Here are some of my favorite podcasts found this week:
TRAPPED ON A SAND SPIT FOR YEARS
A reminder that perseverance and ingenuity can overcome almost anything... an amazing story.
JUST SOME MAKERS CHATTING
It's good to see (or hear) how other groups of Makers interact. Hint: it's not always about making.
THE SCARIEST MONSTER MIGHT BE US
A funny, irreverent look at the myth and story of Frankenstein, plus what it means to us as now.
Monday, September 17, 2018
Wednesday, September 5, 2018
Creepy Baby Head with Remote Contol
Dolls are creepy in general, and disembodied heads with fluttering long-lashed eyes give me nightmares. So what could be better to create a Halloween prop? Add some cheap remote control units and wait for the trick-or-treaters to arrive.
I was looking for hackable electronic toys at the local thrift store. The dolls were nearby. I couldn't avoid them. There were hundreds of them, strange limbless torsos and disheveled Barbies lying in twisted entangled piles.
One bald head --- just the head --- sat alone on the top shelf.
As I walked past it the doll's eyes fluttered, then suddenly snapped open in an unfocused stare. I freaked out... until I realized the vibrations from the nearby pillaging children were causing the eyes to operate. I was relieved and decided I had to have it. For 50 cents, how could I resist?
It turns out that the eyelids are on a pivot. A metal weight holds them shut or opens them depending on the head's orientation. However, the weights are so delicately balanced that any small vibration (or magnetic field) can cause them to flutter, or even snap open unexpectedly.
I needed to learn to control this frightening phenomenon. If I can control it, I take away its power over me. (And can frighten other people instead). A cheap RF remote-control, some motors and LEDs gave me some ideas.
I have posted about how easy these cheap RC units are to work with, but didn't include any real examples. So I worked up a quick breadboard example in Fritzing last night. I haven't hooked it up yet, so there are probably errors in the circuits (I just did the diagram to help me think about how to do the project). But it gives you a good idea of the kinds of things you can do with a $10 radio remote control.
The doll-head's pale, unnaturally pink skin is partially translucent, so an LED causes the skill to glow eerily from within. I'm using red and green LEDs for a nicely diffused sick glow. I pull the power directly off the RC receiver's pins with a current-limiting resistor placed inline.
The small vibrator also pulls power from a receiver pin. I used an NPN transistor and protective diode to form a basic motor driver circuit. It causes the eyes to flutter (but not open) and is startling because, well, doll heads don't typically buzz and vibrate. (Or maybe they do, how would I know)
The big motor needed a driver board and extra batteries. I was originally going to put the head on a pedestal and have it spin. (Fun, fun, fun) But after working on a gearing system and stand, I started to think of other options.
Right now, I'm thinking about using an electromagnet to pull on the metal weights of the eyes. They should snap open quickly to great emotional effect. And the small ones only need about 5v, so the extra batteries and driver-board might not be needed.
I'll work on this and put an example out for some of my friends to experience. I'll let you know what happens.
I was looking for hackable electronic toys at the local thrift store. The dolls were nearby. I couldn't avoid them. There were hundreds of them, strange limbless torsos and disheveled Barbies lying in twisted entangled piles.
One bald head --- just the head --- sat alone on the top shelf.
As I walked past it the doll's eyes fluttered, then suddenly snapped open in an unfocused stare. I freaked out... until I realized the vibrations from the nearby pillaging children were causing the eyes to operate. I was relieved and decided I had to have it. For 50 cents, how could I resist?
It turns out that the eyelids are on a pivot. A metal weight holds them shut or opens them depending on the head's orientation. However, the weights are so delicately balanced that any small vibration (or magnetic field) can cause them to flutter, or even snap open unexpectedly.
I needed to learn to control this frightening phenomenon. If I can control it, I take away its power over me. (And can frighten other people instead). A cheap RF remote-control, some motors and LEDs gave me some ideas.
 |
| Schematic circuit diagram for making a creepy Halloween doll head prop with cheap RF remote controls. The LEDs cause the skull to glow. The small vibrator causes the eyes to flutter. The big motor was intended to make the head spin on a spiked pedestal, but I might replace it with an electromagnet to pull on the metal weights and make the eyes snap open suddenly. |
I have posted about how easy these cheap RC units are to work with, but didn't include any real examples. So I worked up a quick breadboard example in Fritzing last night. I haven't hooked it up yet, so there are probably errors in the circuits (I just did the diagram to help me think about how to do the project). But it gives you a good idea of the kinds of things you can do with a $10 radio remote control.
The items used in the schematic are available from Amazon.
The doll-head's pale, unnaturally pink skin is partially translucent, so an LED causes the skill to glow eerily from within. I'm using red and green LEDs for a nicely diffused sick glow. I pull the power directly off the RC receiver's pins with a current-limiting resistor placed inline.
The small vibrator also pulls power from a receiver pin. I used an NPN transistor and protective diode to form a basic motor driver circuit. It causes the eyes to flutter (but not open) and is startling because, well, doll heads don't typically buzz and vibrate. (Or maybe they do, how would I know)
The big motor needed a driver board and extra batteries. I was originally going to put the head on a pedestal and have it spin. (Fun, fun, fun) But after working on a gearing system and stand, I started to think of other options.
Right now, I'm thinking about using an electromagnet to pull on the metal weights of the eyes. They should snap open quickly to great emotional effect. And the small ones only need about 5v, so the extra batteries and driver-board might not be needed.
I'll work on this and put an example out for some of my friends to experience. I'll let you know what happens.
Sunday, September 2, 2018
Simple RF Remote Control for Motor and Lights
Control a motor or lights just by clicking a button --- no microcontroller needed, no Arduino or programming required.
Sometimes you just want to keep things simple. Not everyone wants to learn how to code and configure an Arduino. With these handy little boards you simply press a button on the remote and the receiver module turns on an output to power your light or motor.
I have already found them useful for several types of DIY projects and am dreaming up more:
COSTUMES: Placing and wiring switches into your costume can be a real pain. With these you can turn on lights, trigger the smoke effects and start the radar dish turning with the click of a button.
GAG PROPS: Make a chair vibrate, cause the creepy doll head to rotate and eyes light up, or make the fake rat run around the table.
SUPER SOLAR YARD LIGHTS: Make a simple security or decorative lighting system that only operates when you want them to. No more coming home to solar lights that have run out of power when you really need them.
I even did a Creepy Remote Control Doll Head for Halloween... it glows and vibrates and its eyes snap open... all at the click of a button.
If you know how to install a button and an LED or motor, you can get started for under $5. For a few dollars more you can get a four-output versions with a preassembled remote transmitter. For a few more you can get one to control 12-24 volt circuits or even 110/220 AC.
You can get 10x pairs of single-output receivers for $12. These are just the raw boards. You will need to put a trigger (like a button) on the transmitter and wire a light or motor to the output of the receiver. But for about a buck each, that's a cheap way to start.
For a little more money, you can get four-output versions with premade key-fob style transmitters. That way you can control multiple lights and motors from a single remote.
While these tiny RF modules are cheap and easy to use, they do have significant limitations.
Most of the cheaper versions are "non discriminating" transmitter/receiver pairs. You cannot assign a specific transmitter to a specific receiver. So you can simultaneously operate 10 receivers with a single remote. But if two people have a transmitter, both people can operate all the receivers.
They send simple on/off signals to the transmitter to toggle the output lines. You can control one or all of those four outputs. You can wire the outputs up to an Arduino and have it take other actions based on the state of the output. However, you cannot send complex data like serial text commands with them. You will need a more expensive RF transmitter receiver to do that.
Some only work from a few feet away, others have a decent range (several yards) under ideal circumstances, all certainly good enough for costumes, props and gags. But you won't be turning on your porchlight from a mile away like with the expensive models. I found that fiddling with the coiled antenna can give me a little extra range (or limit it to a few inches).
