[SGVHAK] 3-D print a magnifying glass?

[Claude Felizardo]

Did i say concave?  Typo on my part.  i meant bulging so yes convex.  Wow,
I was rereading and I had typed concave again or perhaps it's the
auto-correct?

Joining lenses - tricky as you'll get refraction every time you change
material from lens to cement to lens again.  Unless it's well done, it
might affect the image.

Protesting business practices or just be done with it.  You could spend
hours searching for a comparable product.

5x?  I think i had a slide magnifier that looked similar, don't recall what
magnification.  Probably not as large as 2.5".  Not sure as I haven't used
in since a big slide scanning project several years back.  Don't recall if
I had gotten it at a computer swap meet or at a photography store.

Hey, what about B&H?  They have several to chose from:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Loupes-Magnifiers/ci/987/N/4077634476

I just did a google search on "slide magnifier"

Claude







On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:27 PM, John Kreznar <jek at ininx.com> wrote:

> In a posting purporting to be from Claude Felizardo
> <cafelizardo at gmail.com> but lacking a digital signature, it is written:
>
> > What is your application for wanting to print a magnifying lens?
>
> It's to replace a lost pocket magnifier that was my constant companion
> for over 30 years and that I used for everything from reading fine print
> to inspecting small objects.  It was unframed glass, all chipped around
> the edges with scratches and even a blob of superglue one the surface,
> but still eminently useful.
>
> My first stop was http://www.scientificsonline.com (Edmund) where I
> found http://www.scientificsonline.com/giant-5x-stand-magnifier.html,
> 2.5" diameter, 5X, $10.95.  Good price, and I could remove the stand and
> provably be back where I started.
>
> But in spite of fond memories of Edmund, I don't like their current
> business practices.  Further, I'm beginning to try to move to Bitcoin
> for trade whenever possible, and a low-priority project like this is a
> good starting point.  Anybody have one they want to sell for Bitcoin?
>
> Of course, there's nothing "Bitcoin" about a 3-D printer, but I thought
> I'd also use this occasion to tap SGVHAK's collective wisdom about
> current 3-D printer capabilities.  Looks like they're not yet good
> enough.
>
> > I think a magnifying lens has to be concave ...
>
> convex, for sure
>
> > ... if it's flat on once side then you've cut the power in half no?
>
> Hence my idea of cementing two together.
>
> > A fresnel lens cuts down on the volume of material needed and space
> > but I don't think you really want to try reading through one for any
> > length of time.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > The resolution of 3d printers are in the order of fractional mm but I
> > think you might need something finer?
>
> No doubt.
>
> > I would think there would be so much optical distortion I can't see it
> > being useful for reading.
>
> Yep.
>
> > Okay, looking around...
>
> Thanks for the links.  Following them now.
>
> --
> OpenPGP key: http://ininx.com
>  John E. Kreznar jek at ininx.com 9F1148454619A5F08550 705961A47CC541AFEF13
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sgvhak.net/pipermail/hak/attachments/20131119/dfbe3250/attachment.html>