<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Mounting Brackets Second good DCG Hologram</title>
        <link>https://swannrack.tv/videos/watch/b29498d3-fa58-4a01-a21e-cb815dc7d103</link>
        <description>When I made this hologram I was again incredibly excited and happy. It was the second time I got a super bright Hologram made with the DCG process. Maybe even a little brighter than on the first mounting brackets. A lot of things went in my favor with this one. As the angle brackets are standing directly on the holographic emulsion, there is very little chance for movement between object and emulsion. Movement during the exposure results in dim or nonexistent holograms. The less movement the better. Also the angle brackets have a very shiny surface. That means these objects reflect a lot of the light back to the emulsion which is key for a good Hologram recording. Ideally you want the light passing through the emulsion onto the object which then gets reflected back onto the emulsion to be at a ratio of 1:1. The closer you can get to that ratio, the brighter the hologram will be. These were my production notes on the hologram: I rebuilt the exposure setup and installed the collimating mirror. It’s not perfect yet, but the beam is already fairly uniform across a 16 × 16 cm window. After that I also cleaned the lens in the spatial filter – it was totally dirty at the focal point. The optimal distance between the spatial filter and the collimating mirror should be about 62 cm. The plates I sensitized today with the old sensitizing solution from three days ago turned out to be awful. Lots of crystallization, even though I diluted the solution again with 300 ml of water and added eight thick drops of soap. So for good results I need a fresh solution every time. After the dry box all the plates showed crystallization, which explains the poor result. In addition the beam from the collimating mirror wasn’t properly centered. Both plates were exposed at the same time; they lay side by side. I attribute the differences in the results solely to the varying degrees of crystallization. Hologram 1 and 2: • Exposure: 5 min • Light fix: 20 cm, 2 min (too short) • Chemical fix: 1 min • ISO standard • ISO 100 % – 58 °C (too cold), 4.5 min @ 400 W • Hair dryer: 10 min After the hair dryer, one hologram was visible, the other almost none. After 10 min I pulled both out and checked; both were reddish. Then I put the better‑visible one back in the oven at 100 °C for another 10 min to see if there would be a color shift – nothing changed. Conclusion: The holograms need more hardening than just 5 min exposure, maybe 3 or 4 min… The collimated beam is simply much weaker now. Hashtags: #hologram #holography #dcg Swann’s Email: feed_enduring000@simplelogin.com</description>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2026 16:00:55 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        <docs>https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html</docs>
        <generator>PeerTube - https://dudelike.wtf</generator>
        
        <copyright>All rights reserved, unless otherwise specified in the terms specified at https://dudelike.wtf/about and potential licenses granted by each content's rightholder.</copyright>
        <atom:link href="https://dudelike.wtf/feeds/video-comments.xml?videoId=b29498d3-fa58-4a01-a21e-cb815dc7d103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    </channel>
</rss>