, but there was a disappointing lack of results. Come to think of it, I still have that rig laying around somewhere, and the experiment may have been flawed, I’ll have a look next time I’m at my workshop. I’ll let you know what I find.

I know that rig is at least functional, as objects placed directly onto the glass renders crude shadows on the scans.

That’s the long answer, the short answer is no, I don’t have any tips, maybe aside from working on fooling the possible calibration somehow.

Thanks!

If you’re interested in photography, building your own camera is extremely rewarding, and I can’t recommend it strongly enough. Hit me up if you need any guidance!

Thanks!

Cabbage covered a bunch of the process below. In this case, I had a neutral grey background and laid on my back, sticking my hands into the view of the camera. And while watching the scan progress on a screen I moved my hands around until I got this.

It’s a fairly cumbersome process, as each scan takes a couple of minutes and any unintended motion gets captured as well. Out of the 40 or so attempts, this one is the cleanest, both with regards to unintended motion, and with the pose coming out the way I wanted it to.

Good ifra, unfortunately my engineering skills stop at desk-sized

Hah! Thanks, I’ll let you know! Maybe I can set up some guerilla style exhibition in a nearby alley 😂

Thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I don’t crop shots done with this camera, I want to preserve the organic borders and learn to live with what is captured without messing too much with it.

However, I halfway agree with your observation, on a small screen this really could do with a tighter framing, or maybe bringing the model closer to the camera. But in a larger print (this is one of two shots Ive printed in 80x80 cm), the airy composition works really well.

I refuse to ignore you!

That’s really nice

As for busy road at night, I’m afraid that with this way of doing scanning photography it would be quite uninteresting. The motion is way too quick, and cars would render as with either weird vertical lines or very small diagonal squiggles, depending on which direction you scan.

I suggest looking up some talks by the Italian photographer Adam Magyar, he’s done some great talks on transchronologal (?) photography, and is a great artist himself.

I love the small insights into signal theory/processing generated by this image, this is really cool stuff! Thank you for chiming in.

Of course there’s some ancient broadcast standard at the bottom of 44.1khz, thanks for the clarification! (I work in film/TV and still struggle with explaining explaining ‘illegal’ values to some clients on certain deliverables)

Or a wheatfield, definetly not water though…

I haven’t really considered that, I’m assuming the (in this case) vertical sampling is ‘global’, as in the values at each sensor site is locked at the same time and then read out from the serial bus.

If there was a delay, stuff like fluorescent lighting would read as a moire pattern, but I’ve only ever encountered streaking/linear distortion in those circumstances.

I think the ‘griddyness’ or general sense of direction in the water is purely a function of how water moves and not a result of readout delay.

I’d love to be proven wrong, though, so if I can do some experiment to determine either way, I’m all ears.

Thanks! I’d love to hear your thoughts if you feel like sharing.

Agreed, it’s usually not that spiky

Thanks! Your nitpicking is most welcome.

Thanks, I agree, it’s one of my favorite shots from this camera.

That’s pretty clever. You’re walking in the footsteps of the Dutch masters, using projection in this way. I really like the drawings, and congratulations on finding more uses for your device!