and the site receives a small commission
InsTLR Project
- Thread starter stevelmx5
- Start date
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
That's not a bad idea although I was also looking at solid rubber rollers last night as an alternative. I've also been scratching my head all night to work out the gearing so I can rotate the film 180 degrees and eject it out of the top like I always wanted to. There might be just enough room to fit the Instax cartridge and use the original 120 winding knob to turn the rollers if I can squeeze it all in which keeps the camera looking almost stock.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
This is my thinking with layout. The Instax cartridge can't move any further down because the shots will get cutoff by the 6x6 film aperture.
I drew up a new 120 spool last night with a wider centre spindle so it could be used as one of the rollers to save space. It may be a little too low down into the body of the camera though, meaning that the top roller will have to push down more on the film as it ejects which might cause some issues with development.
It would be much easier if I can get the original spool to function as a roller and that will also help secure the back onto the body.
The other reason for rotating the film is that it makes the lines of the new back flow much more smoothly with the original camera than my originals build. The base of the film cartridge should stop before the base of the camera meaning that there is nothing stopping it sitting flat when stood up.
I drew up a new 120 spool last night with a wider centre spindle so it could be used as one of the rollers to save space. It may be a little too low down into the body of the camera though, meaning that the top roller will have to push down more on the film as it ejects which might cause some issues with development.
It would be much easier if I can get the original spool to function as a roller and that will also help secure the back onto the body.
The other reason for rotating the film is that it makes the lines of the new back flow much more smoothly with the original camera than my originals build. The base of the film cartridge should stop before the base of the camera meaning that there is nothing stopping it sitting flat when stood up.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I've been looking at Kevin Kadooka's Instax back that he made for his Pentax 67 for some inspiration and think I might have come up with a way to use the original spool as a roller and resolve the issue of focal range/film plane.
Kevin found the same issue as me whereby the Instax cartridges have a 4mm deep base before the film so fitting them in any camera not designed with that in mind means that the focal range is reduced and infinity lost. He built his back for the film to be removed from the Instax cartridge in the dark and transferred into it. I could do the same thing with this back but think the extra step of removing film in the dark work be a pita for most people.
https://flickr.com/photos/14474101@N05/sets/72157655033978675
As an alternative, I'm looking into the possibility of supplying modified Instax cartridges pre-loaded with film which could just be fitted straight in.
This is a pita for me instead of the user but will kill two birds with one stone by letting me use the original 120 spool as the bottom roller and correcting focus. Hmmm, worth a look!
Kevin found the same issue as me whereby the Instax cartridges have a 4mm deep base before the film so fitting them in any camera not designed with that in mind means that the focal range is reduced and infinity lost. He built his back for the film to be removed from the Instax cartridge in the dark and transferred into it. I could do the same thing with this back but think the extra step of removing film in the dark work be a pita for most people.
https://flickr.com/photos/14474101@N05/sets/72157655033978675
As an alternative, I'm looking into the possibility of supplying modified Instax cartridges pre-loaded with film which could just be fitted straight in.
This is a pita for me instead of the user but will kill two birds with one stone by letting me use the original 120 spool as the bottom roller and correcting focus. Hmmm, worth a look!
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I've just spent a few hours going cross-eyed on Google Sketchup working out what size I would need to make the rollers without them fouling the original camera body or being too far apart to actually compress the film enough.
I've started by looking at using the standard 120 spool location because that's the most seamless installation. If I use that, I'll need a roller that's around 16mm diameter to meet the bottom side of the film without fouling the base of the cartridge. The problem with this is that any top roller will need to be mounted slightly ahead of the bottom one to fit which will be naturally pushing the ejected film down, right into the inside of the camera rather than out the top :0(
I don't want to force the film back upwards again because I think that will impact the development. I might be able to use a smaller top roller but I get the impression that the development will end up being uneven if do.
After deciding that's not going to be ideal, I've gone back to another idea of fitting a small cog to the original 120 winding point which will mate with a cog on the top roller to turn it. As well as that, the bottom roller is interlinked to the top using 2 separate cogs so that both rollers turn (opposite ways to pull the film out) in unison. This idea brings its own headaches trying to workout the number of teeth/diameter for each cog so I'm slowly working through that.
I might have to revert to the film ejecting through the base like my current back but that's the last option (and easiest!).