The receivers may have different ways of responding to the transmitter signals. Some only turn on while the button is pressed, then turn off once the button is released. Others turn on with the first press, then remain on until the same button is pressed. Others cycle through, they turn on a channel when the button is pressed while also turning off all the other channels.
My recommendation?
Adafruit has a good selection of key-fob style transmitters (1,2 or 4 button) and receivers (momentary, latching and toggling).
While Adafruit's versions are more expensive than knockoffs, they might be worth it to you. You know exactly how the transmitters and receivers work together, all the transmitters work with all the receivers, and as usual with Adafruit, you get excellent tutorials on how to wire, install and operate the equipment.
Plus, you can order some LEDs, motors and driver boards all from the same place. They even have a sound effects board that can be controlled with these remotes.
If you know how to read digital inputs on an Arduino, then your options expand exponentially. You can control the speed and direction of motors, change the color of LEDs and even control NeoPixel animations. With some MOSFETs, a driver boards or some relays you can control valves, pumps, fans, solenoids and servos ---- basically anything you normally control with your Arduino.
But this post is about keeping it simple and using only basic hardware and the simplest of electrical circuits. So pick up one these RF units and start building your own props and costumes.
Sometimes you just want to keep things simple. Not everyone wants to learn how to code and configure an Arduino. With these handy little boards you simply press a button on the remote and the receiver module turns on an output to power your light or motor.
I have already found them useful for several types of DIY projects and am dreaming up more:
COSTUMES: Placing and wiring switches into your costume can be a real pain. With these you can turn on lights, trigger the smoke effects and start the radar dish turning with the click of a button.
GAG PROPS: Make a chair vibrate, cause the creepy doll head to rotate and eyes light up, or make the fake rat run around the table.
SUPER SOLAR YARD LIGHTS: Make a simple security or decorative lighting system that only operates when you want them to. No more coming home to solar lights that have run out of power when you really need them.
I even did a Creepy Remote Control Doll Head for Halloween... it glows and vibrates and its eyes snap open... all at the click of a button.
 |
| Adafruit's four-button RF transmitter (key-fob) and one of their four-output-line receivers. For about $10 for the pair you can control up to four different outputs with the press of a button. The receiver puts out about 5v on each of the outputs. With a few more components, you can easily control LEDs or even motors. Add an Arduino and you have an easy RF remote control for all kinds of projects. |
If you know how to install a button and an LED or motor, you can get started for under $5. For a few dollars more you can get a four-output versions with a preassembled remote transmitter. For a few more you can get one to control 12-24 volt circuits or even 110/220 AC.
You can get 10x pairs of single-output receivers for $12. These are just the raw boards. You will need to put a trigger (like a button) on the transmitter and wire a light or motor to the output of the receiver. But for about a buck each, that's a cheap way to start.
For a little more money, you can get four-output versions with premade key-fob style transmitters. That way you can control multiple lights and motors from a single remote.
While these tiny RF modules are cheap and easy to use, they do have significant limitations.
Most of the cheaper versions are "non discriminating" transmitter/receiver pairs. You cannot assign a specific transmitter to a specific receiver. So you can simultaneously operate 10 receivers with a single remote. But if two people have a transmitter, both people can operate all the receivers.
They send simple on/off signals to the transmitter to toggle the output lines. You can control one or all of those four outputs. You can wire the outputs up to an Arduino and have it take other actions based on the state of the output. However, you cannot send complex data like serial text commands with them. You will need a more expensive RF transmitter receiver to do that.
Some only work from a few feet away, others have a decent range (several yards) under ideal circumstances, all certainly good enough for costumes, props and gags. But you won't be turning on your porchlight from a mile away like with the expensive models. I found that fiddling with the coiled antenna can give me a little extra range (or limit it to a few inches).
The receivers may have different ways of responding to the transmitter signals. Some only turn on while the button is pressed, then turn off once the button is released. Others turn on with the first press, then remain on until the same button is pressed. Others cycle through, they turn on a channel when the button is pressed while also turning off all the other channels.
My recommendation?
Adafruit has a good selection of key-fob style transmitters (1,2 or 4 button) and receivers (momentary, latching and toggling).
While Adafruit's versions are more expensive than knockoffs, they might be worth it to you. You know exactly how the transmitters and receivers work together, all the transmitters work with all the receivers, and as usual with Adafruit, you get excellent tutorials on how to wire, install and operate the equipment.
Plus, you can order some LEDs, motors and driver boards all from the same place. They even have a sound effects board that can be controlled with these remotes.
Both the cheap versions and the Adafruit boards are also available from Amazon
If you know how to read digital inputs on an Arduino, then your options expand exponentially. You can control the speed and direction of motors, change the color of LEDs and even control NeoPixel animations. With some MOSFETs, a driver boards or some relays you can control valves, pumps, fans, solenoids and servos ---- basically anything you normally control with your Arduino.
But this post is about keeping it simple and using only basic hardware and the simplest of electrical circuits. So pick up one these RF units and start building your own props and costumes.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Messy Mixed Media Landscape
Mixed media mess... but I like it. I tried to recreate a color study I had done earlier. But the recreation lacked something. It was dull and lifeless, probably because I had a preconceived idea of what it should look like instead of painting from inspiration in the moment. So I set it aside.
I was playing with pastels a few days later so I hit it with pastels and it started to look better. That gave me courage to keep going.
Later, I found some scrap remains of abstract paper and glued that to the foliage. Add some raw watercolor and anything else I found and it started to look okay, But when I took a photo of it the texture and color washed out, So I hit it with some Photoshop as well. It's not what I intended, but I'm tired of looking at it and working on it so I'm declaring it finished Baahaahaa… my typical work cycle.
(BTW, the trees really are planted in a grid in real life. It's an artificial commercially planted grove with all the trees the same age and shape, not the typical random forest. I didn't capture the rhythmic pattern very well, but the one "natural" tree at the edge of the grove proves I can see and paint a gnarly tree also LOL... just so you know)
I was playing with pastels a few days later so I hit it with pastels and it started to look better. That gave me courage to keep going.
Later, I found some scrap remains of abstract paper and glued that to the foliage. Add some raw watercolor and anything else I found and it started to look okay, But when I took a photo of it the texture and color washed out, So I hit it with some Photoshop as well. It's not what I intended, but I'm tired of looking at it and working on it so I'm declaring it finished Baahaahaa… my typical work cycle.
(BTW, the trees really are planted in a grid in real life. It's an artificial commercially planted grove with all the trees the same age and shape, not the typical random forest. I didn't capture the rhythmic pattern very well, but the one "natural" tree at the edge of the grove proves I can see and paint a gnarly tree also LOL... just so you know)
Sunday, August 19, 2018
Post-Apocalypse Cosplay Dust Mask
In honor of all my NorCal peeps who are wearing their N-95 dust masks because of the wildfires. Also appropriate for anyone still procrastinating on their Burning Man costumes.
Whipped up a quick and dirty post-apocalypse covering for an old N-95 mask. Great way to get rid of some bits-and-bobs from my scavenging.
Not the best and it's held together with hot glue, but good enough to keep parts from for a serious cosplay session.
 |
| I know it's bad in Northern California, but when my friend said they were wearing masks to go shopping I decided to make a costume version. Not to make light of the danger and or impact of the fires. But if you have to wear a mask you can also make it a design project. Post-apocalypse seemed all too appropriate. |
Whipped up a quick and dirty post-apocalypse covering for an old N-95 mask. Great way to get rid of some bits-and-bobs from my scavenging.
Not the best and it's held together with hot glue, but good enough to keep parts from for a serious cosplay session.
