This is fantastic, well done! I hadn’t even listed all the parts I used, but it appears you got the IR gate and other bits. Very neat to see others getting similar “builds” working. One important note: it sounds like your DSLR (Canon 7D?) is actuating the shutter / mirror every time, the classic Canon “mirror slap” sound. This will be wear and tear on the camera, and it will shorten the camera’s lifespan. 😬 Take a look at “silent” mode as a start to help reduce that, and maybe also the alternate firmware “Magic Lantern” (with its own risks / caveats) which may offer a way to get a fully silent frame without any mechanical movement.
@@scottschiller Yes, I was able to use your videos and replicate what you "created." Your videos are first class and solved a mystery I have been thinking about for many years - "How do I scan my old film to RAW images so I can process them." I wanted more control than a raster offers. I'd never heard of Arduino and your set up solved answers I didn’t even know I had. I think the only thing different was I 3D-printed a mount for the LED light because why not...plus I don’t have the same set of kitchen utensils 😊 You are correct, this is a 7D….an OLD 7D. I did a little research and found shooting in silent mode activates the shutter 2 times, not one. Upon further research it appears (depending on who you listen to) that the shutter is what wears out on the canon cameras not the mirror. So with that info I figured what the heck, if I wear out my well used 7D I will just have to replace it with a new full frame Canon..ahh darn. I will check out Magic Lantern's options. Its in fact already set up on this camera, just not being used. I used it years ago to shoot video in RAW on this camera. That was a beast of a project in terms of processing. Thanks again for sharing everything. I have family members that are blown away. I picked up a sound projector to pull the audio off the super-8 as well and it’s turning out awesome. Great work!!!
@@dtorbit It's always inspiring, and an honour to see others' work based on something you've shared. I'm glad you've found the video series useful too, of course! I enjoy making these, and I put them out there with the hopes they'll be enjoyed by others. Thanks for confirming the Canon 7D, I'm glad to know you're aware of the shutter activation and eventual wear and tear. I tried some raw video experiments on my 5D3 (which I have here) years ago, and I agree - it took many hours and hundreds of gigabytes to process the frames, but I got some pretty nice results! Some San Francisco Bay Bridge footage, here. ruclips.net/video/IymJBmfa_bY/видео.html Regarding reducing or eliminating shutter / mirror / mechanical activity: I haven't tested this yet, but Magic Lantern calls the "silent" feature "Full-resolution silent pictures." I intend to check it out on my 5D3 and will include my findings in Part 3 if I there's anything notable. www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12523.0 I'm delighted to hear you were able to scan stuff for your family and surprise them; that was my goal for last holiday season as well, to bring material from the archives and make it look really good. Getting Super-8 sound must be interesting, I have not tried that yet myself. I have one commercial film that has a visual waveform printed on it, I have yet to dig into that.
@@scottschiller ' Waveform printed on it' sounds as if you've got a Super-8 film with a mono optical audio track printed onto it. These were almost invariably prints made for the aviation industry, where the film ran at 24 fps, and the iffy signal to noise ratio and poor frequency response of optical tracks came with the advantage that there were no magnetic heads to wear and get clogged up. The Elmo GS1200 will replay these films well.
This is a fantastic project, and what you've done is awesome! Some tweaks you can make to your existing camera settings: Yes, you are absolutely correct that the more zoom - the longer the tube - the less light will reach the sensor. It's the same problem those of us who shoot large format (the old cameras that look like an accordion?) have to deal with and compensate for. While the "sweet spot" of a lens is nice to know, there is NOTHING stopping you from closing down to get a deeper depth of field. You mention you stop it down to f8 - I would have jumped right to f11 when dealing with that shallow of a subject. For what you are doing, you will never notice any difference in quality between f4 and f11, but you are guaranteed the whole field will be in focus. Now, long zoom, and stopping down equals LESS light, RIGHT?! Here's something else to note: I feel like you are going by the rules of film photography (hey, I'm a 50yr old photographer, and I sometimes go back to them as well) where the higher the ISO/ASA, the "chunkier" the image. 800 ISO on that camera (Sony a7 series cameras) is smooth as butter! Gone are the days where you need to work with the slowest ASA possible to ensure it being sharp. Add to that, in the end, the image will be "moving", which negates a LOT of image artifacting anyway. This will ALSO give you the benefit of a lower contrast image - less likely to both blow-out your highlights and/or crush your blacks - you will see MORE information overall in the finished frame. A note about a DSLR that has a mirror - they can use the Mirror Lock-Up feature to relieve the camera of that. No mechanical use, and even better, no camera SHAKE. Sorry for the novel. LOVE the Venkman figure! Looking forward to watching your Pt. 3!
