Jon Anderson wrote:

Looking for an inexpensive single axis stepper motor controller that has
a single output that can be programed. Simple contact closure on the
output is fine, no current to speak of is to be handled.
Strongly prefer something battery powered.

I'm very interested in the technique called stacking in macro
photography where multiple shots are taken with the camera moved ever so
slightly between exposures. In macro photography, depth of field can be
paper thin. These multiple shots can be digitally stacked to provide a
macro image with a vastly greater apparent depth of field than could
otherwise be achieved.

I've just made my 3rd attempt to get an ultra close shot of fine brass
chips, but the depth of field is so narrow, I can barely get a single
chip completely in focus. The bed of chips is far too uneven to get
anywhere near the effect I want without stacking.

I could use a dial indicator on my bellow's focusing rail and a remote
release, but of course, I want to automate! Something like the now
defunct Frog CNC with a single output would be perfect for field use.
I'd need to be able to program an output event, move the camera, pause
to let things settle, then repeat.
Not interested in schematics or even kits, if it's not available turn
key, I don't have time for it right now.

Thanks,

Jon

How about that single stepper controller that Sherline makes, P/N 8850?
It comes with a 23 size stepper and appears to have GPI/GPO
functionality on a mini-din connector.

Looking for an inexpensive single axis stepper motor controller that has
a single output that can be programed. Simple contact closure on the
output is fine, no current to speak of is to be handled.
Strongly prefer something battery powered.

I'm very interested in the technique called stacking in macro
photography where multiple shots are taken with the camera moved ever so
slightly between exposures. In macro photography, depth of field can be
paper thin. These multiple shots can be digitally stacked to provide a
macro image with a vastly greater apparent depth of field than could
otherwise be achieved.

I've just made my 3rd attempt to get an ultra close shot of fine brass
chips, but the depth of field is so narrow, I can barely get a single
chip completely in focus. The bed of chips is far too uneven to get
anywhere near the effect I want without stacking.

I could use a dial indicator on my bellow's focusing rail and a remote
release, but of course, I want to automate! Something like the now
defunct Frog CNC with a single output would be perfect for field use.
I'd need to be able to program an output event, move the camera, pause
to let things settle, then repeat.
Not interested in schematics or even kits, if it's not available turn
key, I don't have time for it right now.

Thanks,


Jon

On 7/15/2011 7:22 PM, Pete C. wrote:

How about that single stepper controller that Sherline makes, P/N 8850?
It comes with a 23 size stepper and appears to have GPI/GPO
functionality on a mini-din connector.

That would do almost exactly what I want. Unfortunately it's a bit
pricey for me given everything else I'd need to build. For $25 more I
can buy a turnkey setup:
http://www.cognisys-inc.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24&products_id=122&osCsid=f 148f1bd614d63a28e604963dfe6bade

Not having $525 to burn, I was looking for a cheap solution. I don't
recall what the Frog CNC sold for, but I thought I recalled something
selling for around $150 or so a few years ago. Maybe I'm wrong.
Looks like the StackShot is a better bargain than I thought!

Thanks,


Jon

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 19:41:30 -0800, Jon Anderson
wrote:

I've just made my 3rd attempt to get an ultra close shot of fine brass
chips, but the depth of field is so narrow, I can barely get a single
chip completely in focus. The bed of chips is far too uneven to get
anywhere near the effect I want without stacking.

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.


Gunner

--
Maxim 12: A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head.

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/15/2011 11:58 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.

Not too many of those around I recon, especially for a modern DSLR.
Such a small aperture calls for long exposures or some really bright
lighting. And I'm locked into that lens for any macro work calling for a
lot of depth of field (relatively speaking). There's -one- potentially
viable lens on ebay right now. A programmable slide offers the flexibility
to use any lens I can hang off the front of my bellows.
A lot has changed since the advent of high end DSLR cameras....

It just dawned on me, I -think- I still have a copy of the step/direction
version of the MaxNC software. Put that on a cheap laptop and I've got my
control. I also have a Sherline Z axis laying around, and some stepper
motors. Just need a cheap driver and a bit of work... Not as clean and
compact as the StackShot, but a hell of a lot cheaper...


Jon

I haven't used them but I've been interested in the Gecko drives, they have
enough current capability to be useful for many hobby type CNC applications.
There are also breakout boards for the parallel port to use with stepper
drives. With that kind of setup you could program your camera moves in
G-code and use M-codes to turn on your output to take the picture. For
software you can use EMC2 for free or there are demo versions of other
software that should let you run it in windows if that's what you want.

If you want cheaper there is a unipolar stepper driver chip, uln5804, they
work up to something like 1.2A and at the time I bought some they were $4.95
from spHerbach and Rademansp or something like that.

The breakout board I bought for my parallel port was under $30 IIRC, it
seemed worth it to me to try to avoid damaging the PC with a wiring mistake.
Some better boards are isolated to protect the PC but the cheaper ones seem
better than trying to wire straight to the connectors.

RogerN

RogerN wrote:

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/15/2011 11:58 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.