I've started by looking at using the standard 120 spool location because that's the most seamless installation. If I use that, I'll need a roller that's around 16mm diameter to meet the bottom side of the film without fouling the base of the cartridge. The problem with this is that any top roller will need to be mounted slightly ahead of the bottom one to fit which will be naturally pushing the ejected film down, right into the inside of the camera rather than out the top :0(
I don't want to force the film back upwards again because I think that will impact the development. I might be able to use a smaller top roller but I get the impression that the development will end up being uneven if do.
After deciding that's not going to be ideal, I've gone back to another idea of fitting a small cog to the original 120 winding point which will mate with a cog on the top roller to turn it. As well as that, the bottom roller is interlinked to the top using 2 separate cogs so that both rollers turn (opposite ways to pull the film out) in unison. This idea brings its own headaches trying to workout the number of teeth/diameter for each cog so I'm slowly working through that.
I might have to revert to the film ejecting through the base like my current back but that's the last option (and easiest!).
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Ok, I'm ready to print the first draft of my new roller/gear system. On screen it should work but I don't have a huge amount of tolerance as I'm fitting a drive gear to the original winding spool so I can eject the film using the normal 120 winding knob outside. I'm expecting some adjustment to be needed once it's printed but fingers crossed!
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I guess it's only like someone saying they're going to build a camera and cut the pieces manually. The benefit of 3D printing is I can extend the 'measure twice, cut once' plan to measure loads of times, swear, re-design, swear, draw it again then print once :0)
wontolla
Misery Guts Monica
- Messages
- 8,501
- Name
- I'm not a Misery Guts and Monica is not my Moniker
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeh, been there.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Illustrations look good, watching the saga with interest.
Thanks. I'm not entirely convinced the first print will work exactly as planned but i'll find out tomorrow when it's done.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Well, Mark one has printed and I'm pretty happy with it. It was printed in the lowest quality and there was an issue with the filament snapping mid-print so the actual finished parts didn't hold together properly but the actual alignment of the cogs seems to be spot on :0)
The rollers snapped because of the filament issue but I'm really happy with how round they've ended up.
I need to cut out some of the surround to fit into the body properly but the overall position of the cogs/rollers seems to be pretty much spot on which is good and surprising!
The rollers snapped because of the filament issue but I'm really happy with how round they've ended up.
I need to cut out some of the surround to fit into the body properly but the overall position of the cogs/rollers seems to be pretty much spot on which is good and surprising!
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
While I was re-designing the surround to fit into the TLR body, I printed out the grip I drew up for my Olympus Pen FT a while back. After figuring out some of the advanced settings for the printing software we've managed to get a completely flat piece (one of the problems with 3D printing is the layers cooling at different rates causing warping).
I also printed a screw for attaching the grip to the tripod socket but I'm not 100% happy with the head of it so I might just use a metal screw instead.
For interest, this was the grip mid-print :0)
I also printed a screw for attaching the grip to the tripod socket but I'm not 100% happy with the head of it so I might just use a metal screw instead.
For interest, this was the grip mid-print :0)
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Cartridge surround version 1.1 fits much better now. The cartridge slots down into the surround tightly and leaves enough room for the winding cogs on the outside between it and the camera body.
Annoyingly, I did a stupid schoolboy error and allowed the printing software to update. Looks
Like the new version forces a firmware check/update on the printer so the hack I did to use non-OEM filament has now stopped working [emoji35]. Until I can get the printer recognising the new filament I'm stuck for more prints...aaaarrghhh!
Annoyingly, I did a stupid schoolboy error and allowed the printing software to update. Looks
Like the new version forces a firmware check/update on the printer so the hack I did to use non-OEM filament has now stopped working [emoji35]. Until I can get the printer recognising the new filament I'm stuck for more prints...aaaarrghhh!
- Messages
- 1,184
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Blimey mate, I was impressed with the previous incarnation but this has just gone up a notch!
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
After a long night on Sketchup last night I think I'm at the point of having the completed internal mechanism/container, external body and rear door sorted now.
The parts will be printed individually so the rollers can be assembled before the internal container is slotted into the main body and the whole unit attached to the camera. I was going to hinge the rear door but have decided to use a friction slot on the base along with a slot in tab on the top to keep it all tightly aligned. as well as saving weight, it also keeps the print more simple.
Top tab inserted showing internal light traps down each side of the door;
Door fully closed;
Exploded parts ready to print;
The last pieces I need to draw before it's ready to print are the eject hook (once I decide where the sliding button will be!) and the springs for the back door to keep pressure on the film. It is actually possible to print the flat springs required so I'll try that first and see how well they work.