Hi Lew, Thanks for the kind words, and the notes coming from someone who knows large format and film! I've had varying thoughts from folks on aperture. I think I initially tried f/16 with my first prototype in part 1, but my exposure time was multiple seconds when using my LED flashlight. I think it's good to test your own camera and gear, of course, and see what works for you. I think I've used f/8 for most of my scans at this point, and I've found that aperture much more forgiving than f/4 where the focus was harder to line up across the film. Either way, the depth of field is very shallow on this lens! As I recall, there's an argument that smaller apertures introduce diffraction and thus reduced sharpness - so I try not to use the smallest aperture, i.e., f/16, on this macro lens. I think f/4 or f/5.6 have been recommended as the "sweet spot", per se. Regarding ISO, I've heard arguments that ISO is effectively just a multiplier on exposure with digital cameras. As I recall, the argument was you could (theoretically) always shoot ISO 100, bring exposure up in post, and it'd be almost the same as using a higher ISO when shooting. Either way, I found that I can shoot pretty reliably and get good results at f/8, ISO 100, and 1/10s shutter speed. For scenes where more light is needed, I can slow down to 1/8s or 1/6s, noting that it's increasingly important that the camera doesn't vibrate or move during this process. On DSLR mirror lock-up: Indeed, most have this feature, but there is still *some* mechanical movement from what I found. It's reduced, but still there, and I show that briefly in this video on my Canon 5D3. Folks with Canon DSLRs can try looking into the "full-resolution silent picture" feature offered by the Magic Lantern firmware as one possible way to get truly silent pictures, but it sounds like this is slow and outputs YUV 422-type files - perhaps not RAW, which may negate the benefits of the process otherwise. wiki.magiclantern.fm/userguide#silent_pictures
Hi Lew and Scott. I'm in total agreement about the usable ISO extending to 800 (though on my A7R2 I limit it to 400). But I flinch at your 'jump straight to f/11' comment. On our side is the fact that we're using a beautifully designed flat-field macro lens (the Laowa), and if the camera is truly perpendicular to the film in the projector's gate there should be no need to stop down the lens at all. OK, there 'could' be some film curvature and splices will be horrible, but generally (as Scott has found) it's vibration that causes the loss of focus. The tests of my 4K TVs screen show a MARKED resolution loss when you go from f/4 to f/11, and this has nothing to do with Laowa and all to do with the laws of optics. I shoot my gate at f/5.6 to give me that tiny bit of DoF reassurance, but I know it's visibly not as good as f/4. I'd happily use f/2.8 from a resolution standpoint, but the very slight vignetting wide open (easily shown using zebras) has completely cleared by f/5.6
Thanks for the detail. I tried f/4 myself, but noted the depth of field being very thin and having some trouble aligning with the film gate, using my setup as-is. With f/5.6, it seemed like a nice go-between. I wouldn’t use the smallest aperture on any lens under normal circumstances, but it never hurts to look up the “sweet spot” online.
Seriously beautiful machine and even better results. I have about 100 years worth of family movies that I’m too paranoid to ship anywhere, so I’ve been wanting a Dual 8 ‘telecine’ for many years now, especially one that’s independent of a computer connection and easily upgradeable as the camera tech gets better. As the saying goes, it’s pointless to reinvent the wheel, so I’ll be copying your methods as closely as possible. So close, in fact, that I just bought the exact same Canon S-400 projector on eBay. Hope you don’t mind... I’ll give you full credit whenever I’m taking to someone about it. You touched upon this a bit already, but rewinding the film back through the gate is just more wear and tear on the film. I recommend finding some old rewinds and doing it manually. Doesn’t take that much longer. A quick question.... my apologies if I missed this info in the videos... Since the A7 is a full frame camera, after color correction and cropping, etc, is your finished film reel 2k or 4K? I’m looking to ‘future proof’ my films, so I want the most maximum resolution possible for the family archives.