Thursday, August 16, 2018
Do People Still Flowchart Their Code
Just wondering if anyone still flowcharts their code? Does anyone write pseudocode anymore? Does anyone sketch and take notes about their ideas before diving into writing the actual code? Do schools still teach these skills and this way of thinking.
I work with new programmers on occasion. People know I can code so they ask me for help with their projects. I'm happy to do it, but sometimes it's difficult for me to understand what the new coders want to accomplish. I don't mean the details, I'm talking about the most basic tasks the code needs to perform.
When I ask them to sketch the logic flow or write some pseudocode they... well... they are completely stymied and confused. In fact, they seem genuinely insulted. How dare I imply that they are so dumb and their projects so simple that it needs to be thought about or sketched out before they start typing.
I don't really know how to respond because I always sketch, pseudocode and flowchart anything more complex than the most basic of programs. But I'm a very visual thinker and I see the code-flow as blocks, objects and streams. I see those visual images in my mind. So putting those ideas onto paper seems natural to me.
And when I was learning to code, the professors often used graphics and pseudocode to explain concepts and communicate their intention. It was the way technique they used to outline the tasks and express their expectations.
These techniques made specifying functionality much easier (for me) and helped abstract the tasks to a level where I could concentrate on the underlying requirements before I began typing. Since all the teachers used them, and there were predefined shapes and symbols to represent universal tasks, I just assumed that this was a normal way of operating for coders
I work with hobbyists, not computer science or tech students. These folks are just normal people that want to make LEDs light up or control a motor. We hang out for an hour or so every few weeks. So maybe my perception is skewed and, in the science or trade schools, they still use decision charts and diagrams and such
But it's been years since I've met a coder that bothers to use these methods. When I try to explain a process using (to me) standard symbols, people totally freak out. They have never seen diagrams used and they think I'm making it up. I've tried to explain that it's a time-tested way of communication, part shorthand and part map.
Even if you can hold the entire program in your brain, charts and diagrams are a good way to explain the program to people who do not have direct brain-to-brain access to you mind. Although the new coders seem to appreciate the diagrams I draw to explain actions and concepts, not one single new coder has ever even tried to learn or use the techniques. So I've given up - maybe I'm just weird or too old or not very smart..
However, I've noticed that the new coders take a lot longer to get the hang of basic programming structures. They bang away at the keyboard, frantically changing words without (so it seems to me) understanding the basic tasks they are trying to describe with all that typing. Any new language completely confuses them. It's like they see no similarity between the languages because they concentrate on memorizing syntax rather than structure.
I've tried to explain that the flow-charts and pseudocode work for any language. You can code the same functionality shown in the pseudocode or diagram using C-Arduino, Java, Python, Basic or PHP. But that concept, that abstracted flow and process, is foreign to them.
I've admitted I'm not very smart and explained how diagrams help me keep the program organized. Maybe I should take the opposite approach and tell them only the really smart people know how to use pseudocode and diagrams, we just keep it hidden from mere mortals - make the process more appealing and less a sign of weakness.
Maybe it's because all the movies and TV-shows featuring coders always show the hackers typing furiously and magically knowing the structure of massive chunks of code. The media never shows people charting and diagramming, that's just boring. And they never show people learning to code, only the genius wizards. Well I'm not a genius or a wizard, so I still sketch programs on a regular basis.
Also, none of the tutorials on YouTube use sketching, pseudocode, flows or any other visual communication methods. All those really smart teachers just start typing without ever planning anything in advance. I'm skilled enough to follow them. But I still have to literally "draw myself a picture" before I start any complex coding task of my own design.
Don't get the wrong idea. My flowcharts are just a bunch of lines and squiggles - definitely not the standards defined in the plastic templates with all the shapes and line types. My pseudo-code is sparse and unreadable to most people. But it helps me get results quickly and helps me find errors in my logic more easily.
The drag-and-drop programming environments are super popular (MakeCode, AppInventor, Scratch to name a few) so the visual tradition is definitely still alive. The "Hello world" introductory projects are becoming increasingly spectacular. Amazing hardware and software libraries make basic tasks very easy to accomplish. Everyone loves that instant success and I love to see how many people are willing to start. But so many people drop out when they are required to conceptualize and create a program from scratch.
Yet somehow, the new coders I work with never make the connection between structure and words. They can all set up a simple loop and a couple of test conditions. But anything more complex and they bog down and drop out. It just seems too complicated and they can't keep it all straight in their head - but they won't sketch it out either. If they just keep typing and changing stuff the larger structure will magically start working just like it does in the movies. I laugh and cry at the same time.
So I'm just wondering if maybe teaching the old fashioned methods of flowcharting and pseudocode could still help new programmers succeed, stay interested and stay motivated. I don't have the answer. I only get a couple of hours per month with the group, maybe five minutes a month with any individual. I'm not a teacher or a mentor, but it still bothers me when I see people struggling and know their are tools that have been proven to help people in their situation.
Maybe if there were more examples of smart people using diagrams and pseudocode, some alternate coder heroes for me to point to, maybe I could guide new programmers towards the time-tested tool set that helped become a better programmer.
I work with new programmers on occasion. People know I can code so they ask me for help with their projects. I'm happy to do it, but sometimes it's difficult for me to understand what the new coders want to accomplish. I don't mean the details, I'm talking about the most basic tasks the code needs to perform.
When I ask them to sketch the logic flow or write some pseudocode they... well... they are completely stymied and confused. In fact, they seem genuinely insulted. How dare I imply that they are so dumb and their projects so simple that it needs to be thought about or sketched out before they start typing.
I don't really know how to respond because I always sketch, pseudocode and flowchart anything more complex than the most basic of programs. But I'm a very visual thinker and I see the code-flow as blocks, objects and streams. I see those visual images in my mind. So putting those ideas onto paper seems natural to me.
And when I was learning to code, the professors often used graphics and pseudocode to explain concepts and communicate their intention. It was the way technique they used to outline the tasks and express their expectations.
These techniques made specifying functionality much easier (for me) and helped abstract the tasks to a level where I could concentrate on the underlying requirements before I began typing. Since all the teachers used them, and there were predefined shapes and symbols to represent universal tasks, I just assumed that this was a normal way of operating for coders
 |
| Okay, so this is way overdone... but it's a good example. |
But it's been years since I've met a coder that bothers to use these methods. When I try to explain a process using (to me) standard symbols, people totally freak out. They have never seen diagrams used and they think I'm making it up. I've tried to explain that it's a time-tested way of communication, part shorthand and part map.
Even if you can hold the entire program in your brain, charts and diagrams are a good way to explain the program to people who do not have direct brain-to-brain access to you mind. Although the new coders seem to appreciate the diagrams I draw to explain actions and concepts, not one single new coder has ever even tried to learn or use the techniques. So I've given up - maybe I'm just weird or too old or not very smart..
However, I've noticed that the new coders take a lot longer to get the hang of basic programming structures. They bang away at the keyboard, frantically changing words without (so it seems to me) understanding the basic tasks they are trying to describe with all that typing. Any new language completely confuses them. It's like they see no similarity between the languages because they concentrate on memorizing syntax rather than structure.
I've tried to explain that the flow-charts and pseudocode work for any language. You can code the same functionality shown in the pseudocode or diagram using C-Arduino, Java, Python, Basic or PHP. But that concept, that abstracted flow and process, is foreign to them.
I've admitted I'm not very smart and explained how diagrams help me keep the program organized. Maybe I should take the opposite approach and tell them only the really smart people know how to use pseudocode and diagrams, we just keep it hidden from mere mortals - make the process more appealing and less a sign of weakness.
