Haha, our kids do go under our table at times but they know not to go under other people’s tables.
I don’t have much tolerance for absentee parenting either, especially if the kids wind up seeking attention from others, by say going under someone else’s table, because they’re not getting enough attention from their own parents.
As a parent of younger kids, we’re sorry. We come armed with as many activities as possible and will take our kids outside if they’re too excited until food gets to the table. That will help them focus on eating.
We very rarely went out to eat when they were toddlers due to fear of our kids bothering others and understand that our desire to experience some level of normalcy shouldn’t come at the expense of others.
All that said, if the parents are trying to keep their kids occupied, please extend some grace. Being a parent can be extremely isolating and we’re simply trying to pretend like we still get to do normal things once in a while.
Yes. I epoxy filled some voids in a wood top for a desk I made a few years back. I used frog tape (fancy masking tape) on the bottom and it worked fairly well. Some epoxy still escaped and some of the tape was a bit difficult to get off. Be sure you do this over something like waxed paper for easier cleanup.
Like you, I tinted my epoxy black.
I used disposable cups for measuring, measured by weight on a digital scale (don’t forget to weigh an empty cup), and mixed with a popsicle stick. Pour on the top around the cracks. Don’t go too nuts on the first pour and let it fully cure. It will work its way into the cracks if you’re using a crack filler - that stuff is very thin. Why not go big on the first pour? It will minimize the mount of leakage you get on the backside.
I sanded the top down afterwards and finished as per usual. The fill is very low key, which is what I wanted.
Pic of the desk being used. Look for the black between the boards.
Get a hear rate monitor and do High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT). It’s by far the fastest way to increase your stamina if you’re untrained and even if you are trained it’s a very effective means of increasing your stamina.
While significant improvements in endurance performance and corresponding physiological markers are evident following submaximal endurance training in sedentary and recreationally active groups, an additional increase in submaximal training (i.e. volume) in highly trained individuals does not appear to further enhance either endurance performance or associated physiological variables [e.g. peak oxygen uptake (V . O 2peak), oxidative enzyme activity]. It seems that, for athletes who are already trained, improvements in endurance performance can be achieved only through high-intensity interval training
It is generally believed that in sedentary (VO 2max <45 ml/kg/min) and recreationally active individ- uals (VO 2max ≈ 45 to 55 ml/kg/min), several years are required to increase VO 2max to that of the highly trained athlete (VO 2max > 60 ml/kg/min). [21,42] However, Hickson et al. [43] showed, in eight sedenyary and recreationally active individuals, that VO2max could be markedly increased (+44%; p < 0.05) after 10 weeks of high-intensity exercise training (alternating 40 minutes cycling intervals at VO 2max 1day, with 40 minutes high-intensity running the next, 6 d/wk
PrusaSlicer is a fork of Slic3r Bambu’s slicer is a fork of PrusaSlicer Orca Slicer is a fork of Bambu’s slicer and also pulls in ideas from super slicer (another PrusaSlicer fork).
In other words, they all share a common lineage. Each adds quality of life improvements over the fork, at least in theory. It’s possible those quality of life improvements will make it back upstream to the thing that was forked.
As for specific examples, Orca Slicer has a somewhat different set of tuning parameters, some unique-to-it quality things like scarf seams, built in tuning prints (temp towers, EM multiplier, pressure advance, a test to find your max flow rate, etc) a revamped UI, etc. I haven’t compared the two in a while, so it’s possible that some of this has made its way upstream by now.
This is very cool!
How were you able to capture this image with such a nice perspective? Were you in an adjacent building, airborne (helicopter/dron), using a tilt shidt lens, something else?
TIL there’s a slicer called Lychee Slicer.
Sounds like a hot mess. Are you looking for a alternative? If yes, provide info but my off the cuff recommendation for a FDM printer is Orca Slicer.
On my direct drive Voron I could make it through retraction tower test prints fine with TPU, but it would always jam with retraction enabled on longer prints with my usual 0.3mm. Pulling apart the extruder would always reveal some TPU had gotten wrapped around the drive gear. Rather than try tuning until the failure went away, I just went with 0 lol.