Thanks for the kind words, Doug! You raise a good point about the rewinding of film. I do recommend pulling the last bit of film through the gate at the end, and then attaching the film to the empty reel directly above - bypassing the film gate - for rewinding. The Canon S-400 seems like a pretty reliable projector, although I have found it a bit tight when lining up the camera lens with the film gate - something to consider. With the setup I’m using, I do get scans that allow me to export at 4K, 2160p resolution. At time of writing, my most recent video of street cars from 1982 is in 4K, scanned from Super-8. Hope this helps!
You sound like Mike Rowe meets Neil Peart. And very helpful for my project, although I cant find an S-400 for less than a kidney. Nice Job!!! Thank you.
Thanks for the kind words-I recognize both those names, too. Mike Rowe has a great voice! Regarding the projectors, keep an eye out - you may find the occasional bargain, or perhaps a similar Canon model that can be adapted.
Thank you! I am glad you have found this combination here. My work has been inspired by others’, as well. I’m new to the film aspect, but have been tinkering with Arduino stuff since perhaps 2010. It’s a lot of fun.
Thanks for the pointer! I’m familiar with Adobe Lightroom, so I’ve been using that as the first step of post-processing - it has some similar color grading tools. I will look at editing raw in Resolve as well, as folks may find it easier to do all the work in one program.
Very intriguing, enjoy this type of DIY, grate work. What I would like to know the camera, would a simple cell phone camera work or must it be the expensive ones with bells and whistles.
Thank you, I’m glad you found it interesting! Regarding the camera - I have seen some scanners where folks use a Raspberry Pi-type camera lens/sensor, basically a lens module on a little circuit board sort of thing. That might be a little more work, but more convenient / reliable than trying to set up and remote trigger a cell phone to take thousands of images. Whatever you choose, the most important thing is you don’t want a mechanical camera shutter e.g., DSLR cameras, because those will get worn out pretty quickly with the movement required to take a picture - and then you’ll have a “dead” camera, not very useful! 😩
Yes, indeed! I haven't tried that myself, but it's entirely feasible. You may need to run the motor at a lower speed in that case, to ensure time for three exposures. That of course depends on your lighting and aperture, etc.
Very nice. I have an old projector that's begging to be modified. Whilst I know how stepper motors work, I have no practical experience using them. The Nema 17 appears, to come in different sizes, presumably different power, torque and voltages. Is there a specific model that you would recommend to do the job ?
In researching stepper motors, it seemed like the NEMA 17 was a "safe bet" in terms of its torque. I think you're right in that specs vary somewhat, but driving a projector shouldn't take much force; you can turn the projector gears etc. by hand, using the pulley. I wasn't sure how much torque was required, so I got a 2-amp 1.8-degree (200 steps per revolution) bipolar (4 wire) NEMA 17 which has 84 oz-in / 59 N-cm torque. I wager a 1.5-amp would be fine as well. The 2A version is certainly strong enough that you can't easily stop the motor turning with your fingers. The model I got was around $10 USD. I believe these all run at 12V, but make sure you check the specs before buying. www.amazon.com/STEPPERONLINE-Stepper-63-74oz-Connector-Extruder/dp/B07LF898KN A smaller 1-amp NEMA 17 might be fine in terms of torque for a projector, but I haven't tested this. If the price is roughly the same, I'd get the 2-amp one to be safe. www.amazon.com/Short-Bipolar-Motor-18-4oz-13Ncm/dp/B00PNEQ79Q/ As for making them work with the TB6600 + Arduino, I found these two videos to be really useful. One warning I've also seen: Don't connect or disconnect the stepper motor wires to the TB6600 while the power is on, because it might burn out the controller! I've been lucky and haven't done this - yet - myself. ;) Background, types and theory: ruclips.net/video/0qwrnUeSpYQ/видео.html TB6600 + NEMA 17 + arduino specifics: ruclips.net/video/3LZ_v3Jldwo/видео.html Hopefully this is helpful for you!
Indeed! I discuss this a bit in Part 3. ruclips.net/video/NEWPAG6cBYE/видео.html The reason I use Lightroom is my decade-plus history of experience with it. In Part 4, I may try a Resolve-only workflow and see how it goes.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for all your hard work. Thanks to you we are seeing film not viewed since the 70's. ruclips.net/video/-Wu4AkhUs8Q/видео.html
This is fantastic, well done! I hadn’t even listed all the parts I used, but it appears you got the IR gate and other bits. Very neat to see others getting similar “builds” working.