Maybe it's because all the movies and TV-shows featuring coders always show the hackers typing furiously and magically knowing the structure of massive chunks of code. The media never shows people charting and diagramming, that's just boring. And they never show people learning to code, only the genius wizards. Well I'm not a genius or a wizard, so I still sketch programs on a regular basis.
Also, none of the tutorials on YouTube use sketching, pseudocode, flows or any other visual communication methods. All those really smart teachers just start typing without ever planning anything in advance. I'm skilled enough to follow them. But I still have to literally "draw myself a picture" before I start any complex coding task of my own design.
Don't get the wrong idea. My flowcharts are just a bunch of lines and squiggles - definitely not the standards defined in the plastic templates with all the shapes and line types. My pseudo-code is sparse and unreadable to most people. But it helps me get results quickly and helps me find errors in my logic more easily.
The drag-and-drop programming environments are super popular (MakeCode, AppInventor, Scratch to name a few) so the visual tradition is definitely still alive. The "Hello world" introductory projects are becoming increasingly spectacular. Amazing hardware and software libraries make basic tasks very easy to accomplish. Everyone loves that instant success and I love to see how many people are willing to start. But so many people drop out when they are required to conceptualize and create a program from scratch.
Yet somehow, the new coders I work with never make the connection between structure and words. They can all set up a simple loop and a couple of test conditions. But anything more complex and they bog down and drop out. It just seems too complicated and they can't keep it all straight in their head - but they won't sketch it out either. If they just keep typing and changing stuff the larger structure will magically start working just like it does in the movies. I laugh and cry at the same time.
So I'm just wondering if maybe teaching the old fashioned methods of flowcharting and pseudocode could still help new programmers succeed, stay interested and stay motivated. I don't have the answer. I only get a couple of hours per month with the group, maybe five minutes a month with any individual. I'm not a teacher or a mentor, but it still bothers me when I see people struggling and know their are tools that have been proven to help people in their situation.
Maybe if there were more examples of smart people using diagrams and pseudocode, some alternate coder heroes for me to point to, maybe I could guide new programmers towards the time-tested tool set that helped become a better programmer.
Sunday, August 12, 2018
Blacklight (UV) NeoPixel LEDs
Adafruit just released UV Blacklight NeoPixels. I've been waiting on something like this for a while. I had figured the UV light would be added to the RGB configuration like their RGBW versions. But this is really cool because all three LEDs are blacklights so you have a lot of control over their intensity.
Now you can make your costumes and festival clothing glow in the dark. Your Halloween props or stage backdrops can really pop. And your model spaceships can emit eerie lights.
I just finished making my own portable UV Blacklight out of an old flashlight (my INSTRUCTABLE), so I remembered how much fun blacklights really are.
And since they are Neopixels, you can control individual LEDS and create moving patterns. Combine these with traditional RGB NeoPixels and you've got quite a light show.
Now you can make your costumes and festival clothing glow in the dark. Your Halloween props or stage backdrops can really pop. And your model spaceships can emit eerie lights.
 |
| Add some extra pizazz to your LEGO Bionicle or other models with Adafruit's new UV Blacklight NeoPixels. |
I just finished making my own portable UV Blacklight out of an old flashlight (my INSTRUCTABLE), so I remembered how much fun blacklights really are.
 |
| Make those neon mesh costumes really glow in the dark at your next music festival. |
Thursday, August 9, 2018
Using Fusion 360 for Technical Illustration
Found another way to (mis)use Fusion 360... making quick technical sketches. Fusion is incredibly powerful and I use it to create complex structures. Most get 3d printed or sent to the CNC. But this time I just needed to illustrate a simple repair project.
The illustrations were for my How to Fix Venetian Blinds tutorial over on Instructables. Nothing needed to be 3d printed, machined or manufactured. I just needed a way to show what the existing objects looked like and illustrate some hand-done repairs..
In the past I would have used a graphic design software like Illustrator or Inkscape. But as I was thinking about how I could do the drawing, I realized something... I could do it quicker and easier in Fusion 360. (Especially the screw threads)
This might not seem like a big deal, but it's the first time a 3d modeling program was easier to use than a vector drawing program. It always bugged me that I could do incredibly complex things with 3d software, but the simplest drawings worked better in an artists software. I often had to redraw a 3d design in 2d to illustrate a point.
Some of the drawings really helped clarify the process and relationships. Other drawings were not significantly better than a photo of the actual object or process. But having the option to choose (or to include both) with just a few minutes extra work made the entire project simpler.
Fusion 360 will never replace Illustrator or even Inkscape for most applications. But I'm really happy that I have free access to a program that allows me to create sophisticated technical sketches so quickly. And when you combine the powers of Fusion and Illustrator you could do some very helpful drawings. So I'm really happy.
The illustrations were for my How to Fix Venetian Blinds tutorial over on Instructables. Nothing needed to be 3d printed, machined or manufactured. I just needed a way to show what the existing objects looked like and illustrate some hand-done repairs..
In the past I would have used a graphic design software like Illustrator or Inkscape. But as I was thinking about how I could do the drawing, I realized something... I could do it quicker and easier in Fusion 360. (Especially the screw threads)
This might not seem like a big deal, but it's the first time a 3d modeling program was easier to use than a vector drawing program. It always bugged me that I could do incredibly complex things with 3d software, but the simplest drawings worked better in an artists software. I often had to redraw a 3d design in 2d to illustrate a point.
 |
| Drawing this design, complete with threads and bent metal wire, only took a few minutes. Making a section through the solid 3d object took mere seconds. Getting this quality in a drawing using Illustrator would have taken me an hour or more. |
 |
| I think the drawing illustrates the concept a lot better than a photograph of the real object. |
With Fusion, I could draw complex geometry like screw threads, apply materials and textures, create a perspective view and a cutaway... all in a matter of minutes. I could explore lots of different views in seconds instead of doing a separate drawing for each view. It would have taken me an hour to do a single drawing in Illustrator, a full day to do multiple drawings. With Fusion, I basically drew one object and "looked at it differently" to create several new drawings. Fusion was a huge time saver..
 |
| This illustration took a few minutes and has a perspective view of a screw thread and multiple material textures. |
 |
| But I think a simple photograph illustrated the concept and process just as well as the drawing. |
Fusion 360 will never replace Illustrator or even Inkscape for most applications. But I'm really happy that I have free access to a program that allows me to create sophisticated technical sketches so quickly. And when you combine the powers of Fusion and Illustrator you could do some very helpful drawings. So I'm really happy.
Check out all of our Fusion 360 Tips, Tricks and Tutorials
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Thanks Old Man, I Put It To Good Use
An old man died recently. For a brief period in my childhood, measured easily in hours, I interacted with him and his family. They changed the course of my life. It was a small influence, barely more than the butterfly effect. But it mattered and I will always be grateful to them.
An early influence had showed me that you could be a skilled machinist/welder/cabinet maker and still revere beauty and practice creativity. When that influence ended I was left in a culture that did not value artistic creativity, especially in males. No guidance or instruction was available for visual artists between the finger painting stage and the high school drafting class. In between, you were completely on your own.
Without an adult to encourage me I was soon convinced there was something seriously wrong with me for wanting to create beauty or simply to draw. I understood the local social rules (universal as far as I knew) and the costs of breaking them. I never stopped drawing, but I did keep my drawings secret. It sucked.
Then one day this bearded, long-haired wild man showed up (think Willie and Waylon meets Page and Plant). I guess I hadn't hidden my drawings well enough after all because an adult said, "He draws too." That was amazing news, unprecedented and a little scary. There were two of us out there.
Except for the hair and the drawing, this person appeared completely normal. He could build and fix and operate machinery like other high-valued local people - and he could draw. Men liked him, the ladies loved him. He also painted and played musical instruments. He had been to far away places and hung out with famous people yet still fit in where I grew up... and he could draw - like me, he could draw.