Not too many of those around I recon, especially for a modern DSLR.
Such a small aperture calls for long exposures or some really bright
lighting. And I'm locked into that lens for any macro work calling for a
lot of depth of field (relatively speaking). There's -one- potentially
viable lens on ebay right now. A programmable slide offers the flexibility
to use any lens I can hang off the front of my bellows.
A lot has changed since the advent of high end DSLR cameras....

It just dawned on me, I -think- I still have a copy of the step/direction
version of the MaxNC software. Put that on a cheap laptop and I've got my
control. I also have a Sherline Z axis laying around, and some stepper
motors. Just need a cheap driver and a bit of work... Not as clean and
compact as the StackShot, but a hell of a lot cheaper...


Jon

I haven't used them but I've been interested in the Gecko drives, they have
enough current capability to be useful for many hobby type CNC applications.
There are also breakout boards for the parallel port to use with stepper
drives. With that kind of setup you could program your camera moves in
G-code and use M-codes to turn on your output to take the picture. For
software you can use EMC2 for free or there are demo versions of other
software that should let you run it in windows if that's what you want.

If you want cheaper there is a unipolar stepper driver chip, uln5804, they
work up to something like 1.2A and at the time I bought some they were $4.95
from spHerbach and Rademansp or something like that.

The breakout board I bought for my parallel port was under $30 IIRC, it
seemed worth it to me to try to avoid damaging the PC with a wiring mistake.
Some better boards are isolated to protect the PC but the cheaper ones seem
better than trying to wire straight to the connectors.

RogerN

The various Gecko drives work well, but the OP was looking for a
complete single axis control with GPI/GPO, not a standalone drive that
would need a control added.

On 7/15/2011 11:58 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.

Not too many of those around I recon, especially for a modern DSLR.
Such a small aperture calls for long exposures or some really bright
lighting. And I'm locked into that lens for any macro work calling for a
lot of depth of field (relatively speaking). There's -one- potentially
viable lens on ebay right now. A programmable slide offers the
flexibility to use any lens I can hang off the front of my bellows.
A lot has changed since the advent of high end DSLR cameras....

It just dawned on me, I -think- I still have a copy of the
step/direction version of the MaxNC software. Put that on a cheap laptop
and I've got my control. I also have a Sherline Z axis laying around,
and some stepper motors. Just need a cheap driver and a bit of work...
Not as clean and compact as the StackShot, but a hell of a lot cheaper...


Jon

"Pete C." wrote in message
.com...

RogerN wrote:

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/15/2011 11:58 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.

Not too many of those around I recon, especially for a modern DSLR.
Such a small aperture calls for long exposures or some really bright
lighting. And I'm locked into that lens for any macro work calling for
a
lot of depth of field (relatively speaking). There's -one- potentially
viable lens on ebay right now. A programmable slide offers the
flexibility
to use any lens I can hang off the front of my bellows.
A lot has changed since the advent of high end DSLR cameras....

It just dawned on me, I -think- I still have a copy of the
step/direction
version of the MaxNC software. Put that on a cheap laptop and I've got
my
control. I also have a Sherline Z axis laying around, and some stepper
motors. Just need a cheap driver and a bit of work... Not as clean and
compact as the StackShot, but a hell of a lot cheaper...


Jon

I haven't used them but I've been interested in the Gecko drives, they
have
enough current capability to be useful for many hobby type CNC
applications.
There are also breakout boards for the parallel port to use with stepper
drives. With that kind of setup you could program your camera moves in
G-code and use M-codes to turn on your output to take the picture. For
software you can use EMC2 for free or there are demo versions of other
software that should let you run it in windows if that's what you want.

If you want cheaper there is a unipolar stepper driver chip, uln5804,
they
work up to something like 1.2A and at the time I bought some they were
$4.95
from spHerbach and Rademansp or something like that.

The breakout board I bought for my parallel port was under $30 IIRC, it
seemed worth it to me to try to avoid damaging the PC with a wiring
mistake.
Some better boards are isolated to protect the PC but the cheaper ones
seem
better than trying to wire straight to the connectors.

RogerN

The various Gecko drives work well, but the OP was looking for a
complete single axis control with GPI/GPO, not a standalone drive that
would need a control added.

I think they usually call those an indexer, the ones I've used are pretty
pricey new but possibly available on eBay. The projects I've done used
indexers in combination with a PLC to position axis at certain programmable
positions. Some used servo's some used steppers.

But another way to get better depth of field is if you can find a
telecentric lens but the field of view is about the size of the lens, also
pricey new.

I guess if you had a remote trigger and a hand crank slide (cross slide
vise) it might be good for experimental.

RogerN

Sounds like you have way more photography knowledge than I do, but here
goes.

