removing the dusts for less than 3 euros/dollars

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JD <no.spam.jdon@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> It's better if you speak French though the photos are explicit. It DOES
> work. I did mine in less than 10 minutes yesterday.
> http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerF.htm

It's also presented in english.
<http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerE.htm&gt;

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Paul Mitchum wrote:

> JD <no.spam.jdon@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> > It's better if you speak French though the photos are explicit. It DOES
> > work. I did mine in less than 10 minutes yesterday.
> > http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerF.htm
>
> It's also presented in english.
> <http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerE.htm&gt;

Very elegant: no contact with the optics at all.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JD wrote:

> It's better if you speak French though the photos are explicit. It DOES
> work. I did mine in less than 10 minutes yesterday.
> http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerF.htm

Quite clever. I'll wait for a few dozen testers first!

Cheers,
Alan



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

eawckyegcy@yahoo.com <eawckyegcy@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Paul Mitchum wrote:
>
> > JD <no.spam.jdon@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> >
> > > It's better if you speak French though the photos are explicit. It DOES
> > > work. I did mine in less than 10 minutes yesterday.
> > > http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerF.htm
> >
> > It's also presented in english.
> > <http://fovea.perso.cegetel.net/IonizerE.htm&gt;
>
> Very elegant: no contact with the optics at all.

I was thinking about that, and I remember there used to be ionizer
'guns' for cleaning LP records. I wonder if any of those are still
available.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1gx4hbu.vhz1np9t09xeN%usenet@mile23.c0m>,
usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:

> I was thinking about that, and I remember there used to be ionizer
> 'guns' for cleaning LP records. I wonder if any of those are still
> available.

The most well-known of these was the DiscWasher ZeroStat, the one made
with a red plastic pistol grip. I still have one.

Static neutralizing guns have been in use for many years by darkroom
workers, for cleaning negs and slides. The principle is sound, but it's
not a panacea. Some dust particles adhere by mechanical or chemical
effects, and reducing static charge does not help to release them.

I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a
strong unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the chip
could be damaged.

--
Julian Vrieslander

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 26 May 2005 01:32:17 GMT, Julian Vrieslander
<julianvREMOVE_THIS_PART@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <1gx4hbu.vhz1np9t09xeN%usenet@mile23.c0m>,
> usenet@mile23.c0m (Paul Mitchum) wrote:
>
>> I was thinking about that, and I remember there used to be ionizer
>> 'guns' for cleaning LP records. I wonder if any of those are still
>> available.
>
>The most well-known of these was the DiscWasher ZeroStat, the one made
>with a red plastic pistol grip. I still have one.
>
>Static neutralizing guns have been in use for many years by darkroom
>workers, for cleaning negs and slides. The principle is sound, but it's
>not a panacea. Some dust particles adhere by mechanical or chemical
>effects, and reducing static charge does not help to release them.
>
>I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
>CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a
>strong unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the chip
>could be damaged.

Some of those brushes used polonium, a radioactive source to ionize
the dust and make it lose it's static charge. They'd be safe, better
than something with an electric field anyway.
-Rich

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Julian Vrieslander wrote:

> I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
> CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a
> strong unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the chip
> could be damaged.

This is also my main concern with the technique. I'll let others try it
for a few years first!

Cheers,
Alan



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> a écrit dans le message de
news: d74p3i$5va$3@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Julian Vrieslander wrote:
>
>> I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
>> CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a strong
>> unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the chip could be
>> damaged.

I don't think that there can be any arcing: remember, you have completely
removed one of the wires.
Further than that, you hold the device about 5 to 10 cm *in front* of the
camera, not *in* the camera.

Anyway, I tried and everything is fine. In fact, I used it before cleaning
the sensor. I also used a pressure gun (with moderate pressure) to dislodge
the would be last particles of dust (yes, I'm a bit of a kamikaze). And
now, I have a spotless image on my camera.

I think we have to be both reasonable and practical: my alternative was to
send my camera to have it cleaned (lots of ??? and 2-3 weeks waiting time).
Now I know how to do it and I can fix it anytime.

And oh, I forgot: I also removed the frosted glass because there was some
yuck lodged behind it. In fact, I did it before the sensor cleaning
operation as a warm up exercise.

Cheers,

Jean.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JD wrote:

> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> a écrit dans le message de
> news: d74p3i$5va$3@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>Julian Vrieslander wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
>>>CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a strong
>>>unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the chip could be
>>>damaged.
>
>
> I don't think that there can be any arcing: remember, you have completely
> removed one of the wires.
> Further than that, you hold the device about 5 to 10 cm *in front* of the
> camera, not *in* the camera.

I realize that. I'm just concerned about the effects at the surface of
the sensor. If the technique is sufficient to cancel/neutralize the
static bond at the surface, then what else is it strong enough to do?

> I think we have to be both reasonable and practical: my alternative was to
> send my camera to have it cleaned (lots of ??? and 2-3 weeks waiting time).
> Now I know how to do it and I can fix it anytime.

I agree on reasonable and practical. As another poster stated, there
is also the issue of dust stuck by humidity or other means, and the ion
gun won't do it for that...

I'll wait for a larger return of repeated uses of the electrostatic
technique.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

RichA <none@none.com> wrote:

> Some of those brushes used polonium, a radioactive source to ionize
> the dust and make it lose it's static charge. They'd be safe, better
> than something with an electric field anyway.
> -Rich

The Polonium brushes used animal hair which will leave sleeks all over your
sensor. You only want to use a synthetic brush on a sensor.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> JD wrote:
>
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> a écrit dans le
>> message de news: d74p3i$5va$3@inews.gazeta.pl...
>>
>>>Julian Vrieslander wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I would also be concerned about using a static gun very close to a
>>>>CMOS/CCD sensor. If the device arced to the camera, or released a
>>>>strong unbalanced current of ions, the delicate structures on the
>>>>chip could be damaged.
>>
>>
>> I don't think that there can be any arcing: remember, you have
>> completely removed one of the wires.
>> Further than that, you hold the device about 5 to 10 cm *in front* of
>> the camera, not *in* the camera.
>
> I realize that. I'm just concerned about the effects at the surface
> of the sensor. If the technique is sufficient to cancel/neutralize
> the static bond at the surface, then what else is it strong enough to
> do?
>
>> I think we have to be both reasonable and practical: my alternative
>> was to send my camera to have it cleaned (lots of ??? and 2-3 weeks
>> waiting time). Now I know how to do it and I can fix it anytime.
>
> I agree on reasonable and practical. As another poster stated, there
> is also the issue of dust stuck by humidity or other means, and the
> ion gun won't do it for that...
>
> I'll wait for a larger return of repeated uses of the electrostatic
> technique.
>
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
>

The ions are hitting a niobium glass filter rather than the sensor. This
should effectively insulate the sensor from the ion stream.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

> As another poster stated, there is also the issue of dust stuck by
> humidity or other means, and the ion gun won't do it for that...
>
This is correct, and I had to cleaned the sensor with pecpad and fluid to
get it perfect. I think the gun must/can be used before pecpads to make the
opertion more "sterile".
Jean.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JD wrote:

>>As another poster stated, there is also the issue of dust stuck by
>>humidity or other means, and the ion gun won't do it for that...
>>
>
> This is correct, and I had to cleaned the sensor with pecpad and fluid to
> get it perfect. I think the gun must/can be used before pecpads to make the
> opertion more "sterile".

At that point, I doubt there's much improvement in doing a static pass
before doing a wipe pass.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.