The parts will be printed individually so the rollers can be assembled before the internal container is slotted into the main body and the whole unit attached to the camera. I was going to hinge the rear door but have decided to use a friction slot on the base along with a slot in tab on the top to keep it all tightly aligned. as well as saving weight, it also keeps the print more simple.
Top tab inserted showing internal light traps down each side of the door;
Door fully closed;
Exploded parts ready to print;
The last pieces I need to draw before it's ready to print are the eject hook (once I decide where the sliding button will be!) and the springs for the back door to keep pressure on the film. It is actually possible to print the flat springs required so I'll try that first and see how well they work.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Why do people take such awful pictures when they're trying to sell a camera and also not even bothering to clean the crud off it!
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Instax-Mi...384042?hash=item2a698b9dea:g:16sAAOSwnNBXU0ss
I've sent them a question asking to see example pictures from it and also asking how they've fitted the back as I reckon the focus will be well out but they seem to be skipping around that..
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Instax-Mi...384042?hash=item2a698b9dea:g:16sAAOSwnNBXU0ss
I've sent them a question asking to see example pictures from it and also asking how they've fitted the back as I reckon the focus will be well out but they seem to be skipping around that..
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I've also just uploaded the final print files to a local printer on 3DHubs to get a quote for them providing the finished parts. I'm interested to see what their results look like compared to the prints I've done. Hopefully, assuming they can print them, I'll get them back within 3 days.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Nice name drop in ThePhoblographer's review of the new Mint InstantFlex Version 2.0
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2016/06/16/review-mint-camera-instantflex-tl70-2-0/#more-89982
"So how’s the image quality? Honestly, in the best of situations it’s quite awesome. I don’t think that it’s capable of achieving the fullest sharpness that Fujifilm Instax film (or Polaroids, as some of you call them) can render, but it surely is still very capable of doing. The only camera that I think can do that is Steve Lloyd’s hack for a TLR."
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2016/06/16/review-mint-camera-instantflex-tl70-2-0/#more-89982
"So how’s the image quality? Honestly, in the best of situations it’s quite awesome. I don’t think that it’s capable of achieving the fullest sharpness that Fujifilm Instax film (or Polaroids, as some of you call them) can render, but it surely is still very capable of doing. The only camera that I think can do that is Steve Lloyd’s hack for a TLR."
ChrisR
I'm a well known grump...
- Messages
- 11,024
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nice name drop in ThePhoblographer's review of the new Mint InstantFlex Version 2.0
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2016/06/16/review-mint-camera-instantflex-tl70-2-0/#more-89982
"So how’s the image quality? Honestly, in the best of situations it’s quite awesome. I don’t think that it’s capable of achieving the fullest sharpness that Fujifilm Instax film (or Polaroids, as some of you call them) can render, but it surely is still very capable of doing. The only camera that I think can do that is Steve Lloyd’s hack for a TLR."
The annoying thing is that the link he includes is to an article about Brock Saddler's hack of an ETRS! Still, if you didn't do the jump, you know this Steve Lloyd bloke is awesome, which is right!
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I noticed that too and commented about it so Chris (Phoblographer) has corrected the link now :0)
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
A couple of very short videos showing the working interlink between the original 120 spool winding know on the outside of the body and the internal Instax roller;
https://flic.kr/p/JavwEf
https://flic.kr/p/J6VkyP
https://flic.kr/p/JavwEf
https://flic.kr/p/J6VkyP
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
After a lot of experimentation and corrections to the models I've now got two versions of my parts being sent out to me. One set is printed in PLA and one in ABS to compare relative strength/rigidity. In theory, the PLA is more rigid but also more fragile than ABS so can snap at joints as well as being more susceptible to high heat. However, ABS is flexible which might affect alignment but I think it should be ok.
My rear door design might need some more work too as there is a 0.75mm thick strip along the bottom that slots between the base of the unit and the cartridge surround to lock it in but due to how thin it is, it's pretty fragile. I'll assemble the pieces when they arrive and see what changes are needed.
My rear door design might need some more work too as there is a 0.75mm thick strip along the bottom that slots between the base of the unit and the cartridge surround to lock it in but due to how thin it is, it's pretty fragile. I'll assemble the pieces when they arrive and see what changes are needed.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I've just uploaded more pictures to my Flickr set but my parts have arrived :0)
I've started assembling the PLA parts first and have come across some gaps that are too tight so I need to adjust my models slightly to account for that. The main thing is that the rollers work well and the gears mesh nicely.