I sometimes need to take pictures of small parts. I made a small light box
that works ok for some, but if shadows are not a huge issue I take them
outside and set them on the ground in the sunlight and stand up on top of
one of my jobsite boxes. This allows me to shoot straight down at the
part. Then I use my highest resolution and highest optical zoom to take the
picture. I have several digital cameras, and the one that does this the
best is actually an inexpensive Vivitar HD digital camcorder, but my old SLR
(looking) FUJI does ok too. Mid day is best. Alternatively in the shadow
on the north side of the shop works for some if glare or reflections are a
problem.

If I have to do it indoors I can do roughly the same thing, but I light the
part from an angle to either side of the camera with a pair of 250 watt
halogen work lights.

Instead of trying to macro at 3 feet or closer I zoom from about 8-10 feet.
As long as I get a good focus it shoots pretty good.

I usually get a pretty good shot within 3 tries with one of these methods.

Jon Anderson wrote:

On 7/16/2011 8:15 AM, Pete C. wrote:

The various Gecko drives work well, but the OP was looking for a
complete single axis control with GPI/GPO, not a standalone drive that
would need a control added.

Well, I was. But it's looking like what I wanted really doesn't exist
anymore at the price point I want. The Sherline setup will do it, but I
can buy a turn key rig for $25.

It's looking like a laptop, MaxNC Step/dir software, and a simple low
cost stepper driver. Geckos are very nice, but overkill. I don't need
much power or speed.

Jon

However you do it, be sure to include a vibration dissipation delay
before each shutter trip, and suitable delay for the exposure interval
before moving to the next position.

On 7/16/2011 8:15 AM, Pete C. wrote:

The various Gecko drives work well, but the OP was looking for a
complete single axis control with GPI/GPO, not a standalone drive that
would need a control added.

Well, I was. But it's looking like what I wanted really doesn't exist
anymore at the price point I want. The Sherline setup will do it, but I
can buy a turn key rig for $25.

It's looking like a laptop, MaxNC Step/dir software, and a simple low
cost stepper driver. Geckos are very nice, but overkill. I don't need
much power or speed.


Jon

On 7/16/2011 9:11 AM, RogerN wrote:

I guess if you had a remote trigger and a hand crank slide (cross slide
vise) it might be good for experimental.

My bellows has a focusing rail, for now I'm just going to rig a dial
indicator to insure precise and even increments as I experiment, using a
cable remote to trip the shutter.
I'm interested in the automation however, well, just because I can... G


Jon

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 08:17:54 -0800, Jon Anderson
wrote:

On 7/15/2011 11:58 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

This is where you really need a F32 lens, or add a pin hole adapter to
your working rig.

Seriously.

Not too many of those around I recon, especially for a modern DSLR.
Such a small aperture calls for long exposures or some really bright
lighting. And I'm locked into that lens for any macro work calling for a
lot of depth of field (relatively speaking). There's -one- potentially
viable lens on ebay right now. A programmable slide offers the
flexibility to use any lens I can hang off the front of my bellows.
A lot has changed since the advent of high end DSLR cameras....

It just dawned on me, I -think- I still have a copy of the
step/direction version of the MaxNC software. Put that on a cheap laptop
and I've got my control. I also have a Sherline Z axis laying around,
and some stepper motors. Just need a cheap driver and a bit of work...
Not as clean and compact as the StackShot, but a hell of a lot cheaper...


Jon

http://toothwalker.org/optics/dof.html

http://photo.net/nature-photography-forum/00M87M
http://photoblog.edu-perez.com/2009/...eld-macro.html

http://www.richard-seaman.com/Photography/Insects/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinhole_camera
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...al-camera.html


--
Maxim 12: A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head.

On 7/16/2011 11:01 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

I usually get a pretty good shot within 3 tries with one of these methods.

I've done the same thing, and gotten some great pics. But when I say
macro, I mean extreme macro, going into the world of small at a level of
detail not visible to the naked eye. Well, not mine anyway!
Like this sort of stuff:
http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/gallery

BTW, I hardly know what I'm doing so far, but I have a brother that is
exceedingly talented with photography. He could seriously make a living
at it, even as competitive as the field is. But he does it just for
personal enjoyment.
He's my mentor. When he suggests something, I listen!


Jon

On 7/16/2011 1:12 PM, Pete C. wrote:

However you do it, be sure to include a vibration dissipation delay
before each shutter trip, and suitable delay for the exposure interval
before moving to the next position.

Yup, got that covered! And the camera has a shutter mode where it will
pull up the mirror and wait 2 seconds before taking the shot, to let
vibration from the mirror settle. Automation is to relieve the monotony
of the process, speed isn't the goal at all. Some of the shots in that
gallery I linked to have 80+ frames stacked, that would be tedious if
done all manually.


Jon

Jon Anderson wrote:

On 7/16/2011 1:12 PM, Pete C. wrote:

However you do it, be sure to include a vibration dissipation delay
before each shutter trip, and suitable delay for the exposure interval
before moving to the next position.

Yup, got that covered! And the camera has a shutter mode where it will
pull up the mirror and wait 2 seconds before taking the shot, to let
vibration from the mirror settle. Automation is to relieve the monotony
of the process, speed isn't the goal at all. Some of the shots in that
gallery I linked to have 80+ frames stacked, that would be tedious if
done all manually.

