How do you bulb?

padu

How do you time long exposures? My camera (sony alpha) goes up to 30". After that is bulb. I know that I can buy the wired shutter release, but then if you want a 4 minutes exposure, do you have to actually time it using a stopwatch or something?

How's long exposure on nikon and canon planets?

Nikolai

Padu,

padu wrote:

How do you time long exposures? My camera (sony alpha) goes up to 30". After that is bulb. I know that I can buy the wired shutter release, but then if you want a 4 minutes exposure, do you have to actually time it using a stopwatch or something?

How's long exposure on nikon and canon planets?

There are different remotes...

Some are "dumb" (so you need to use external measuring devices, like a light meater and a stopwatch), others can let you set the initial delay or start time, number repetitions, exposure time, pause between shots, etc.
In Canon world dumb ones like ADIDT go for about $10. smart ones like TC80N3 go for about $130..#150.

HTH

padu

Nikolai wrote:

There are different remotes...

Some are "dumb" (so you need to use external measuring devices, like a light meater and a stopwatch), others can let you set the initial delay or start time, number repetitions, exposure time, pause between shots, etc.
In Canon world dumb ones like ADIDT go for about $10. smart ones like TC80N3 go for about $130..#150.

HTH

That's what I needed to know. I'm about to start making my own (a smart one).

The difference is that hardware wise it will be very simple (look like the dumb one), and if you only have the hardware, it will also behave like the dumb one (shutter stays open while you press/lock a switch).

The difference is that it will be possible to connect a pocket pc (sorry, no palm for now) to it and using a really simple to use software, program how you want the exposure (and the other features as well) your photos.

Do you think it would have a commercial appeal if marketed for let's say about $50-$70?

Nikolai

Padu,
It's a nice idea, but if you start thinking about how many devices you need to support on a software side and interface with on a hardware side - I think you'll realize that dedicated remote control is much easier...

Just MHO...

padu

Nikolai wrote:

It's a nice idea, but if you start thinking about how many devices you need to support on a software side and interface with on a hardware side - I think you'll realize that dedicated remote control is much easier...

Just MHO...

No no, I don't plan to support different devices by software. I plan to make my own device, that interfaces with my own software.
If you don't have a pocket pc, then the hardware device is a simple remote control. But if you do have the pocket pc running the software, then you can program the device for a "job". A job could be for example, take 50 pictures 10 minutes apart, each one with shutter opened for 45 seconds. Since a job is created by the pocket pc software, then I could think on really interesting stuff. For instance, on the above job, instead of all 50 pictures being taken with 45 seconds exposure time, it could be that individual pictures would have increasing exposure time from 45 seconds (the first picture) to let's say 120 seconds (the last one). This way you could compensate for decreasing lighting conditions...

I was investigating the pins of the remote jack on my camera (sony alpha/minolta) and they are very simple electrically. If canon and nikon are similarly simple (I suspect canon is), then my hardware device could be compatible with all major cameras by simply using a different cable from my device to the camera.

Is it getting more attractive?

Nikolai

Padu,
In engineering word this is called making "a better mouse trap". People would only buy it if it deals with rodents at least twice as efficient (better 10 times more efficient) and cost at least twice as cheap (better 10 times cheaper). They they would love your product!

The only problem is... the conventional trap (you know, the piece of plywood with a spring-loaded wire frame) works very effectively and is dirt cheap.

Hope you can do better...!

I honestly think the manufacturers should simply add this finctionality into the $1000+ cameras, that would be the most convenient for everybody...

padu

Nikolai wrote:

I honestly think the manufacturers should simply add this finctionality into the $1000+ cameras, that would be the most convenient for everybody...

I completely agree, but I doubt they will.

Meanwhile, I'm gonna make my own... I refuse to pay $150 bucks (which could be a new lens) for such a simple device.

I'll post the results when I'm done.

mr peas

Make one out of a: kitchen timer and cheapo remote.
Bulb? Just twist that dial!

Hah, let us know what you do.

Nikolai

Well, good luck!

padu wrote:

I completely agree, but I doubt they will.

Meanwhile, I'm gonna make my own... I refuse to pay $150 bucks (which could be a new lens) for such a simple device.

I'll post the results when I'm done.

I wholeheartedly wish you a success. Just keep the time sheet. Once you spend more than 2 hours for labor alone (I'm not even counting the parts and skills), you'd know it will be cheaper for everybody else to simply buy that $130 device...