One important note: it sounds like your DSLR (Canon 7D?) is actuating the shutter / mirror every time, the classic Canon “mirror slap” sound. This will be wear and tear on the camera, and it will shorten the camera’s lifespan. 😬
Take a look at “silent” mode as a start to help reduce that, and maybe also the alternate firmware “Magic Lantern” (with its own risks / caveats) which may offer a way to get a fully silent frame without any mechanical movement.
@@scottschiller Yes, I was able to use your videos and replicate what you "created." Your videos are first class and solved a mystery I have been thinking about for many years - "How do I scan my old film to RAW images so I can process them." I wanted more control than a raster offers. I'd never heard of Arduino and your set up solved answers I didn’t even know I had. I think the only thing different was I 3D-printed a mount for the LED light because why not...plus I don’t have the same set of kitchen utensils 😊
You are correct, this is a 7D….an OLD 7D. I did a little research and found shooting in silent mode activates the shutter 2 times, not one. Upon further research it appears (depending on who you listen to) that the shutter is what wears out on the canon cameras not the mirror. So with that info I figured what the heck, if I wear out my well used 7D I will just have to replace it with a new full frame Canon..ahh darn.
I will check out Magic Lantern's options. Its in fact already set up on this camera, just not being used. I used it years ago to shoot video in RAW on this camera. That was a beast of a project in terms of processing.
Thanks again for sharing everything. I have family members that are blown away. I picked up a sound projector to pull the audio off the super-8 as well and it’s turning out awesome. Great work!!!
@@dtorbit It's always inspiring, and an honour to see others' work based on something you've shared. I'm glad you've found the video series useful too, of course! I enjoy making these, and I put them out there with the hopes they'll be enjoyed by others.
Thanks for confirming the Canon 7D, I'm glad to know you're aware of the shutter activation and eventual wear and tear. I tried some raw video experiments on my 5D3 (which I have here) years ago, and I agree - it took many hours and hundreds of gigabytes to process the frames, but I got some pretty nice results! Some San Francisco Bay Bridge footage, here. ruclips.net/video/IymJBmfa_bY/видео.html
Regarding reducing or eliminating shutter / mirror / mechanical activity: I haven't tested this yet, but Magic Lantern calls the "silent" feature "Full-resolution silent pictures." I intend to check it out on my 5D3 and will include my findings in Part 3 if I there's anything notable. www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=12523.0
I'm delighted to hear you were able to scan stuff for your family and surprise them; that was my goal for last holiday season as well, to bring material from the archives and make it look really good. Getting Super-8 sound must be interesting, I have not tried that yet myself. I have one commercial film that has a visual waveform printed on it, I have yet to dig into that.
@@scottschiller ' Waveform printed on it' sounds as if you've got a Super-8 film with a mono optical audio track printed onto it. These were almost invariably prints made for the aviation industry, where the film ran at 24 fps, and the iffy signal to noise ratio and poor frequency response of optical tracks came with the advantage that there were no magnetic heads to wear and get clogged up. The Elmo GS1200 will replay these films well.
Well done Scott! Some good information here.
Thanks! I had fun with this project.
This is a fantastic project, and what you've done is awesome!
Some tweaks you can make to your existing camera settings:
Yes, you are absolutely correct that the more zoom - the longer the tube - the less light will reach the sensor. It's the same problem those of us who shoot large format (the old cameras that look like an accordion?) have to deal with and compensate for.
While the "sweet spot" of a lens is nice to know, there is NOTHING stopping you from closing down to get a deeper depth of field. You mention you stop it down to f8 - I would have jumped right to f11 when dealing with that shallow of a subject. For what you are doing, you will never notice any difference in quality between f4 and f11, but you are guaranteed the whole field will be in focus.
Now, long zoom, and stopping down equals LESS light, RIGHT?!
Here's something else to note: I feel like you are going by the rules of film photography (hey, I'm a 50yr old photographer, and I sometimes go back to them as well) where the higher the ISO/ASA, the "chunkier" the image. 800 ISO on that camera (Sony a7 series cameras) is smooth as butter! Gone are the days where you need to work with the slowest ASA possible to ensure it being sharp. Add to that, in the end, the image will be "moving", which negates a LOT of image artifacting anyway. This will ALSO give you the benefit of a lower contrast image - less likely to both blow-out your highlights and/or crush your blacks - you will see MORE information overall in the finished frame.
A note about a DSLR that has a mirror - they can use the Mirror Lock-Up feature to relieve the camera of that. No mechanical use, and even better, no camera SHAKE.
Sorry for the novel.
LOVE the Venkman figure!