Jon

167 frames for one of them, automation is pretty essential.

On 7/16/2011 2:02 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

(buncha links)

Ok, I looked at your links. Now you look at this one:
http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/gallery

Tell me how I'm going to get that top shot at that level of detail with
a pinhole camera. Or with the 135mm f/32 lens I found on ebay. A screw
on close-up adapter, or conventional lens.

My macro bellows with an M42 adapter gives me a world of manual focus,
top quality lenses to chose from. Names like Zeiss. And many of these
lenses perform much better with a reversing adapter. Flexibility and
choices.

I'm not ignorant of photography by any means. I understand depth of
field and such reasonably well. What I want to do, isn't going to be
done with pinholes, screw on adapters, or a lens that merely stops down
to f/32. What you are talking about is valid and has it's place in
photography. Extreme macro work is a different place and calls for
different tools.
And it's my dang hobby so if I want a CNC macro stacking rail, by God,
I'm gonna have one!


Jon

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/16/2011 11:01 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

I usually get a pretty good shot within 3 tries with one of these
methods.

I've done the same thing, and gotten some great pics. But when I say
macro, I mean extreme macro, going into the world of small at a level of
detail not visible to the naked eye. Well, not mine anyway!
Like this sort of stuff:
http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/gallery

BTW, I hardly know what I'm doing so far, but I have a brother that is
exceedingly talented with photography. He could seriously make a living at
it, even as competitive as the field is. But he does it just for personal
enjoyment.
He's my mentor. When he suggests something, I listen!

How about using a simple CNC mill with trigger outputs on the controller,
and writing a bit of code. Move the head .001, fire the trigger, move the
head .001, fire the trigger. Could use a spindle relay output etc. I
could mod one for the application I bet in half a day.

--You should go over to gigapan.org and look up Rich Gibson; he's
doing extensive work in this area.

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Steel, Stainless, Titanium:
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : Guaranteed Uncertified Welding!
www.nmpproducts.com
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

On 7/17/2011 10:02 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

How about using a simple CNC mill with trigger outputs on the
controller, and writing a bit of code. Move the head .001, fire the
trigger, move the head .001, fire the trigger. Could use a spindle relay
output etc. I could mod one for the application I bet in half a day.

I've moved in that direction. Really wanted something portable I could
take afield, but think the StackShot is really the ticket there and I'll
just have to save up for one.
But for 'studio' work, I have most of a MaxNC sitting in the corner
gathering dust, and discovered I still have the step/direction version
of the MaxNC software. That would allow several degrees freedom if I
used all 3 axis. There's some trick software that allows cabling the
camera to a laptop and viewing in real time on the screen in Lightroom,
what is in the camera's field of view. If I stacked the Z axis onto the
table, I could use X-Z to frame the shot and Y for the stacked shots.
Down the road, will probably go to my older copy of Ahha Pro for this,
have a few more outputs, and programming with subroutines and parameters
would make for a couple generic programs that could be quickly modified
for most any task.

Hoping the Max software supports a rotary axis, I just don't remember if
it does or not. I was looking at taking this approach even further this
once I've moved down under, for astrophotography. At the very bottom of
that learning curve, but there's a fellow down under taking impressive
shots of the night sky. Dave (brother) says he uses some combo of linear
and rotary axis tracking, though I haven't found that info on his blog
yet. So a telescope and photography like this is slated for future
exploration.


Jon

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/17/2011 10:02 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

How about using a simple CNC mill with trigger outputs on the
controller, and writing a bit of code. Move the head .001, fire the
trigger, move the head .001, fire the trigger. Could use a spindle relay
output etc. I could mod one for the application I bet in half a day.

I've moved in that direction. Really wanted something portable I could
take afield, but think the StackShot is really the ticket there and I'll
just have to save up for one.
But for 'studio' work, I have most of a MaxNC sitting in the corner
gathering dust, and discovered I still have the step/direction version of
the MaxNC software. That would allow several degrees freedom if I used all
3 axis. There's some trick software that allows cabling the camera to a
laptop and viewing in real time on the screen in Lightroom, what is in the
camera's field of view. If I stacked the Z axis onto the table, I could
use X-Z to frame the shot and Y for the stacked shots.
Down the road, will probably go to my older copy of Ahha Pro for this,
have a few more outputs, and programming with subroutines and parameters
would make for a couple generic programs that could be quickly modified
for most any task.

Hoping the Max software supports a rotary axis, I just don't remember if
it does or not.

Are you still running the MaxNC controller? If so you need to look and see
if it has an A motor output or not. I didn't care for the MaxNC controller
or motors so I swapped them out on mine for a Gecko G540 and heavier motors.
The G540 definitely supports four motors and has a breakout built in for
trigger outputs. I use one (with a 48V relay) on my Taig to turn the
spindle and cutting oil pump on and off automatically. Same on the MaxNC
except I still haven't gotten around to putting it in an enclosure yet.