Eventually I worked up the courage to show him one of my drawings. And do you know what he did? It wasn't what I expected, not what other adults did.
He did not praise me, he did not patronize me and he definitely did not pity me. He did not fawn over my pitiful attempts at drawing, he did not ridicule their childish character, and he did not caution me about wasting my life in such pursuits.
He showed me how to make a better line.
He taught me that you could lay the pencil on its side and vary the pressure or speed to create different effects. He explained that, no matter how hard I tried, I would never get dark values with a 2H pencil - that it wasn't my fault, that I had to go get myself a 6B because it was the appropriate tool. He did it all without making me feel like a child or stupid in any way. Not like a peer exactly, but like drawing was normal.
Maybe I wasn't as malformed as I had been led to believe.
A few days later he showed me hatching and cross-hatching techniques. Yes, a grown man sat down with a kid and took the time to cover several sheets of paper with different hatching techniques -- kind of like I did but with a lot more skill and confidence. He explained that it only took a few hundred hours to learn how to do it that well. Wait, a grown man had used all those hours just to get good at drawing and had survived? This was in direct contradiction to the local belief that drawing was a waste of time. I wasn't sure what to think by that point, but maybe there was hope for me after all.
Those two experiences (30 minutes total) would have been enough to make a difference in my life. Just knowing that there was one other flesh-and-blood person out there who drew for their own edification would have helped me. Getting confirmation that there were physical techniques to create visual and emotional impact validated all my previous efforts. Luckily for me, this man's entire family was like that. They were all skilled creators, artisans and crafters who worked in a variety of materials and fields - yet were otherwise totally normal.
Eventually, I wound up hanging out at the family's luthier shop. I didn't realize it at the time, but their work was kind of semi famous. Unless you are an aficionado, you may no longer recognize their name. But most of you would definitely still recognize the names of the people who do know about them.
None of that mattered to me. What mattered to me was that they worked to create beauty and they treated me like I was normal. Drawing was apparently just the tip of a huge creative iceberg. There were all kinds of ways to create.
In fact, the shop was filled with other men I recognized from the community. Well respected, upstanding members of society. But while they were in the shop they talked freely about shapes and curves and contours and tone and timbre. They worked hard, even struggled, to get materials to behave and adopt the shapes they wanted. The shop had specialized tools to make all those shapes - seemingly hundreds of specialty tools hanging from every wall and ceiling along with the half-completed skeletons of instruments and the stacks of raw wood in every corner.
It was a secret society that I had never known existed. I was smack in the middle of it and happy to be there. I was barely tall enough to see the top of the work table but I felt at home. And just like the bearded wild man, those men explained the tools to me and told me how they were used. Each tool had a name and a specific purpose. They all agreed that you needed to put the time in to learn how to use each tool to get the results you wanted. As they told me about the tools and how to use them they also told me about the men who had taught them how to use those tools.
Apparently, this process had been going on for generations. I was not alone and had never been alone.
When these normal looking men were finished with the sawing, planing, scraping, gluing, clamping inlay and staining (and so much more) they had a working musical instrument that was beautiful to look at, to hold and to play. If you could pick it, pluck it, bow it or thump it - one of the people in that shop could probably make one. They would often gather in a group and play music. The music made people feel something. Even the onlookers tapped their feet, danced or sang along. The men caused people to feel something using the very same instruments that they had just constructed out of raw wood. And strangely enough, they seemed to earn a living making and selling beautiful objects that made people feel things.
These men never bragged about it, maybe they didn't think of themselves as creative in the modern egotistical sense. But even as a child I realized that people wanted their work, would pay for the privilege of owning and using it, precisely because the creators cared so much about those shapes and curves and contours and tone and timbre. It was also the reward for putting in all that work to learn tools and techniques over the course of hundreds and hundreds of hours... or years... or even decades.
Today we would probably call it craftmanship. They just called it work. It's just what they did because that's how they did it. They did it that way because that's how they were taught. Sure, they made up new techniques and invented new tools. But that work ethic and attitude has proven to be eternal and universal among all the successful crafters and artists I have met.
For a variety of reasons, I lost access to the bearded Wildman along with his family and their studio soon afterwards. In total, I knew them for oh, maybe the equivalent of a single 40 hour semester. But in that short time I gained a knowledge that has served me well my entire life.
Reacting to beauty and wanting to create it does not make you strange or malformed. Everyone craves beauty. A lot of people want to create beauty. Few are willing to do the required work. People will pay you to create beauty for them. Creating beauty does not make you important. Having a good character is important. You are not the first and you should not be the last to create beauty. Learn from the elders. Teach the young ones. Teach the young ones about the elders. Learn your tools and take care of them. Be kind to each other.
That's a pretty good set of lessons for such a short time. The world wasn't exactly how it had so often been described to me. I had seen and met creators twice now, they all told me the same thing, and they all seemed to live good happy lives. That early influence was correct, the booster shot from the Wildman and luthiers worked and I never doubted the power of beauty again.
I made good use of those lessons and have made my living in a range of "creative professions." I had not given those early experiences much thought until I heard the old man had died. I felt a little guilty because I never properly expressed my thanks to him or his family. Then I learned that my experience was not a singular event. The Wildman's descendants could fill a small crafts fair all by themselves. The family's progeny could fill a large one. Throw in the shop's interns, students and kids who were lucky enough to hang around the work tables and you could fill a small town.
Now, when I work with kids or new creators I try to emulate the Wildman and his family even though social attitudes are very different. YouTube and the entire advertising industry are currently trying to convince everyone that they are already creators before they start the work. But I've noticed something... the kids who respond well to the ways of the Wildman and the luthiers often go on to successful creative careers. The ones who fear work drop away quickly. The ones who dig in and ask for more challenges stay and grow and become better at their chosen craft.
The old man and every creator like him lives on. The tradition continues, the elders pass on their knowledge and leave. The young ones who paid attention and took the lessons to heart live happy creative lives. Eventually, they too grow old and realize it's time to pass on the knowledge from and about their elders. The cycle continues and everyone is better for it. I am grateful to have been a part of it.
An early influence had showed me that you could be a skilled machinist/welder/cabinet maker and still revere beauty and practice creativity. When that influence ended I was left in a culture that did not value artistic creativity, especially in males. No guidance or instruction was available for visual artists between the finger painting stage and the high school drafting class. In between, you were completely on your own.
Without an adult to encourage me I was soon convinced there was something seriously wrong with me for wanting to create beauty or simply to draw. I understood the local social rules (universal as far as I knew) and the costs of breaking them. I never stopped drawing, but I did keep my drawings secret. It sucked.
Then one day this bearded, long-haired wild man showed up (think Willie and Waylon meets Page and Plant). I guess I hadn't hidden my drawings well enough after all because an adult said, "He draws too." That was amazing news, unprecedented and a little scary. There were two of us out there.
Except for the hair and the drawing, this person appeared completely normal. He could build and fix and operate machinery like other high-valued local people - and he could draw. Men liked him, the ladies loved him. He also painted and played musical instruments. He had been to far away places and hung out with famous people yet still fit in where I grew up... and he could draw - like me, he could draw.
Eventually I worked up the courage to show him one of my drawings. And do you know what he did? It wasn't what I expected, not what other adults did.
He did not praise me, he did not patronize me and he definitely did not pity me. He did not fawn over my pitiful attempts at drawing, he did not ridicule their childish character, and he did not caution me about wasting my life in such pursuits.
He showed me how to make a better line.
He taught me that you could lay the pencil on its side and vary the pressure or speed to create different effects. He explained that, no matter how hard I tried, I would never get dark values with a 2H pencil - that it wasn't my fault, that I had to go get myself a 6B because it was the appropriate tool. He did it all without making me feel like a child or stupid in any way. Not like a peer exactly, but like drawing was normal.