Looking forward to watching your Pt. 3!
Hi Lew,
Thanks for the kind words, and the notes coming from someone who knows large format and film! I've had varying thoughts from folks on aperture. I think I initially tried f/16 with my first prototype in part 1, but my exposure time was multiple seconds when using my LED flashlight. I think it's good to test your own camera and gear, of course, and see what works for you. I think I've used f/8 for most of my scans at this point, and I've found that aperture much more forgiving than f/4 where the focus was harder to line up across the film. Either way, the depth of field is very shallow on this lens!
As I recall, there's an argument that smaller apertures introduce diffraction and thus reduced sharpness - so I try not to use the smallest aperture, i.e., f/16, on this macro lens. I think f/4 or f/5.6 have been recommended as the "sweet spot", per se.
Regarding ISO, I've heard arguments that ISO is effectively just a multiplier on exposure with digital cameras. As I recall, the argument was you could (theoretically) always shoot ISO 100, bring exposure up in post, and it'd be almost the same as using a higher ISO when shooting. Either way, I found that I can shoot pretty reliably and get good results at f/8, ISO 100, and 1/10s shutter speed. For scenes where more light is needed, I can slow down to 1/8s or 1/6s, noting that it's increasingly important that the camera doesn't vibrate or move during this process.
On DSLR mirror lock-up: Indeed, most have this feature, but there is still *some* mechanical movement from what I found. It's reduced, but still there, and I show that briefly in this video on my Canon 5D3. Folks with Canon DSLRs can try looking into the "full-resolution silent picture" feature offered by the Magic Lantern firmware as one possible way to get truly silent pictures, but it sounds like this is slow and outputs YUV 422-type files - perhaps not RAW, which may negate the benefits of the process otherwise. wiki.magiclantern.fm/userguide#silent_pictures
Hi Lew and Scott. I'm in total agreement about the usable ISO extending to 800 (though on my A7R2 I limit it to 400).
But I flinch at your 'jump straight to f/11' comment. On our side is the fact that we're using a beautifully designed flat-field macro lens (the Laowa), and if the camera is truly perpendicular to the film in the projector's gate there should be no need to stop down the lens at all.
OK, there 'could' be some film curvature and splices will be horrible, but generally (as Scott has found) it's vibration that causes the loss of focus. The tests of my 4K TVs screen show a MARKED resolution loss when you go from f/4 to f/11, and this has nothing to do with Laowa and all to do with the laws of optics. I shoot my gate at f/5.6 to give me that tiny bit of DoF reassurance, but I know it's visibly not as good as f/4. I'd happily use f/2.8 from a resolution standpoint, but the very slight vignetting wide open (easily shown using zebras) has completely cleared by f/5.6
Thanks for the detail.
I tried f/4 myself, but noted the depth of field being very thin and having some trouble aligning with the film gate, using my setup as-is. With f/5.6, it seemed like a nice go-between.
I wouldn’t use the smallest aperture on any lens under normal circumstances, but it never hurts to look up the “sweet spot” online.
Great video!
Seriously beautiful machine and even better results. I have about 100 years worth of family movies that I’m too paranoid to ship anywhere, so I’ve been wanting a Dual 8 ‘telecine’ for many years now, especially one that’s independent of a computer connection and easily upgradeable as the camera tech gets better.
As the saying goes, it’s pointless to reinvent the wheel, so I’ll be copying your methods as closely as possible. So close, in fact, that I just bought the exact same Canon S-400 projector on eBay. Hope you don’t mind... I’ll give you full credit whenever I’m taking to someone about it.
You touched upon this a bit already, but rewinding the film back through the gate is just more wear and tear on the film. I recommend finding some old rewinds and doing it manually. Doesn’t take that much longer.
A quick question.... my apologies if I missed this info in the videos... Since the A7 is a full frame camera, after color correction and cropping, etc, is your finished film reel 2k or 4K? I’m looking to ‘future proof’ my films, so I want the most maximum resolution possible for the family archives.
Thanks for the kind words, Doug! You raise a good point about the rewinding of film. I do recommend pulling the last bit of film through the gate at the end, and then attaching the film to the empty reel directly above - bypassing the film gate - for rewinding.
The Canon S-400 seems like a pretty reliable projector, although I have found it a bit tight when lining up the camera lens with the film gate - something to consider.