Mach 3 is fine and it supports upto 500 lines of code unlicensed. More than
enough I think for your 40 or 50 frames of macro shots.




I

On 7/17/2011 11:00 AM, steamer wrote:

--You should go over to gigapan.org and look up Rich Gibson; he's
doing extensive work in this area.

Thanks for the link, that's cool stuff!


Jon

On 7/17/2011 4:04 PM, Bob La Londe wrote:

Are you still running the MaxNC controller?

No, I junked that shortly after getting it, a long, long time ago. I
last had it configured in 2 axis only with quick attach mounts for a
Clausing engine lathe I had, for a simple CNC lathe retrofit.
The step/dir version of the Max software will work with any step/dir
drivers. I ultimately ran the Max via Ahha Pro and Compumotor OEM650
drives with 280oz/in motors. Those same drivers, set for higher current,
have been running my full size knee mill for a decade now, though I did
upgrade the control to Artisan.

Mach 3 is fine and it supports upto 500 lines of code unlicensed. More
than enough I think for your 40 or 50 frames of macro shots.

Hmm, that's a thought. The reason for wanting to use the MaxNC software
is I could easily run it on any laptop that'll run DOS and has a
parallel port. Moving up to Ahha gives me a lot more flexibility, but it
won't work on a laptop due to needing an ISA slot for the motion control
card. I'll have to see if Mach will run on a laptop OK, never looked
into that. If so, might as well go whole hog... G I know it supports
some form of subroutines. Heck, down the road, might even try to write a
plug in to really automate this whole process. Thanks, I'd not thought
about going full modern. But then, my whole line of thinking has gone
from home brew field portable to buying that setup and making something
really flexible for studio use.


Jon

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/17/2011 4:04 PM, Bob La Londe wrote:

Are you still running the MaxNC controller?

No, I junked that shortly after getting it, a long, long time ago. I last
had it configured in 2 axis only with quick attach mounts for a Clausing
engine lathe I had, for a simple CNC lathe retrofit.
The step/dir version of the Max software will work with any step/dir
drivers. I ultimately ran the Max via Ahha Pro and Compumotor OEM650
drives with 280oz/in motors. Those same drivers, set for higher current,
have been running my full size knee mill for a decade now, though I did
upgrade the control to Artisan.

Mach 3 is fine and it supports upto 500 lines of code unlicensed. More
than enough I think for your 40 or 50 frames of macro shots.

Hmm, that's a thought. The reason for wanting to use the MaxNC software is
I could easily run it on any laptop that'll run DOS and has a parallel
port. Moving up to Ahha gives me a lot more flexibility, but it won't work
on a laptop due to needing an ISA slot for the motion control card. I'll
have to see if Mach will run on a laptop OK, never looked into that. If
so, might as well go whole hog... G I know it supports some form of
subroutines. Heck, down the road, might even try to write a plug in to
really automate this whole process. Thanks, I'd not thought about going
full modern. But then, my whole line of thinking has gone from home brew
field portable to buying that setup and making something really flexible
for studio use.

I ran the MaxNC software in DOS mode briefly on a laptop to test it when I
sold the controller and motors. I did not care for it, but it did seem to
work. It supported all the basic G codes, although I didn't test it
extensively. That being said, Mach 3 likes to run under Windows XP Pro, can
be jiggered to run under Vista, and I have not heard many complaints about
running it on 7. I have a machine running my MaxNC/G540 under 7 in rollback
mode (to XP Pro) reliably.

All that being said, It might be hard to find a laptop that runs Windows
quickly and reliably, has appropriate ports for your hardware (Usually an
LPT port), has full voltage on the pins, and doesn't have power management
that could mess with your plans. Otherwise... yes I suppose you can run it
on a laptop, but why? Small powerful desktops can be had pretty
inexpensively from guys like Tiger Direct. I bought three of them last time
I bought computers. I can see the desire for a laptop with the desire for a
portable machine though. The other alternative if you can't find the ideal
laptop is to use a Smoothstepper via USB to provide the LPT port. It adds
about $165 to the cost, but I haven't really seen you mention budget much in
this thread. Lots of guys use the Smoothstepper even on machines that
support or could support a full LPT port because it takes a lot of the work
load off the processer and is reported to provide better control (but no
ability to manage backlash compensation).

Not sure which MaxNC you have, but the MaxNC 5 is small enough you could
carry it with one hand if you put a handle on it. I think I would design a
multi point rigid mount handle if I did that. One that went from the base
to the column and helped hold it square. Since you aren't dealing with
cutting forces, and are just moving the weight of a camera you could easily
run your controller and stepper motors off a couple gel cell batteries like
you might find in an alarm panel, UPS, or game caller. Most controllers and
steppers run fine off an unregulated DC power supply. Batteries are the
same thing, just cleaner. You could probably even run it for a limited time
off a pack of throw away dry cells. I think your goal of a portable macro
machine is very doable.

On 7/18/2011 6:33 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

I ran the MaxNC software in DOS mode briefly on a laptop to test it
when I sold the controller and motors. I did not care for it, but it
did seem to work.