Sorry. but this is how the market works...:cry

padu

Nikolai wrote:

I wholeheartedly wish you a success.

I wholeheartedly thank you

Just keep the time sheet. Once you spend more than 2 hours for labor alone (I'm not even counting the parts and skills), you'd know it will be cheaper for everybody else to simply buy that $130 device...

Sorry. but this is how the market works...:cry

I'm doing this for personal pleasure as well, therefore no need for timesheet. Or do you keep a timesheet when you go out photographying?

Nikolai

Padu,

padu wrote:

I'm doing this for personal pleasure as well, therefore no need for timesheet. Or do you keep a timesheet when you go out photographying?

You started this thread asking opinions like how much people would pay for your product, hence my monetary angle.

As to me timing my photography - yes, I do, if I work for money.

It would not worth my while spending two hours on a single 2"x3" stock object for a web-store, but it may on a 30"x40" $500 personal portrait...

And, no, I don't charge the sunsets the sitting fee :-)

Once again, good luck!

padu

Nikolai wrote:

You started this thread asking opinions like how much people would pay for your product, hence my monetary angle.

Got it. Now, since you seem to be the only one interested (at least in the discussion), how much would you pay for a remote? From your first post, I see that the range today varies from $10 to $150, so my initial estimate of $50-$60 for a smart one may a bit too low.

As to me timing my photography - yes, I do, if I work for money.

It would not worth my while spending two hours on a single 2"x3" stock object for a web-store, but it may on a 30"x40" $500 personal portrait...

And, no, I don't charge the sunsets the sitting fee :-)

I understand your point... I would rarely develop one line of code (I'm a software developer) for free. In this case, because I am the customer, I'm giving myself a good discount.

Today I've spent 15 minutes on my electronics development board and finished the "dumb" remote (prototype, of course). Tested on my old minolta and it worked as a charm. Now I'm going to interface it with my pocket pc and make it a smart one.
What I need to know now is how's the electrical specification of the remote plug on the canon and nikon. For the minolta, I found it in 15 minutes on the web... I'll assume I can get it in 5 minutes or even less for the big duo.
You see, if they are similar, one remote could in theory work for all major cameras.

Once again, good luck!

And once again, thanks for playing devil's advocate. That's how one gets really good ideas, by being challenged.

If it works out, I promise to give you one for cost only (of course, if you want it).

Cheers

Padu

gus

padu wrote:

I completely agree, but I doubt they will.

Meanwhile, I'm gonna make my own... I refuse to pay $150 bucks (which could be a new lens) for such a simple device.

I'll post the results when I'm done.

You can buy them for $20 on eBay. Mine has been drowned..stood on etc etc & refuses to die.

Bendr

Unless I'm misinterpreting, I think what nikolai was saying earlier is that it might be more efficient just to build the remote so that it acts "smart" without being hooked up to a pocket PC.

For one thing, cables for the pocket PC's vary significantly, so, you will have to have a seperate cable for each model of pocket pc which you are supporting, or were you thinking wireless?

As for camera interface, If I recall correctly, the high end canon SLRs have a proprietary connector/interface, while the lower end ones(Rebel, Rebel XT, 10D/20D) have a standard tiny stereo 3-pin connector, with one pin each for ground, focus, and shutter. to achieve an action, you merely short one or both pins to the ground pin...

Anyway, Good luck, sounds like an interesting project!

Ben

Shay Stephens

padu wrote:

How do you time long exposures? My camera (sony alpha) goes up to 30". After that is bulb. I know that I can buy the wired shutter release, but then if you want a 4 minutes exposure, do you have to actually time it using a stopwatch or something?

How's long exposure on nikon and canon planets?

I have always done the stopwatch routine. It is cheap and reliable and always at hand ;-)

And when it comes to Sony and remote controls...join the club. I have tinkered with the remote myself and even put something together. But the problem comes from the lanc protocol sony uses. It's not just the simple electrical contacts it looks to be. You have digital signals doing the actual control.

And everyone and their mothers have thought about this project. I can pretty much say no, this will never make money for you. Keep it as a hobby project and enjoy that.

padu

Shay Stephens wrote:

I have always done the stopwatch routine. It is cheap and reliable and always at hand ;-)

And when it comes to Sony and remote controls...join the club. I have tinkered with the remote myself and even put something together. But the problem comes from the lanc protocol sony uses. It's not just the simple electrical contacts it looks to be. You have digital signals doing the actual control.