Most camera websites tend to be geared towards what’s launching now, and will offer comparisons to other current products, but some will let you compare anything to anything. Examples include:
You need to identify what you’re going to be photographing, what you want, and let that guide your purchase.
Your decision points are:
My take?
Modern glass is really very good, but analog and DSLR glass generally isn’t significantly worse. Analog and DSLR glass is also getting pretty cheap as active photographers move to mirrorless since that’s the new hotness.
Modern bodies make taking great photographs easier than older bodies in two regards: smarter autofocus algorithms that can intelligently choose a subject and higher burst rates (eg take faster sequential photos). More modern bodies also handle high ISO (low light) better, but you can generally avoid this with fast glass. The rest is pure quality of life - more preset shooting modes, connectivity, etc. Old cameras have been taking great photos since the beginning. High end cameras have been taking low quality photographs since the beginning. Higher end cameras won’t help you develop an eye for action or framing, but might make it easier to capture the moment.
If I had to offer a blind recommendation it would be for a Nikon D7x00 (eg D7000, D7100, D7200, D7300, D7400, or D7500). That was Nikon’s top crop sensor DSLR ramge, which does mean some bells and whistles but more importantly it also includes a built in autofocus motor. This will let you use any autofocus f-mount lens going back to the mid 1980s (look for AF in the lens name), as well as newer lenses that have their own built in focus motors (AF-S). You’ll obviously be able to use manual focus lenses too. The autofocus system is very reliable (use single point and keep it on your subject) and there’s plenty of great used glass on the market. I am personally leaning toward fast primes these days, as they generally sharper than zooms and offer faster apertures than zooms, but that choice is very use case dependent. I’ve taken photos of my kids at our local zoo two years running with a f/1.4 lens during their holiday lights display and was surprised that very few of my photos cracked ISO 500.
So, back to you.
I have a budget of ~1000 bucks
Go used! Also go mirrored - they’re in less demand now, and were once very popular, so there’s a ton of used product on the market for cheap.
I want something that is light sensitive
Not sure what you mean here. I’m guessing you mean dynamic range? Honestly, unless you’re going to be shooting super high contrast (bright bright and dark dark) scenes and don’t want to lose information in the highlights and shadows any body from say 2010 onward will probably be good enough. The quality of photos taken by my old D40 is not significantly behind my A7III or A9, or the Z6II I bought and sold used. The only thing to possibly think about is sensor size. If you’re going to be shooting lots of low light with motion and horrible lighting it might be worth thinking about a full frame body. Another thing to potentially think about is a body with a dual gain sensor, but these will be newer and higher $$. Unless you’re going to be photographing lots of concerts and museums, I wouldn’t worry about low light beyond buying a fast lens (f/1.8 or better).
has modern software
Not sure what you mean.
All digital cameras have some level of inbuilt software and it’s all varying levels of serviceable. You’ll adopt fine to any camera body over time - even on cameras with “old crappy menus”. The truth is you probably won’t be in the menus very often and can bind physical buttons to your most used controls.
You don’t have to use the OEM’s image processing software. Many use Photoshop. I use darktable which is FOSS.
Some digital cameras have a companion phone app. Most of these are pretty meh and aren’t needed. I do leave the Sony app running on my phone to share location information, but very rarely use it for anything else.
is preferably not Sony
I wonder why. Sony is probably the king of autofocus. Their bodies are also pretty compact if that’s your thing.
and has a low minimum focus distance
This is up to the lens, not the camera body. Generally speaking, glass designed for smaller sensors will have closer minimum focusing distances than glass designed for a larger sensor. If you want up close and personal, micro four thirds (M43) is king. It will be closer focusing and since it has more depth of field more will be in focus. Note that everything is doubled and halved compared to full frame if you’re trying to compare full frame lenses to M43 lenses. The thing to search for is “lens equivalence”. Note that this can be a bit thorny.
There are macro full frame, and crop, lenses but they’re less common. Especially in full frame, the shallower depth of field means stepping down the lens, which will cost shutter speed or ISO. That or you’ll have to use a flash. Most of my recent photos on beebutts were taken on an OM-1 with the 12-40.
It can be, especially the lens, a few years old, since I prefer to buy it used.
