Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: Nice show, but...

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,753

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pangolin View Post
    ...So selling it as a component to a variety of people, who would retrofit into their variety of projectors, and wind up having a variety of results, and would then make a variety of forum posts, well, I hope you see where all of this is headed. Basically Pangolin would look like idiots for developing such a bad system. Know what I mean?
    I understand. For those who publish shows on forums/youtube/facebook, it makes sense to have the highest quality to add validity to a new product.

    So -- bottom line, if you want one of these projectors, call Justin and he'll give you a price for a projector. There is a line of projectors ranging from 3 watts up to 30 watts (I think, something like that).
    For my living room laser show, that's the equivalent of using a Ferrari to pick up the groceries! My projectors are all single-mode 250mW projectors (I hate beam shaping multi-mode diodes!). I used to use 1W projector but that was too bright for my living room wall! Hopefully, in the future, when the product had matured, it will be available to all! Thanks for your reply though!
    If you're the smartest person in the room, then you're in the wrong room.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,314

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkumpula View Post
    Nice work, PJ!
    I'm sure the new Kvant builds will be great, but in the mean time I am happy to film any BeamBrush show after I finish my projector if desired by PJ/Mike/Lyra/ and others with access to the BeamBrush updated version of Beyond.
    -David
    Yes that will be a given. Wanna see how things look with so many wavelengths on video too. I'm assuming you are using really narrow band pass (I think that's what it's called) dichroics so you can combine both 405nm and 445nm without too much losses.. I think i've seen those in the past.. unless you are just using a prism pair.

    You could push the max divergence further in machdsp I reckon although for content compatibility that's interchangable off course I would disadvice!


    Regarding the module: I will eventually replacing it in mine in some way or another even if that means bearing the cost of interchange to a different module (or trade) + fees.
    But it's important i'm working with it because content is key.. content will help people get an idea of how to use the platform and also means the product is usefull out of the box for people who aren't hardcore content creators (that allows them to modify or just use what's given to them on launch).

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Default

    How small is this latest incarnation of the Beam Brush idea?

    I remember Bill talking about Beam Brush way back in 2007 at the first SELEM, and he said that while the very first version that he got working years earlier was something quite large (as in, somewhere between the size of a coffee cup and a beer can, not counting the driver electronics), by that time he had it down to around the size of a roll of quarters or so. I believe that "roll of quarters" form factor was the second version of the device.?.

    So now that we're up to what, version 4 maybe? Something like that... Anyway I'm sure by now it's gotten even smaller, but I'm curious as to just how small...

    Adam

  4. #24
    swamidog's Avatar
    swamidog is online now Jr. Woodchuckington Janitor III, Esq.
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    santa fe, nm
    Posts
    1,545,752

    Default

    based on what i saw at ILDA, it's pretty tiny. roughly the size of a galvo block.

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    How small is this latest incarnation of the Beam Brush idea?

    I remember Bill talking about Beam Brush way back in 2007 at the first SELEM, and he said that while the very first version that he got working years earlier was something quite large (as in, somewhere between the size of a coffee cup and a beer can, not counting the driver electronics), by that time he had it down to around the size of a roll of quarters or so. I believe that "roll of quarters" form factor was the second version of the device.?.

    So now that we're up to what, version 4 maybe? Something like that... Anyway I'm sure by now it's gotten even smaller, but I'm curious as to just how small...

    Adam
    suppose you're thinkin' about a plate o' shrimp. Suddenly someone'll say, like, plate, or shrimp, or plate o' shrimp out of the blue, no explanation. No point in lookin' for one, either. It's all part of a cosmic unconciousness.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swamidog View Post
    based on what i saw at ILDA, it's pretty tiny. roughly the size of a galvo block.
    That *is* an improvement then!

    I just learned that in addition to Mike Dunn, and Master PJ, and David Kumpula, Lyra Letourneau is also working on new shows that will include Beam Brush effects. So it would appear that we've all got some very cool content to look forward to seeing in the near future.

    Adam

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Mill, SC USA
    Posts
    1,507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    How small is this latest incarnation of the Beam Brush idea?

    I remember Bill talking about Beam Brush way back in 2007 at the first SELEM, and he said that while the very first version that he got working years earlier was something quite large (as in, somewhere between the size of a coffee cup and a beer can, not counting the driver electronics), by that time he had it down to around the size of a roll of quarters or so. I believe that "roll of quarters" form factor was the second version of the device.?.

    So now that we're up to what, version 4 maybe? Something like that... Anyway I'm sure by now it's gotten even smaller, but I'm curious as to just how small...
    It's the size of another Saturn galvo mount sitting right next to your galvos plus the driver. Saturn galvos in their mount are pretty small, of course, so much smaller a footprint as compared with a coffee cup or beer can.