Yeah, it's about as basic as it gets. Doing some poking around, I still
have a copy of TurboCNC too, which requires no special card and is a lot
more capable than the Max software.

I can see the desire for a laptop with the desire for a portable
machine though. The other alternative if you can't find the ideal
laptop is to use a Smoothstepper via USB to provide the LPT port.

Yes, still would like a portable setup if feasible, thus the laptop.
Budget is, cheaper the better, as is often the case with DIY projects...
G I just gave away a Gateway last month that had a full parallel port,
and there are cheaper alternatives than the Smoothstepper to insure full
voltage at the port.

Since you aren't dealing with cutting forces, and are just moving the
weight of a camera you could easily run your controller and stepper
motors off a couple gel cell batteries like you might find in an
alarm panel, UPS, or game caller.

Sorta what I'd hoped when I started down this road. I felt I could
likely get away with driving motors at 12v as speed and acceleration are
not the criteria. Moves might range from .0005 to maybe .020, even the
latter would go pretty quickly at a slow feedrate. Would gear the motors
down a ways too to improve resolution.


Jon

On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:24:47 -0800, Jon Anderson
wrote:

On 7/17/2011 4:04 PM, Bob La Londe wrote:

Are you still running the MaxNC controller?

No, I junked that shortly after getting it, a long, long time ago. I
last had it configured in 2 axis only with quick attach mounts for a
Clausing engine lathe I had, for a simple CNC lathe retrofit.
The step/dir version of the Max software will work with any step/dir
drivers. I ultimately ran the Max via Ahha Pro and Compumotor OEM650
drives with 280oz/in motors. Those same drivers, set for higher current,
have been running my full size knee mill for a decade now, though I did
upgrade the control to Artisan.

Mach 3 is fine and it supports upto 500 lines of code unlicensed. More
than enough I think for your 40 or 50 frames of macro shots.

Hmm, that's a thought. The reason for wanting to use the MaxNC software
is I could easily run it on any laptop that'll run DOS and has a
parallel port. Moving up to Ahha gives me a lot more flexibility, but it
won't work on a laptop due to needing an ISA slot for the motion control
card. I'll have to see if Mach will run on a laptop OK, never looked
into that. If so, might as well go whole hog... G I know it supports
some form of subroutines. Heck, down the road, might even try to write a
plug in to really automate this whole process. Thanks, I'd not thought
about going full modern. But then, my whole line of thinking has gone
from home brew field portable to buying that setup and making something
really flexible for studio use.


Jon

Greetings Jon,
How do you combine all the pictures into one?
Eric

"Jon Anderson" wrote in message
...
On 7/18/2011 6:33 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:

I ran the MaxNC software in DOS mode briefly on a laptop to test it
when I sold the controller and motors. I did not care for it, but it
did seem to work.

Yeah, it's about as basic as it gets. Doing some poking around, I still
have a copy of TurboCNC too, which requires no special card and is a lot
more capable than the Max software.

I can see the desire for a laptop with the desire for a portable
machine though. The other alternative if you can't find the ideal
laptop is to use a Smoothstepper via USB to provide the LPT port.

Yes, still would like a portable setup if feasible, thus the laptop.
Budget is, cheaper the better, as is often the case with DIY projects...
G I just gave away a Gateway last month that had a full parallel port,
and there are cheaper alternatives than the Smoothstepper to insure full
voltage at the port.

Well, I'm not defending the SS interface particularly since I don't own one,
but it seems to me it does a lot more than just provide correct voltage on
the pins. Goes from USB to LPT. Provides dual LPT breakout. Removes
signal processing and CPU time usage from the CPU and processes them
directly. I am running upwards of a million lines of code now with a PCI
LPT port and a G540, so your certainly don't need one. I was just
suggesting it to meet the limited capabilities of many laptops. A cheap USB
LPT interface will not work. Several people have tried them.

There are also cheaper optically isolated LPT BOBs that will allow you to
use an external power supply to guarantee full 5+ voltage on all your pins.
The SS just seemed the quicker easier way to go given all your constraints.
You can use it directly into stepper drivers or even into servo drivers that
accept step direction signals. Plug it into the USB port. Hook it to your
drivers.

On 7/18/2011 11:18 AM, wrote:

How do you combine all the pictures into one?

Photoshop will do it, and there are programs dedicated to photo
stacking, like this: http://zerenesystems.com/stacker/
I've not done it yet, but have seen many images stacked.
In addition to stacking frames at different focal distances, there's
also HDR (High Dynamic Range) where a scene is shot in a variety of
exposures, here's just one site covering that topic.
Not sure if Stacker works for HDR though, might have different requirements.


Jon

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 07:33:00 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


All that being said, It might be hard to find a laptop that runs Windows
quickly and reliably, has appropriate ports for your hardware (Usually an
LPT port),

USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop


--
Maxim 12: A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head.

Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop


Yeah, Gunny, but they're not "real" hardware ports. They don't work in
real-time. They operate through USB drivers to serialize your commands,
then on-board (out on the 'dongle') drivers in flash or rom, both of which
can independently queue operations without your knowlege or permission.
It's often difficult, sometimes impossible, to generate real-time signals
offa USB devices.

LLoyd

Gunner Asch fired this volley in
:

USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop


Oh.. should have added.

I keep up a fairly old laptop... a Dell Precision 4300, which was a
"portable desktop" when it was new. I got it because it had real
hardware ports. Real RS232. Real Bi-Di parallel printer port.

It's been through a number of repairs, because it's a good platform I
don't want to part with.

LLoyd

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 07:33:00 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


All that being said, It might be hard to find a laptop that runs Windows
quickly and reliably, has appropriate ports for your hardware (Usually an
LPT port),

USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one. Oh, yeah and
make sure its got high enough voltage on all the outputs. They don't work.
We aren't talking about sending data whenever it feels like to a printer
that buffers it. We are talking about continuous precisely timed signals on
multiple outputs simultaneously thousands of times per second.

A 4 axis stepper controller or four single stepper controllers can run off a
single TRUE parallel port. All four of those axis could potentially be
moving at 60 inches per minute (I capped them at 45) on one of my little
machines at the same time. To do that in any form of coherence to get a
good result it needs precise timing and both step and direction signals for
each of those four axis. The Taig takes 40,000 steps per inch. The MaxNC
with the screws I use takes 32,000 steps per inch. 32,000 X 2 X 45 X 4.
That is a lot of precisely timed signaling. Sure they are simple single
data item signals, but there are a bunch of them and they all hit the
controllers which step the motors just right. In addition there are other
input and outputs that are used for limit switches, spindle control,
external e-stop, etc.

A true honest to goodness hardware parallel port can do it on a good
computer. I just finished a mold plate that ran over a million lines of
code to cut using one. (Actually the finish pass alone was over a million
lines of code)

From what I understand the SmoothStepper works directly with the software
and handles the timing externally from the PC removing a tremendous load
from the CPU and improving overall performance.

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:13:58 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one.

I have a number of USB adapters that have an external power supply..so
the power needs are NOT taken from the computers USB port.

Want some links?

Gunner

--
Maxim 12: A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:13:58 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one.

I have a number of USB adapters that have an external power supply..so
the power needs are NOT taken from the computers USB port.

Want some links?

I want some links to some that will reliably control 3 or 4 axis of steppers
for a million lines of code, and probably a several billion signals, and
will work with just about any step direction driver.

I think you totally missed (or chose to miss) that a cheap generic USB
parallel adaptor will not fill the need.

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 20:16:33 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:13:58 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one.

I have a number of USB adapters that have an external power supply..so
the power needs are NOT taken from the computers USB port.

Want some links?

I want some links to some that will reliably control 3 or 4 axis of steppers
for a million lines of code, and probably a several billion signals, and
will work with just about any step direction driver.

I think you totally missed (or chose to miss) that a cheap generic USB
parallel adaptor will not fill the need.


So USB 3.0 isnt fast enough?

Gunner


--
Maxim 12: A soft answer turneth away wrath.
Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 20:16:33 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:13:58 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one.

I have a number of USB adapters that have an external power supply..so
the power needs are NOT taken from the computers USB port.

Want some links?

I want some links to some that will reliably control 3 or 4 axis of
steppers
for a million lines of code, and probably a several billion signals, and
will work with just about any step direction driver.

I think you totally missed (or chose to miss) that a cheap generic USB
parallel adaptor will not fill the need.


So USB 3.0 isnt fast enough?

Well, I'm not sure its strictly a matter of speed. It's a matter of timing.
I know plenty of people have tried adaptors with poor results. With an
"adaptor" the PC is still doing all the work and then the USB port is
"translating" it. The software would really prefer to control hardware
directly. I can ask over at the Mach Support forum if anybody has better
results with USB 3.0 adaptors, but realistically I can't see how. The
fundamental problem is the same. The SS takes a whole different approach.

"Bob La Londe" wrote in message
...
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 20:16:33 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:13:58 -0700, "Bob La Londe"
wrote:


USB to just about any sort of output..serial, parallel etc etc are
commonly available at any computer shop

LOL. Yeah right. Try running a stepper driver off of one.

I have a number of USB adapters that have an external power supply..so
the power needs are NOT taken from the computers USB port.

Want some links?

I want some links to some that will reliably control 3 or 4 axis of
steppers
for a million lines of code, and probably a several billion signals, and
will work with just about any step direction driver.

I think you totally missed (or chose to miss) that a cheap generic USB
parallel adaptor will not fill the need.


So USB 3.0 isnt fast enough?

Well, I'm not sure its strictly a matter of speed. It's a matter of
timing. I know plenty of people have tried adaptors with poor results.
With an "adaptor" the PC is still doing all the work and then the USB port
is "translating" it. The software would really prefer to control hardware
directly. I can ask over at the Mach Support forum if anybody has better
results with USB 3.0 adaptors, but realistically I can't see how. The
fundamental problem is the same. The SS takes a whole different approach.

There is also something to the way resources are allocated for USB as
opposed to a dedicated hardware communication port. I'll leave that to the
guys who know more about specifically USB to explain if they like. I know
if I send a signal to a pin on a hardware LPT port it (barring the speed of
electrons down wire) its virtually delivered precisely when its sent.

For a full size desktop its really a non issue if price is your only driving
factor however. I can still get a good quality hardware PCI parallel card
brand new for about $20. (I have three spares on the shelf.)

"Bob La Londe" fired this volley in
:

There is also something to the way resources are allocated for USB as
opposed to a dedicated hardware communication port. I'll leave that
to the guys who know more about specifically USB to explain if they
like. I know if I send a signal to a pin on a hardware LPT port it
(barring the speed of electrons down wire) its virtually delivered
precisely when its sent.

It has to do with the fact that USB resources are controlled from the
Windows kernel drivers. The windows kernel is not a real-time system.
It "queues" operations for completion, then goes off and does other
things while those queued tasks get done on a "when I can, IF I can"
basis.

When a machine-lanquage component of software talks directly to a
hardware device (barring getting pre-empted by interrupt service
routines) the physical task occurs immediately. When a program talks to
the kernal routines instead of directly to the hardware, queued tasks can
take microseconds to _minutes_ to get executed on the hardware. This is
worsened by the fact that many USB peripherals themselves queue
operations, separate and apart from the kernel queuing.

That's why the EMC guys talk about using a "non-preemtive, real-time
kernel" in Linux to run machine control routines.

With the right kernel AND the right USB hardware, USB peripherals _can_
be used in real-time. You just have to pick devices that don't have
their own non-real-time queuing on-board. And if you have to use a
Microsoft product, don't use Windows -- use DOS. But, then, that's not a
very pretty scenario, either.

LLoyd


LLoyd

"Bob La Londe" fired this volley in
:

There is also something to the way resources are allocated for USB as
opposed to a dedicated hardware communication port. I'll leave that


I should have added this -- the way more sophisticated CNC machines that
run off windows work is that they have an external "controller". Windows
sends the commands it needs done as it can get around to it. The
controller 'assembles' the required data and control information, and
only sends it to the hardware when it has everything necessary to do the
commanded motions.

IE... the MachMotion guys, who sell very nice 'kit' solutions for CNC
conversion, won't guarantee that their lathe package can do threading
unless you use their external controller. Some folks get away with it -
at very slow speeds - some don't at any speed.

LLoyd

"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote in message
. 3.70...
"Bob La Londe" fired this volley in
:

There is also something to the way resources are allocated for USB as
opposed to a dedicated hardware communication port. I'll leave that
to the guys who know more about specifically USB to explain if they
like. I know if I send a signal to a pin on a hardware LPT port it
(barring the speed of electrons down wire) its virtually delivered
precisely when its sent.

It has to do with the fact that USB resources are controlled from the
Windows kernel drivers. The windows kernel is not a real-time system.
It "queues" operations for completion, then goes off and does other
things while those queued tasks get done on a "when I can, IF I can"
basis.

When a machine-lanquage component of software talks directly to a
hardware device (barring getting pre-empted by interrupt service
routines) the physical task occurs immediately. When a program talks to
the kernal routines instead of directly to the hardware, queued tasks can
take microseconds to _minutes_ to get executed on the hardware. This is
worsened by the fact that many USB peripherals themselves queue
operations, separate and apart from the kernel queuing.

That's why the EMC guys talk about using a "non-preemtive, real-time
kernel" in Linux to run machine control routines.

With the right kernel AND the right USB hardware, USB peripherals _can_
be used in real-time. You just have to pick devices that don't have
their own non-real-time queuing on-board. And if you have to use a
Microsoft product, don't use Windows -- use DOS. But, then, that's not a
very pretty scenario, either.

Thanks Llyod, I have gotten pretty good results out of my CNC mills for
making molds. The very last thing I do is spot the plates for the alignment
pins and clamping screws. Mostly they line up. (GRIN) I use hardware LPT
ports on Windows machines, and I like I said I have run over a million lines
of code now in one code file. I've figured out what speeds work. I only
run one primary application at a time. I disable everything in Windows its
possible to disable. I start Mach with a batch file that assigns a higher
than normal priority to Mach, and I turn off the tool path display to reduce
graphic adaptor load when cutting larger files. It works. I don't see why
it would not work for cutting threads with some care. I've got a single
point milling adaptor for thread cutting (basically a boring bar style). If
I can cut loose threads by single point milling I don't see why I couldn't
cut tighter fit threads using a lathe style operation. If absolute
repeatability was required than add a zero switch to the 4th axis (on a
mill) or the head stock (on a lathe) and write a macro to re-zero before
each pass.

Not arguing at all. Just saying what has worked for me.

AND I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT SWAP ANY USB DEVICES WHILE MACH IS CUTTING A FILE.
The only reason I leave USB enabled at all is that thumb drives are the best
way to sneaker net files from my design computer.