For $1,000 you’re also going to be looking at a used body - especially if the $1,000 covers both the body and lens. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with older bodies and they can/do take great photographs. A good lens or two is a much better expenditure than a “better” body with a compromise lens.
The thing I would pay the most attention to is the system you’re buying into. Even with used gear, you’ll still lose some $$ if you sell it to buy something else.
Feel free to ask follow ups. I’ll respond, but responses will be delayed.
I want to know more about the out of focus back. Specifically what seem to be some pretty beefy speakers.
If it’s heat it could also be a cooling thing. If you search the web on your search engine of choice for “<printer name> driver overheat” you’ll see what solutions the community has already come up with.
For everyone following along at home: this website is worth a click if you’ve never seen it before!
Rinsing rice does wonders. Without a rice cooker you’ll need to strain it, but it’s still worth it.
We made rice for years using this method and it is a very reliable cooking method. Rice doesn’t really leave you a lot of wiggle room though, which is where a rice cooker comes in handy. As an added bonus, some rice cookers come with water lines in them. I measure my dry rice into the cooker, rinse using the cooker, dump most of the water out, and fill to the appropriate level.
Different species of rice have very different textures and somewhat (subtle) different flavorss.
Some rice, like basmati, can be cooked using the pasta method (intentionally use way too much water and strain the excess off after the rice is cooked). I guess all rice could be cooked that way, but you would be giving up some starch.
I totally agree. It seems like the strong suite for micro four thirds. If you’re willing to play the equivalence game a FF body with a slower prime (say f/2.0-f/2.8) is generally as compact as M43 body with a fast prime (say the Oly f/1.2s). Likewise, a number of the long Oly lenses, like the 100-400, are actually FF lenses with a M43 mount. Yeah, you get the 2.0 crop factor, but if you’re willing to shell out for a higher resolution FF body you can just crop.
That said, on pure size a rangefinder M43 with a somewhat slower prime can be truly compact. It seems like that’s where the M43 market would be, especially with the advent of high res FF bodies that crop well like Sony’s R line and A1, Nikon’s Z8/Z9, and Canon’s R5. Heck even Fuji’s X-H2 and XT-5. But since neither Panasonic or OM Systems are making these bodies anymore they must not have been very popular :(
If the print didn’t come off the bed, I don’t think adjusting z-offset will help. As prints get taller, if you’re running into issues with warping the corners will start to curl up.
Your printer definitely missed some x or y steps. Whether that was due to your drivers getting too hot and just that, or the extruder running into the print. Have you ever seen your printer do this:
Does the stacking software handle alignment as the earth rotates? If so, that’s pretty cool. I’m tempted to take a stab at this if that’s the case.
It looks like you missed some x and/or y steps, which made the printer lose its orientation and make a lot of spaghetti.
Possible causes usually involve warping, the nozzle catching the wrapped up piece, and then your printer missing some steps.
Have you completed a large print before?
The GX9 is a rangefinder camera without much of a grip, so the body is pretty compact. The G9M2 on the other hand is a M43 sensor in a FF body. Here’s the GX9 vs G9:
The thing you’re asking about is an adapter. You could get f mount to: z mount (Nikon mirrorless), e mount (Sony), x mount (Fuji), etc. Not sure about Canon, they’ve been pretty protective of their new mount. It will add some overall length though.
If you’re looking for smaller gear, going to a mirror less system will result in a smaller body guaranteed. Modern glass can be smaller, but that’s not always the case. Especially for APS-C lenses. Most of the mirror less OEMs (Sony, Canon, Nikon) have been favoring FF glass. The glass will happily mount on a crop sensor body, but it will be physically larger than necessary.
If you want to save some size and mass, micro four thirds is worth a look. Something like the Olympus E-M5 or even E-M10, or Panasonic GX7/GX9 is pretty compact, and there are a bunch of compact micro four third zooms and primes out there.
Agree on older gear being cheaper. I’ve taken many a great photo on my D40 ($50-75 on MPB) and D5300 ($225-325 on MPB). Depending on the focal length desired, there are solid used F-mount lenses around for fairly cheap as well. My go-to was the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR, which is a FF lens, but it still isn’t that heavy. I think I got mine used for $350 10 years ago and have to imagine the price has continued to come down. There’s a lot of fast thrid and first party glass available cheap too.