    Quote Originally Posted by masterpj View Post
    Yes that will be a given. Wanna see how things look with so many wavelengths on video too. I'm assuming you are using really narrow band pass (I think that's what it's called) dichroics so you can combine both 405nm and 445nm without too much losses.. I think i've seen those in the past.. unless you are just using a prism pair.

    You could push the max divergence further in machdsp I reckon although for content compatibility that's interchangable off course I would disadvice!
    Yeah, PJ, I use this to combine 405nm with everything else. The 405nm gets introduced last in my builds and there is very low loss of any wavelength through this dichro.

    Regarding the divergence, for the benefit of those that don't already know it is adjustable in both hardware and software and I may increase mine in the hardware a bit if I think its necessary due to the small (~2mm) incoming beam. That could impact its ability to quickly shift from full divergence to no divergence when scanning at 60Kpps, but we'll see. I believe Bill tuned mine with my plans in mind though, so I doubt it will be necessary.

    I think for show compatibility when changing throw distance or when switching projectors that have significantly different initial beamsize/divergence, adjusting through Beyond is the most practical solution. It will just become another step as you adjust your target zones and such. I'm talking about graphics shows of course. I don't see differences as being as big a deal for beamshows using BeamBrush technology unless different types of projectors need to be matched up for use in the same show. My guess is that will happen infrequently.

    -David
    Last edited by dkumpula; 07-15-2020 at 08:38.
    "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL - USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    How small is this latest incarnation of the Beam Brush idea?
    It's something like 1.5 times the size of an XY system, which makes sense, since we add just one more scanner.

    We're purposely putting the info out there little by little, and releasing shows one by one. It tends to stretch out the "ooooo" and "ahhhhh".

    I learned this from Tesla, who's users will release a single YouTube video about a Tesla Model Y they saw. Then a few weeks later, there's another video from another user. Then a few weeks later another. Actually there have been quite a number of shows done with Beam Brush, and you'll be seeing more and more over time.

    After many of the shows have been seen, we'll release a video that explains the tech, which is quite cool.

    Bill

    PS: I keep watching that SOPHIE video and I still think that thing Pieter did most recently was really cool, and to do it totally live really kicked ass. The beam goes much wider than he showed through most of his video.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Default

    I really like the fact that this latest version of Beam Brush uses scanner technology rather than a custom solution.

    Years ago when Bill was describing one of the earliest prototypes to us at SELEM he was talking about something similar to the voice coil suspension in a loudspeaker, except that instead of moving a speaker cone to make sound waves it would move a lens in or out to adjust the focus of the beam. And yeah, that created all sorts of issues with regard to where you were going to stick this beer-can sized adjustable collimator inside your projector... (To say nothing of the control hardware or PSU.)

    But now, using a scanner to control it means it's compact *and* it uses existing hardware with basically the same response as the X/Y scanners themselves. So it's smaller, cheaper, and delivers equivalent performance to the X/Y scanners. That's pretty darned cool!

    Adam

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,489,446

    Lightbulb Beam Brush + ion lasers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pangolin View Post
    At the present point in time, we're not selling it as a component. The reason is because when you expand the divergence, you can see the "structure" of the beam. If the beam doesn't start its life out looking perfect, then, well, there could be "questions"...
    <snip>
    To this end, we are partnering with Kvant who is making complete laser projectors, with laser diode arrays made in such a way that when the beam is expanded with Beam Brush, there aren't any objectionable artifacts.
    I was chatting with Jeff (rgb-gas) about this problem and he commented that it would be really cool to see Beam Brush installed in a gas-only projector.

    What a great idea!

    Wondering if any of the individuals who have prototypes are planning to build one into a projector that uses a mixed-gas ion laser (and PCAOM) instead of diode lasers?

    Adam

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Mill, SC USA
    Posts
    1,507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buffo View Post
    I was chatting with Jeff (rgb-gas) about this problem and he commented that it would be really cool to see Beam Brush installed in a gas-only projector.

    What a great idea!

    Wondering if any of the individuals who have prototypes are planning to build one into a projector that uses a mixed-gas ion laser (and PCAOM) instead of diode lasers?

    Adam
    Not me, but I did just complete a two Saturn scanner build complete with a Scan-Thru Rotator (lumia) and BeamBrush using PBS combined single mode diodes (8 diodes per deck covering 405nm, 450nm, 520nm, 638nm, 650nm) . . . I'll detail the build in a separate post shortly, but OMFG BeamBrush looks FANTASTIC on this rig.

    That said, an ion would still be a further improvement to the beam characteristics. Precise alignment is critical for BeamBrush, but if we could create a stable enough physical environment, we could remove the final bounce mirror on my rig at the next SELEM, shoot in Jeff's ion from the side. This would give us the first ion/PCAOM/BeamBrush rig running at 60kpps. That would be a sweet experiment!

    -David
    "Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •