I hope it's ok posting this question here - it's a bit of woodworking
and a bit cabinet making!
Please see this image;
It's not the best, but hopefully it's enough. I'm thinking of making
something like this, and one thing that I can't quite work out is how
the hinges work.
If you look closely, you'll see the doors aren't perpendicular to the
base, but rather are on a slight angle.
Won't the doors swing out funnily? With part of the door ending up
beneath the level of the base?
What kind of hinges would I use?
thanks in advance
Strap hinges on an opposite angle equal to or greater than the current angle
of the frame. If you want to get exotic and have them open properly, then
pocket doors would make them look good and function properly.
Yup. So? The doors are well off the floor, plenty of clearance. If
you build quirky stuff it's going to do quirky things. Maybe put
chains on the doors to keep them from swinging all the way out, or
hinges that stop at 95-100 degrees.
Are you sure of that? Have you actually seen the object?
More likely is that the object is distorted in the photo because the top is
closer to the camera than the bottom; that makes the sides *look* tapered.
...bingo, give the man a ceeeeegar. I'm getting into architectural
photography and one of the *big* deals is converging lines...how to
*not* get converging lines is a tough...and expensive...nut (I believe
Robotoy found one of the same doors that got close, but you'll notice
it still isn't quite correct). If you want to swing doors off of
jambs that are not plumb with doors shaped to match, and french no
less, well, buckle up. Best idea I've seen is to "pocket" them and
even that would be funky, imagine the jamb sides when the doors are in
the open position. Now, a paralellogram-shaped opening...heh...
Tough, no; expensive, can be but not necessarily.
All you need is a view camera with tilting/sliding/rising/falling front and
back. Biggest problem IMO is that when you correct for converging lines you
get a "flat iron" appearance. My preferance was/is partial correction -
after all, lines *do* appear to converge when we look at them - to avoid
camera induced accentuation of same.
As far as expense goes, you can easily find a decent used camera such as
Cambo/Calumet, Omega etc. *with* lens for around $500. Toyo too but
probably a bit more. One does not *have* to have a Sinar :)
A set of rubber tanks, some 4x5 hangers, a big enlarger... *drools*. I
loved that hobby.
The 'correction' of the cabinet posted by the OP I did in Photoshop.
Very sloppily done on the fly with the 'distort transform*
And you are correct. It looks way nicer to do a partial correction.
Btw, Nikon and leica and i believe Contax all made (or still make) a
lens or two with mechanical correction capability. I think the Nikon
had a focal length of 35 mm.
I have also seen mini bellows used on a Contax RTS.
...I've gotten a decent wide angle that will do for now...doubt if
I'll ever go the bellows route, there's some nice software to help
correct, too. You guys sound like you know the biz...I tend to spend
money when I think it'll solve a problem, not at the expense of
knowledge vis-a-vis the goal, but to achieve maximum speed...and
maximum may be minimum in many circumstances...
FWIW, Nikon has three tilt/shift lenses in the current line, from 24-85mm,
and Canon has four, from 17-90mm.
None of them are particularly cheap.
The Ukrainians are making a 35mm 2.8 tilt/shift that can be had fairly
cheaply--there are two up on ebay right now for under 300 bucks, one in
Canon and the other in Nikon mount--search "Arsat shift" and include
descriptions and you'll find them and a lot of others. Not the greatest
lens ever made but decent enough, and the build quality is Soviet military
or better (the factory was producing them for the Soviet government before
the Fall, and from all accounts they've been improving the quality ever
since), which means it looks rough but everything works and it will take a
With any of these you want an eyepiece magnifier--the ones that Dealextreme
sells are usable and cheap (main problem is that they aren't parfocal--when
you change from low to high power you have to readjust them), the ones from
the camera manufacturers are generally better but not necessarily enough so
to justify the cost differential. The reason you want the magnifier is that
none of the tilt/shift lenses are autofocus, with the lens off-axis any
focusing aids in the viewfinder are iffy, and just forget about the focus
confirmation getting you close enough.
FWIW, depending on your standards and intended market, it doesn't have to be
all that expensive. Any decent photo editor can correct that sort of
distortion, at the sacrifice of some pixels and a bit of genloss.
Another option is to use an extreme wide angle held level and then crop out
the bottom half of the picture--that if you maintain original aspect ratio
costs you 3/4 of your pixels though--that might be fine though for small
The "right" but expensive way to do it is a lens with shifts.
> (I believe
In that case, did you open the doors and see how they hinged?
Funky stuff like that is popular with scifi shows. One thing I
commonly see is that the doors pivot on a vertical axis that is
inset from the "hinge" side of the door. So the bulk of the door
comes out while a narrow strip along the side goes into the cabinet.
No clue how you build that. I'm still trying to figure out why the
garage hasn't built anything with all of the tools that I bought
and put out there. (Spring, and fewer excuses, will soon be here.)
Drew Lawson | Savage bed foot-warmer
| of purest feline ancestry
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.