Maybe I wasn't as malformed as I had been led to believe.
A few days later he showed me hatching and cross-hatching techniques. Yes, a grown man sat down with a kid and took the time to cover several sheets of paper with different hatching techniques -- kind of like I did but with a lot more skill and confidence. He explained that it only took a few hundred hours to learn how to do it that well. Wait, a grown man had used all those hours just to get good at drawing and had survived? This was in direct contradiction to the local belief that drawing was a waste of time. I wasn't sure what to think by that point, but maybe there was hope for me after all.
Those two experiences (30 minutes total) would have been enough to make a difference in my life. Just knowing that there was one other flesh-and-blood person out there who drew for their own edification would have helped me. Getting confirmation that there were physical techniques to create visual and emotional impact validated all my previous efforts. Luckily for me, this man's entire family was like that. They were all skilled creators, artisans and crafters who worked in a variety of materials and fields - yet were otherwise totally normal.
Eventually, I wound up hanging out at the family's luthier shop. I didn't realize it at the time, but their work was kind of semi famous. Unless you are an aficionado, you may no longer recognize their name. But most of you would definitely still recognize the names of the people who do know about them.
None of that mattered to me. What mattered to me was that they worked to create beauty and they treated me like I was normal. Drawing was apparently just the tip of a huge creative iceberg. There were all kinds of ways to create.
In fact, the shop was filled with other men I recognized from the community. Well respected, upstanding members of society. But while they were in the shop they talked freely about shapes and curves and contours and tone and timbre. They worked hard, even struggled, to get materials to behave and adopt the shapes they wanted. The shop had specialized tools to make all those shapes - seemingly hundreds of specialty tools hanging from every wall and ceiling along with the half-completed skeletons of instruments and the stacks of raw wood in every corner.
It was a secret society that I had never known existed. I was smack in the middle of it and happy to be there. I was barely tall enough to see the top of the work table but I felt at home. And just like the bearded wild man, those men explained the tools to me and told me how they were used. Each tool had a name and a specific purpose. They all agreed that you needed to put the time in to learn how to use each tool to get the results you wanted. As they told me about the tools and how to use them they also told me about the men who had taught them how to use those tools.
Apparently, this process had been going on for generations. I was not alone and had never been alone.
When these normal looking men were finished with the sawing, planing, scraping, gluing, clamping inlay and staining (and so much more) they had a working musical instrument that was beautiful to look at, to hold and to play. If you could pick it, pluck it, bow it or thump it - one of the people in that shop could probably make one. They would often gather in a group and play music. The music made people feel something. Even the onlookers tapped their feet, danced or sang along. The men caused people to feel something using the very same instruments that they had just constructed out of raw wood. And strangely enough, they seemed to earn a living making and selling beautiful objects that made people feel things.
These men never bragged about it, maybe they didn't think of themselves as creative in the modern egotistical sense. But even as a child I realized that people wanted their work, would pay for the privilege of owning and using it, precisely because the creators cared so much about those shapes and curves and contours and tone and timbre. It was also the reward for putting in all that work to learn tools and techniques over the course of hundreds and hundreds of hours... or years... or even decades.
Today we would probably call it craftmanship. They just called it work. It's just what they did because that's how they did it. They did it that way because that's how they were taught. Sure, they made up new techniques and invented new tools. But that work ethic and attitude has proven to be eternal and universal among all the successful crafters and artists I have met.
For a variety of reasons, I lost access to the bearded Wildman along with his family and their studio soon afterwards. In total, I knew them for oh, maybe the equivalent of a single 40 hour semester. But in that short time I gained a knowledge that has served me well my entire life.
Reacting to beauty and wanting to create it does not make you strange or malformed. Everyone craves beauty. A lot of people want to create beauty. Few are willing to do the required work. People will pay you to create beauty for them. Creating beauty does not make you important. Having a good character is important. You are not the first and you should not be the last to create beauty. Learn from the elders. Teach the young ones. Teach the young ones about the elders. Learn your tools and take care of them. Be kind to each other.
That's a pretty good set of lessons for such a short time. The world wasn't exactly how it had so often been described to me. I had seen and met creators twice now, they all told me the same thing, and they all seemed to live good happy lives. That early influence was correct, the booster shot from the Wildman and luthiers worked and I never doubted the power of beauty again.
I made good use of those lessons and have made my living in a range of "creative professions." I had not given those early experiences much thought until I heard the old man had died. I felt a little guilty because I never properly expressed my thanks to him or his family. Then I learned that my experience was not a singular event. The Wildman's descendants could fill a small crafts fair all by themselves. The family's progeny could fill a large one. Throw in the shop's interns, students and kids who were lucky enough to hang around the work tables and you could fill a small town.
Now, when I work with kids or new creators I try to emulate the Wildman and his family even though social attitudes are very different. YouTube and the entire advertising industry are currently trying to convince everyone that they are already creators before they start the work. But I've noticed something... the kids who respond well to the ways of the Wildman and the luthiers often go on to successful creative careers. The ones who fear work drop away quickly. The ones who dig in and ask for more challenges stay and grow and become better at their chosen craft.
The old man and every creator like him lives on. The tradition continues, the elders pass on their knowledge and leave. The young ones who paid attention and took the lessons to heart live happy creative lives. Eventually, they too grow old and realize it's time to pass on the knowledge from and about their elders. The cycle continues and everyone is better for it. I am grateful to have been a part of it.
Wednesday, July 25, 2018
Use JavaScript to Decrement Loops in MakeCode
Just found out you can mix-and-match custom JavaScript code with blocks in Microsoft's MakeCode for Adafruit's Circuit Playground Express board.
At a recent maker meeting, one of the makers was trying to determine how to decrement a for-loop using the block editor inside MakeCode, but they couldn't find a way. The built-in for-loop always starts at zero, always increments by one, and always adds. So it's easy to loop from 0 to 255, but there didn't seem to be any way to count backwards from 255 back to 0.
There might be a way to use blocks to decrement a loop, but we went exploring inside the JavaScript editor instead.
Turns out, you can overwrite the blocks by editing the JavaScript code and using the traditional methods for counting down (set start at 255, change the test condition and use "--" instead of "++"). But we weren't sure how the custom code would behave - or if it would even appear in the blocks editor.
The customized code works perfectly fine, and it appears as a gray block with the custom code showing.
This example shows how to light up the LEDs in sequence from 0 to 10, then turn them off from 10 to 0. It's a simple example, but illustrates how the code appears inside the block editor.
It's great that an old text coder like me can work comfortably in MakeCode using traditional styles, but I need to explore to see if there's an easy way to do decrementing loops in the block editor. I'm fine with text-based coding, more comfortable than with blocks honestly - but I should know more about the block editor in case I ever have to help a new programmer.
If you know how please drop some knowledge in a comment.
At a recent maker meeting, one of the makers was trying to determine how to decrement a for-loop using the block editor inside MakeCode, but they couldn't find a way. The built-in for-loop always starts at zero, always increments by one, and always adds. So it's easy to loop from 0 to 255, but there didn't seem to be any way to count backwards from 255 back to 0.
There might be a way to use blocks to decrement a loop, but we went exploring inside the JavaScript editor instead.
Turns out, you can overwrite the blocks by editing the JavaScript code and using the traditional methods for counting down (set start at 255, change the test condition and use "--" instead of "++"). But we weren't sure how the custom code would behave - or if it would even appear in the blocks editor.
The customized code works perfectly fine, and it appears as a gray block with the custom code showing.
 |
| The custom JavaScript is shown in the gray block. The code was edited in the JavaScript mode. |
This example shows how to light up the LEDs in sequence from 0 to 10, then turn them off from 10 to 0. It's a simple example, but illustrates how the code appears inside the block editor.
It's great that an old text coder like me can work comfortably in MakeCode using traditional styles, but I need to explore to see if there's an easy way to do decrementing loops in the block editor. I'm fine with text-based coding, more comfortable than with blocks honestly - but I should know more about the block editor in case I ever have to help a new programmer.
If you know how please drop some knowledge in a comment.
Monday, July 16, 2018
Color-Wheel for HSB and NeoPixels
Here is a helpful color-wheel for using NeoPixels with the HSB color mode. I had to make a printable version when I switched from the RGB to HSB mode and thought I would share it here. I go into more detail on my Instructable for a visual tone piano.
HSB stands for HUE---SATURATION---BRILLIANCE and is just another way to represent the colors for NeoPixel code. I have used the RGB (red, green, blue) mode for so long the HSB mode threw me for a loop until I drew myself a picture of how it works.
I would have probably never used HSB unless Adafruit's amazing Circuit Playground board started using HSB as its beginner-friendly color mode. Now, Microsoft's MakeCode visual programming platform also offers HSB as an alternative to RGB. So I had to learn it.
I have used RGB, CMYK and even LAB color spaces in Photoshop and Illustrator, but had always avoided HSB for some reason. So I originally felt that HSB didn't give me the precise control I was used to. However, after using it for a while I have come to like it.
Being able to set a basic color with a single number, and modify its intensity with a second (and third) number is a quick and slick method. I might not be able to get the perfect sick-acid-green or a eye-popping-pink-gold with a single color number, but honestly, I don't need to for most of my applications. The 256 mixtures of primary color duos gives me enough choices for most basic applications. And it's certainly simpler for beginners.
I was so used to mixing color in RGB and CMYK modes that I thought it was simple. Then I watched some new users struggle to make the color they wanted. It was painful just to watch and I remembered how confusing and complicated it really is. Suddenly, the HSB mode made perfect sense to use as the default color mode.
Basically, the HSB model mixes from:
HSB stands for HUE---SATURATION---BRILLIANCE and is just another way to represent the colors for NeoPixel code. I have used the RGB (red, green, blue) mode for so long the HSB mode threw me for a loop until I drew myself a picture of how it works.
I would have probably never used HSB unless Adafruit's amazing Circuit Playground board started using HSB as its beginner-friendly color mode. Now, Microsoft's MakeCode visual programming platform also offers HSB as an alternative to RGB. So I had to learn it.
 |
| Here's a helpful color-wheel showing how the HSB color space mode works with NeoPixels. The image also shows the basic code used to set the color on Adafruit's wonderful Circuit Playground Arduino board. |
I have used RGB, CMYK and even LAB color spaces in Photoshop and Illustrator, but had always avoided HSB for some reason. So I originally felt that HSB didn't give me the precise control I was used to. However, after using it for a while I have come to like it.
Being able to set a basic color with a single number, and modify its intensity with a second (and third) number is a quick and slick method. I might not be able to get the perfect sick-acid-green or a eye-popping-pink-gold with a single color number, but honestly, I don't need to for most of my applications. The 256 mixtures of primary color duos gives me enough choices for most basic applications. And it's certainly simpler for beginners.
 |
| The free MakeCode online programming environment lets you play with HSB color mode. The model (upper left) shows the result of changing the values. It's a great way to try switching from RGB to HSB without even owning a board. |
I was so used to mixing color in RGB and CMYK modes that I thought it was simple. Then I watched some new users struggle to make the color they wanted. It was painful just to watch and I remembered how confusing and complicated it really is. Suddenly, the HSB mode made perfect sense to use as the default color mode.
Basically, the HSB model mixes from:
- pure red,
- adds some green to make yellow,
- then subtracts red to get pure green,
- adds some blue to get blue-green,
- subtracts green to get pure blue,
- adds red to get purple,
- and subtracts blue to return to pure red
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Shop through our Amazon links to help support this site.
Shop through our Amazon links to help support this site.
Also find me on:
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Publishing a Gap-Toothed Piano with Circuit Playground
Just got a great reminder of why it's important to publish your work and promote the work of other makers. I've been slacking recently, not publishing or documenting much of anything.
I am cycling away from jewelry-making and back to Arduino type projects. Working with jewelry gives me immediate feedback from real living people through sales and human interaction. I get tiny jolts of ego juice when people buy my stuff, not a lot of sales mind you, but enough to keep me going.
With the Arduino and industrial design stuff however, I had started to feel both overly egotistical (talking about my stuff all the time) and unsure if anyone really cares about the projects anyway. These types of projects can seem tedious to many people (all my friends) and the time-scale is so much longer that few people wait around for the pay-off. Who really wants to hear the details of a five-week project that includes coding, electronics, 3d printing and industrial design?
Then someone did one tiny thing and it helped me - they published something similar to my work.
I love it when I see professional designers come up with solutions that are similar to mine. When people I admire solve the same problem and get the same result, it makes me feel like I did something well.
I'm not designing professionally these days, but it still feels good - like maybe I've still got it - even when the professional's design is much better than mine. That little ego-boost is always pleasant, but it really means something when you're designing in isolation.
A few years ago I made a Musical Doodle Bug for an Instructable. It's a cute toy piano thingy with a gap-toothed face. You can play musical notes and arpeggios while LEDs light up to go along with the music. You can change the speed and octave just by rotating the object. You can change modes with buttons and switches. And I tried to make it kid friendly with a cute case made from common craft supplies. I wanted to make something with my favorite new Arduino board that included fun activities for all ages and skill levels.
Last week, I found a project from Adafruit (one of my favorite maker-centric companies) that used the same board that also played music with a cute, toothy face. Finding that project made me smile. Adafruit's version is much more refined and polished. But the basic approach is the same.
Even better, Adafruit is the maker and designer of the board used in the project. It's their Circuit Playground board, an all-in-one Arduino style board that comes complete with a huge collection of sensors and outputs built right onto the board. I fell in love with this wonderful board as soon as I saw it. It's perfect for new programmers and it's cheap. But it's also powerful enough for advanced designers and programmers to use in "real" projects.
I don't get much feedback on my Arduino projects since I'm the only one locally who really uses Arduinos and such. I enjoyed making the project, but I wasn't sure if it was any good. So when I saw the creators of the board design a project for it - that used just a few of the same elements and approaches that I used - well it made my day, it made me happy, it gave me confirmation. Maybe I was on the right track after all.
This might seem silly and trivial. (It's not the first or only "face piano" after all - no big deal.) If you work in a creative environment and are surrounded by skilled and talented designers all day, then you get constant feedback. You get confirmation and guidance from peers and end-users. Or, if you have a large local maker community you can reach out to them, talk to them in real life or even collaborate on projects.
But if you work in isolation, then it can be weeks or even months between comments from another person (typed and anonymous). It's difficult to know if you are on the right track, or know if any one else is even interested in the same things as you. I've annoyed dozens of local people promoting the joys and wonder of this type of making - to the point that their eyes glazed over. By this point I know I have to depend on the internet to provide feedback from like-minded designers and makers.
So here's a big shout out and thank you to everyone who publishes their projects - big or small, simple or sophisticated, artistic or practical. You folks help keep me going. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. There are people on remote jobsites, in small communities, or who just have family responsibilities that keep them from being part of a physical IRL community. We tinker and make and keep ourselves halfway motivated with very little outside feedback.
But if one tiny echo of my project can make me this happy and motivate me again, well it makes me want to publish more projects just in case there is one other person who is working on a similar project and needs some support.
BTW, Adafruit does an excellent job of both publishing and promoting other makers' work. Their skill at creating and nurturing a community is amazing. Their attitude is one of the reasons I'm still involved with electronics and Arduinos when everyone around me thinks it's weird and boring. A big shout out to them as well. Go visit their forums and participate.
