Have any of you printed/used an Infidex or other 35mm panoramic camera? How was final assembly? Were you able to lock in the focus mechanism correctly? I shoot a fair bit of 35mm and a few rolls of 120 every year, but so far, it's all on vintage mid-range cameras (Super Ikonta IV, assorted 1960s-70s fixed lens rangefinders).
I have an abomination that I printed years ago that adapts an Instax SQ1 to Hasselblad lenses (and has an RB67 focusing screen on a viewfinder next to the Instax for composing and focusing).
It's sooooo impractical but the results are so fun.
The process is to compose, focus, put ND filter on, swap from finder to film body, half-fire the shutter, pull out the dark slide, fully fire the shutter, push in the dark slide, eject the film, rewind the shutter, and go back to the finder.
Watching Kyle McDougall[0] take his medium format photos is a soothing experience (but I know full well I would not have the patience for medium format.)
I’ve been wanting to build one of these for awhile. Did you follow a plan/blog or design your own? I already have donor instax and Polaroid bodies not sure what to put it as a back on
One brings to mind the common misconception of the young that all physical media (including dad's CDs) is analogue, and that 'digital' refers only to 'computer' data.
All of these had previously had a digital component to them. It was just the proximal user-facing part being digitised (or the introduction of a computer) that gave the marketing department license to use the word 'digital'. Maybe it was over-cooked a bit.
What about a reflex camera with a CCD? It’s mechanical in that it moves the mirror out of the way to expose the digital censor. I’d call that a digital camera because the output is digital.
I learned the word 'analogue' as meaning something like 'there is a change in the medium in proportion to the signal being recorded'. And digital as 'the signal being recorded is transformed into a numerical value which is stored on the medium'. The consequence being that changes to the medium in the analogue domain (tape wear, attenuation etc) directly affects the signal, whereas in the digital domain the signal can potentially be re-created with no loss of fidelity.
I think chemical film process fits with that description.
RTFA. It clearly shows typical camera lenses in use on most of the cameras. The lens from a large format "press camera" (1) is often used because they'er available for reasonable money and usually have full manual controls, including the shutter release.
Many of the film cameras that people 3D print essentially outsource that stuff to off-the-shelf focusing helicoids which are readily available, along with medium or large format lenses which are traditionally mounted in a leaf shutter anyway. So the hard parts (lens, aperture, focusing mechanism, shutter) are not part of the 3D print itself. You're right that 3D printing a serious shutter mechanism for anything other than a pinhole camera isn't really feasible (yet?). It's the light tight box and the film transport that are completely reasonable to print.
Only if you want a fairly compact camera supporting various shutter speed including some very fast ones, high speed films and lenses, and the kind of subjects that you want to take picture of. Once you are going much slower things can be less precise.
You can make a camera out of a cardboard box really. That won't do for a wildlife or olympic games professional photographer obviously.
Pinhole cameras can be nothing but a soda can and a hole in it. Large format and some medium format folding camera shutter lens units just need a round hole to slip into and all the controls are external and built in