And everyone and their mothers have thought about this project. I can pretty much say no, this will never make money for you. Keep it as a hobby project and enjoy that.

Well, the sony A100 cannot be classified a regular sony breed. I have a minolta maxxum and the A100, both have the same exactly connector and both have exactly the same electrical protocol.

padu

Bendr wrote:

Unless I'm misinterpreting, I think what nikolai was saying earlier is that it might be more efficient just to build the remote so that it acts "smart" without being hooked up to a pocket PC.

That's what I'm planning on doing. The pocket PC (or even a PC) will be used to program the device. I figure that between other things, what makes the canon smart remote so expensive is the LCD screen. If I find a way to eliminate the need for an LCD screen, then I can offer the same type of functionality for a much reduced price.

For one thing, cables for the pocket PC's vary significantly, so, you will have to have a seperate cable for each model of pocket pc which you are supporting, or were you thinking wireless?

The type of signal that will go through the wire is plain vanilla rs232, and if I want to support pocket pcs AND pcs, there is a problem. The tx and rx wires are inverted on the pocket pc. My idea is instead of supporting all types of pocket pcs and pc's, I'll simply give a serial interface to my device through a regular db9 connector with a switch for pocket pc or pc. So if you have a laptop or pc, the only thing you need is a serial cable. If you have a pocket pc, you need a serial cable for your pocket pc model.

As for camera interface, If I recall correctly, the high end canon SLRs have a proprietary connector/interface, while the lower end ones(Rebel, Rebel XT, 10D/20D) have a standard tiny stereo 3-pin connector, with one pin each for ground, focus, and shutter. to achieve an action, you merely short one or both pins to the ground pin...

Anyway, Good luck, sounds like an interesting project!

Ben

Yes, I checked this weekend on a friend's rebel. That's very nice to know. Now, for the higher end canons, I'll investigate what type of electrical protocol they use. If it is pulling low like the minolta/sony/rebel xt, then my universal remote is still feasible.

nightshadow

padu wrote:

That's what I needed to know. I'm about to start making my own (a smart one).

The difference is that hardware wise it will be very simple (look like the dumb one), and if you only have the hardware, it will also behave like the dumb one (shutter stays open while you press/lock a switch).

The difference is that it will be possible to connect a pocket pc (sorry, no palm for now) to it and using a really simple to use software, program how you want the exposure (and the other features as well) your photos.

Do you think it would have a commercial appeal if marketed for let's say about $50-$70?

Mentioning the pocket pc gave me an idea (scary, isn't it?) There is software out there that turns your pocket pc into an ir remote control device, and it has a learn mode. The ir remote for the Canon is inexpensive so it should be possible to get the pocket pc to learn the commands (there are 2, shoot right now, and engage self-timer). How you would integrate that with a timer is another question. But there is the idea.

padu

nightshadow wrote:

Mentioning the pocket pc gave me an idea (scary, isn't it?) There is software out there that turns your pocket pc into an ir remote control device, and it has a learn mode. The ir remote for the Canon is inexpensive so it should be possible to get the pocket pc to learn the commands (there are 2, shoot right now, and engage self-timer). How you would integrate that with a timer is another question. But there is the idea.

That's a good idea, since most (if not all) pocket pc's have a IR port. Developing a custom made software that learns the IR pattern from the canon IR master should be simple enough and very feasible. Adding timer capability to the software is the simple part.

The only concern I have is that for time lapse pictures, you will need to keep the ppc turned on during the whole shootout, and battery life may be a problem.

Bendr

I don't believe the higher end canons pull low... Instead it is a digital protocol...

And I don't believe that LCD's tend to be that expensive...

Mostly I think it is markup to make more money, being the only supplier, there's not much competition.

Good luck!
Ben

padu

Bendr wrote:

I don't believe the higher end canons pull low... Instead it is a digital protocol...

And I don't believe that LCD's tend to be that expensive...

Mostly I think it is markup to make more money, being the only supplier, there's not much competition.

Good luck!
Ben

Maybe the LCD is not the sole responsible for the high price and probably you're right, the price is high because they're the only ones around, but providing an LCD to a electronic device does increase the complexity of the product (requires more components and more firmware development).