I've wrapped the gears in a layer of masking tape which gives them some cushioning to compress the developer pod as well as some grip to pull the film through.
I need to have a re-think of the door I reckon to make it lock and release more simply. At the moment it relies on friction which holds but I don't think it will be enough once the springs are fitted to compress the film.
https://flic.kr/p/JuUMRX
https://flickr.com/photos/8476499@N02/sets/72157667913702016
I've started assembling the PLA parts first and have come across some gaps that are too tight so I need to adjust my models slightly to account for that. The main thing is that the rollers work well and the gears mesh nicely.
I've wrapped the gears in a layer of masking tape which gives them some cushioning to compress the developer pod as well as some grip to pull the film through.
I need to have a re-think of the door I reckon to make it lock and release more simply. At the moment it relies on friction which holds but I don't think it will be enough once the springs are fitted to compress the film.
https://flic.kr/p/JuUMRX
https://flickr.com/photos/8476499@N02/sets/72157667913702016
Last edited:
Hey man, I'm not a regular here, but just wanted to know if you could answer a couple of questions for me? I'm attempting to model something similar to this but for an RZ67 back. How large of a gap did you leave between the rollers? Not sure how crucial it would be. Also I might have missed it from earlier, but how are you handling the initial ejection of the film into the rollers?
Either way, hugely impressed by this project, keep up the good work.
Either way, hugely impressed by this project, keep up the good work.
- Messages
- 1,195
- Name
- Dan
- Edit My Images
- No
That looks really neat, Steve. Good stuff!
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks, I'm getting pretty excited about it now. I've re-designed the door to hinge from the left side using a simple hinge pin and magnetic fixings on the right. I think they should be strong enough to compress the seals and keep the film flat.
The roller mechanism is working really smoothly in my Yashica 635 so my next test is in my friends' Rollei to see if I can have the same movement in that too. I'm hoping the designs are exact as their main dimensions are.
The roller mechanism is working really smoothly in my Yashica 635 so my next test is in my friends' Rollei to see if I can have the same movement in that too. I'm hoping the designs are exact as their main dimensions are.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry, I didn't see your post until now. The gap between the the rollers is around 1.5mm and I've then wrapped them in rough tape to add some grip to pull the film through and also close the gap with some cushioning so the wider chemical pod can fit through as well as the slimmer film.
The initial ejection on my first version used the original metal plate that the Instax camera used. I just removed the gear/cam that moved it automatically when the camera motor started the eject cycle and attached a bracket so I could push the exposed film manually until the rollers took it.
On my new version I've printed an eject bar with a 2mm wide pick that pushes the film forwards instead.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Ok, my updated models are complete and the printer has checked them for supports required and they won't need many which cuts down the cost and complexity. They've been testing a new plastic (for them) called PETG which has the flexibility of PLA and the rigidity of ABS but not the associated issues of PLA not being great in higher temperatures and the risk of snapping thinner ABS parts. They're going to get a price together for me so I can see what difference it makes to the overall cost before going ahead with another print.
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
The next revision of parts are being printed Friday/Saturday so I should have them early next week. The rear door is now hinged with a 2mm steel hinge pin and magnetic fasteners to hold it shut. From the testing I've done, the magnets should be strong enough to hold it shut and allow the springs to compress the film in the cartridge to keep it flat. I'll know for sure once I assemble the parts though.
Once I've got it assembled with the eject bar I'll be able to actually test the success of the rollers in spreading the chemicals so I'm a bit nervous about the actual results. If anything, I'll need to play round with the gap between the rollers by adding/removing tape so I've got a bit of flexibility with it.
Once I've got it assembled with the eject bar I'll be able to actually test the success of the rollers in spreading the chemicals so I'm a bit nervous about the actual results. If anything, I'll need to play round with the gap between the rollers by adding/removing tape so I've got a bit of flexibility with it.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
After numerous attempts at getting my models to print properly I ended up giving up on them and re-drew them from scratch :0(
Good news though, the printer has checked tonight and they look all good!
They're going to be printed this week so I should have them by the weekend/early next week. I'm hoping to have a fully working back in time for the Peaks meet so it would be good if I can test it out on a range of TLRs which I'm hoping will be available!
Cheers
Steve
Good news though, the printer has checked tonight and they look all good!
They're going to be printed this week so I should have them by the weekend/early next week. I'm hoping to have a fully working back in time for the Peaks meet so it would be good if I can test it out on a range of TLRs which I'm hoping will be available!
Cheers
Steve