With the setup I’m using, I do get scans that allow me to export at 4K, 2160p resolution. At time of writing, my most recent video of street cars from 1982 is in 4K, scanned from Super-8. Hope this helps!
You sound like Mike Rowe meets Neil Peart. And very helpful for my project, although I cant find an S-400 for less than a kidney. Nice Job!!! Thank you.
Thanks for the kind words-I recognize both those names, too. Mike Rowe has a great voice! Regarding the projectors, keep an eye out - you may find the occasional bargain, or perhaps a similar Canon model that can be adapted.
Incredible work, Scott!!
Thanks, homes! 🙌🏼
Love this! my interests in film and Arduino have finally crossed paths!
Thank you! I am glad you have found this combination here. My work has been inspired by others’, as well.
I’m new to the film aspect, but have been tinkering with Arduino stuff since perhaps 2010. It’s a lot of fun.
11:58 cyan dye failure. Davinci resolve colour is brilliant for removing red, set your black levels first with the scopes, then it is easy
Thanks for the pointer! I’m familiar with Adobe Lightroom, so I’ve been using that as the first step of post-processing - it has some similar color grading tools. I will look at editing raw in Resolve as well, as folks may find it easier to do all the work in one program.
Very intriguing, enjoy this type of DIY, grate work. What I would like to know the camera, would a simple cell phone camera work or must it be the expensive ones with bells and whistles.
Thank you, I’m glad you found it interesting! Regarding the camera - I have seen some scanners where folks use a Raspberry Pi-type camera lens/sensor, basically a lens module on a little circuit board sort of thing. That might be a little more work, but more convenient / reliable than trying to set up and remote trigger a cell phone to take thousands of images.
Whatever you choose, the most important thing is you don’t want a mechanical camera shutter e.g., DSLR cameras, because those will get worn out pretty quickly with the movement required to take a picture - and then you’ll have a “dead” camera, not very useful! 😩
@@scottschiller - thanks for the info, will do some more research and see which way I want to tackle this project.
so when you have 3 different exposure you can combine all three in to one so it sort of becomes HDR
Yes, indeed! I haven't tried that myself, but it's entirely feasible. You may need to run the motor at a lower speed in that case, to ensure time for three exposures. That of course depends on your lighting and aperture, etc.
Very nice. I have an old projector that's begging to be modified. Whilst I know how stepper motors work, I have no practical experience using them. The Nema 17 appears, to come in different sizes, presumably different power, torque and voltages. Is there a specific model that you would recommend to do the job ?
In researching stepper motors, it seemed like the NEMA 17 was a "safe bet" in terms of its torque. I think you're right in that specs vary somewhat, but driving a projector shouldn't take much force; you can turn the projector gears etc. by hand, using the pulley.
I wasn't sure how much torque was required, so I got a 2-amp 1.8-degree (200 steps per revolution) bipolar (4 wire) NEMA 17 which has 84 oz-in / 59 N-cm torque. I wager a 1.5-amp would be fine as well. The 2A version is certainly strong enough that you can't easily stop the motor turning with your fingers. The model I got was around $10 USD. I believe these all run at 12V, but make sure you check the specs before buying. www.amazon.com/STEPPERONLINE-Stepper-63-74oz-Connector-Extruder/dp/B07LF898KN
A smaller 1-amp NEMA 17 might be fine in terms of torque for a projector, but I haven't tested this. If the price is roughly the same, I'd get the 2-amp one to be safe. www.amazon.com/Short-Bipolar-Motor-18-4oz-13Ncm/dp/B00PNEQ79Q/
As for making them work with the TB6600 + Arduino, I found these two videos to be really useful.
One warning I've also seen: Don't connect or disconnect the stepper motor wires to the TB6600 while the power is on, because it might burn out the controller! I've been lucky and haven't done this - yet - myself. ;)
Background, types and theory: ruclips.net/video/0qwrnUeSpYQ/видео.html
TB6600 + NEMA 17 + arduino specifics: ruclips.net/video/3LZ_v3Jldwo/видео.html
Hopefully this is helpful for you!
@@scottschiller Thanks Scott, for all the info and the links that is extremely helpful .
@@whoam42a1 Excellent; you're most welcome.
There is no need for lightroom if you can import the images directly to resolve.
Indeed! I discuss this a bit in Part 3. ruclips.net/video/NEWPAG6cBYE/видео.html
The reason I use Lightroom is my decade-plus history of experience with it. In Part 4, I may try a Resolve-only workflow and see how it goes.