Just remember - you are not alone. There are other people, normal people without a million subscribers, who tinker and putz in the basement or garage. It's good to hear from them and from you. I learn from you just like the big names. I am impressed by your work and your creativity. Please publish more of your projects. Help keep me motivated and I promise I will publish more in return.
I am cycling away from jewelry-making and back to Arduino type projects. Working with jewelry gives me immediate feedback from real living people through sales and human interaction. I get tiny jolts of ego juice when people buy my stuff, not a lot of sales mind you, but enough to keep me going.
With the Arduino and industrial design stuff however, I had started to feel both overly egotistical (talking about my stuff all the time) and unsure if anyone really cares about the projects anyway. These types of projects can seem tedious to many people (all my friends) and the time-scale is so much longer that few people wait around for the pay-off. Who really wants to hear the details of a five-week project that includes coding, electronics, 3d printing and industrial design?
Then someone did one tiny thing and it helped me - they published something similar to my work.
I love it when I see professional designers come up with solutions that are similar to mine. When people I admire solve the same problem and get the same result, it makes me feel like I did something well.
I'm not designing professionally these days, but it still feels good - like maybe I've still got it - even when the professional's design is much better than mine. That little ego-boost is always pleasant, but it really means something when you're designing in isolation.
A few years ago I made a Musical Doodle Bug for an Instructable. It's a cute toy piano thingy with a gap-toothed face. You can play musical notes and arpeggios while LEDs light up to go along with the music. You can change the speed and octave just by rotating the object. You can change modes with buttons and switches. And I tried to make it kid friendly with a cute case made from common craft supplies. I wanted to make something with my favorite new Arduino board that included fun activities for all ages and skill levels.
Last week, I found a project from Adafruit (one of my favorite maker-centric companies) that used the same board that also played music with a cute, toothy face. Finding that project made me smile. Adafruit's version is much more refined and polished. But the basic approach is the same.
Even better, Adafruit is the maker and designer of the board used in the project. It's their Circuit Playground board, an all-in-one Arduino style board that comes complete with a huge collection of sensors and outputs built right onto the board. I fell in love with this wonderful board as soon as I saw it. It's perfect for new programmers and it's cheap. But it's also powerful enough for advanced designers and programmers to use in "real" projects.
I don't get much feedback on my Arduino projects since I'm the only one locally who really uses Arduinos and such. I enjoyed making the project, but I wasn't sure if it was any good. So when I saw the creators of the board design a project for it - that used just a few of the same elements and approaches that I used - well it made my day, it made me happy, it gave me confirmation. Maybe I was on the right track after all.
This might seem silly and trivial. (It's not the first or only "face piano" after all - no big deal.) If you work in a creative environment and are surrounded by skilled and talented designers all day, then you get constant feedback. You get confirmation and guidance from peers and end-users. Or, if you have a large local maker community you can reach out to them, talk to them in real life or even collaborate on projects.
But if you work in isolation, then it can be weeks or even months between comments from another person (typed and anonymous). It's difficult to know if you are on the right track, or know if any one else is even interested in the same things as you. I've annoyed dozens of local people promoting the joys and wonder of this type of making - to the point that their eyes glazed over. By this point I know I have to depend on the internet to provide feedback from like-minded designers and makers.
 |
| Seriously, who in their right mind does flow-charts much less documents them and publishes them. Well I did, and it helped me understand what I was trying to accomplish. If you do too, then just know that you are not alone. |
So here's a big shout out and thank you to everyone who publishes their projects - big or small, simple or sophisticated, artistic or practical. You folks help keep me going. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. There are people on remote jobsites, in small communities, or who just have family responsibilities that keep them from being part of a physical IRL community. We tinker and make and keep ourselves halfway motivated with very little outside feedback.
But if one tiny echo of my project can make me this happy and motivate me again, well it makes me want to publish more projects just in case there is one other person who is working on a similar project and needs some support.
BTW, Adafruit does an excellent job of both publishing and promoting other makers' work. Their skill at creating and nurturing a community is amazing. Their attitude is one of the reasons I'm still involved with electronics and Arduinos when everyone around me thinks it's weird and boring. A big shout out to them as well. Go visit their forums and participate.
Just remember - you are not alone. There are other people, normal people without a million subscribers, who tinker and putz in the basement or garage. It's good to hear from them and from you. I learn from you just like the big names. I am impressed by your work and your creativity. Please publish more of your projects. Help keep me motivated and I promise I will publish more in return.
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
NeoPixels Behind Air Dry Clay
Tried a new material for diffusing NeoPixels and making jewelry - air dry clay. It didn't work out like I hoped, but the experiments were successful enough that I will continue to play with it.
Air-dry clay is very easy to work with. I think it handles more like real clay than polymer-clays like Sculpey. And you don't have to bake it, just let it dry (a real plus during the summer months).
I also use it to make quick molds and impressions.
I had some white clay (from Polyform) left over from another project, and I don't like to mix partially dried clay back into the main blob. So I decided to press some gears and cogs into the leftover clay to make a quick Steampunk jewelry pendant. With some paint and embellishments, this is a good technique to get a fun surface texture for jewelry.
I thought it would be translucent enough to make a good diffuser for a NeoPixel pendant. But the clay is actually fairly opaque at anything more than a millimeter thickness. That is way too thin to make jewelry with because air-dry clay is brittle and breaks easily (a backer board or thick parts are best for jewelry).
But I had accidently made some of the impressions from the gear so deep that the light from the NeoPixels shined through quite nicely. A few even poked all the way through. The rest of the piece are very thick however, so the pendant is sturdy. Overall, it creates a nice effect.
I need to paint the surfaces to make it prettier, but somehow leave the indentions unpainted. It might take a few tries to get something attractive. But air-dry clay is cheap and quick to work with. So I can try a lot of different techniques cheaply and quickly.
Also, I know that polymer clays have a wide variety of translucency. And my diffusing experiment with 3d printed NeoPixel jewelry proves that even PLA has different light transmitting qualities. So there might be other air-dry clay brands that work much better with technique. I'll keep you updated.
Air-dry clay is very easy to work with. I think it handles more like real clay than polymer-clays like Sculpey. And you don't have to bake it, just let it dry (a real plus during the summer months).
I also use it to make quick molds and impressions.
I had some white clay (from Polyform) left over from another project, and I don't like to mix partially dried clay back into the main blob. So I decided to press some gears and cogs into the leftover clay to make a quick Steampunk jewelry pendant. With some paint and embellishments, this is a good technique to get a fun surface texture for jewelry.
I thought it would be translucent enough to make a good diffuser for a NeoPixel pendant. But the clay is actually fairly opaque at anything more than a millimeter thickness. That is way too thin to make jewelry with because air-dry clay is brittle and breaks easily (a backer board or thick parts are best for jewelry).
 |
| You can see that the NeoPixel lights only show through where the clay is very thin. Luckily, the rest of the pendant is thick and makes for a strurdy piece of Steampunk jewelry. |
But I had accidently made some of the impressions from the gear so deep that the light from the NeoPixels shined through quite nicely. A few even poked all the way through. The rest of the piece are very thick however, so the pendant is sturdy. Overall, it creates a nice effect.
I need to paint the surfaces to make it prettier, but somehow leave the indentions unpainted. It might take a few tries to get something attractive. But air-dry clay is cheap and quick to work with. So I can try a lot of different techniques cheaply and quickly.
Also, I know that polymer clays have a wide variety of translucency. And my diffusing experiment with 3d printed NeoPixel jewelry proves that even PLA has different light transmitting qualities. So there might be other air-dry clay brands that work much better with technique. I'll keep you updated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)