Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Access to xray equipment for making gun images

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Oleg Volk, May 5, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oleg Volk

    Oleg Volk Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    9,155
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    I see a lot of real x-ray images (along with quasi-x-ray illustrations) like these;

    [​IMG]

    How do people get access to x-ray equipment, especially devices capable of high-resolution output?
     

    Attached Files:

  2. benEzra

    benEzra Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8,575
    Location:
    Down East in NC
    I'm not sure, but that could even be a gamma-ray image, except that the resolution is so good. Steel normally looks more opaque than that on most X-rays I've seen.

    Anybody who knows X-ray equipment--if that's an Xray, what energy levels are they using?
     
  3. Chipperman

    Chipperman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,572
    Location:
    Essex Co, MA
    Our clinic may be getting a digital processor in the next 6 months. If so, I will be able to make pretty pics like that.

    Right now we have the old fashioned film. I could get some good pics, but the challenge is getting the picture from the film into a computer. We used to have a special scanner for that, but it's too old to work with modern software. :eek: The other option is just taking a digital picture of the radiograph while it's on the viewbox. That would not look as cool as the nice photos you've seen.

    That is not a standard X-RAY/Radiograph
     
  4. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,051
    Location:
    SouthEast PA
    Not all x-ray equipment is medical or security related.

    Check your nearest foundry. The metalurgical industry uses X-Ray gear for QC purposes.
     
  5. Third_Rail

    Third_Rail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    geekWithA.45 took the words out of my mouth...

    Even at the school here we have access to X-Ray equipment to check work - Pratt & Whitney donated it. :D

    We don't X-Ray firearms, but it'd be neat... we just check for cracks, inclusions, etc. It's pretty neat to do.
     
  6. Stiletto Null

    Stiletto Null Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    That looks suspiciously like a Solidworks render.
     
  7. slohand

    slohand Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    51
    Location:
    Vale, North Carolina
    I'm certain that it's not any type of radiographic image. The density is too uniform throughout the image. You couldn't obtain that without some compensating filters and there are no signs of filter overlays.
     
  8. Mr. Ouchie

    Mr. Ouchie Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    93
    It looks like a 3D render to me.
     
  9. Third_Rail

    Third_Rail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    ;)
     
  10. NukemJim

    NukemJim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,201
    If you want to produce a radiograph of a firearm you will need more than a standard medical X-ray machine. Normal kVp (Think penatration power) is from 30-150 kVp. At those voltages I do not believe the metal is going to be adequetly penetrated.

    Even if you were to get access industrial radiographic unit, as several people have pointed out it will not look like the very nice illustration of the AK ( I do not know what type of image that is, computered rendered or neutron imaging would be my best guess ).

    NukemJim
     
  11. mondocomputerman

    mondocomputerman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    540
    Location:
    Kansas City
    I have access to digital x-ray equipment, and it will penatrate the metal. I work on the systems, and I commonly x-ray through two layers of lead aprons and get a good image on the other side. The systems I work on can go up to 125 kVp and 15ma.

    I do not think that image is a standard x-ray of that rifle. Look at the spring for the bolt carrier. It is perfectly straight, not touching the walls of the bolt carrier at all. Anytime I take my spring out, it is captive on the rod and looks like a snake straightened out somewhat.

    Notice how the butstock and front sight are taken from an angle, and the trigger guard and magazine release are taken straight-on.

    I should take an x-ray of my glock and post the results. I can save the image directly from the machine to a bitmap.
     
  12. Lucky

    Lucky Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    2,919
    Location:
    Calgary, near Rocky Mountains - Canada
    "If you want to produce a radiograph of a firearm you will need more than a standard medical X-ray machine. Normal kVp (Think penatration power) is from 30-150 kVp. At those voltages I do not believe the metal is going to be adequetly penetrated."

    I think that not penetrating is what gives the image definition.

    I think Mondocomputerman is more right, when he talks about the strength of the medical Xray equipment. The manual I just read for the new Xray machine I get to use now said that Dental Xray is around 10 rads, while the xray from this machine is a tenth or less than that. And since it's new, I've been playing with it, of course:)

    The image posted does not look quite real, a little too clear, in every way, for a security machine to have done that, imo.

    For how wood looks, I don't know. But an inch thick book hardly is visible, and a few inch thick books is sort of visible. Plastic shows up better, but not much. So the grips are kind of suspect in that image.
     
  13. atomchaser

    atomchaser Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Messages:
    407
    It's not a standard radiograph if it's a radiograph at all. I've seen computed tomographs of industrial parts that look like that, but they take many images to produce.
     
  14. mondocomputerman

    mondocomputerman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    540
    Location:
    Kansas City
    The machines I work on can go up to 20 rads continous. In digital film mode they can also go up to 150ma. That is quite a lot of penetrating power. It is easily 100 times that of a dental x-ray machine.
    Too much kV (penetrating power) can wash out the image. The ma is what gives a good image and contrast.
     
  15. Chipperman

    Chipperman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,572
    Location:
    Essex Co, MA
    OK, I took a standard radiograph (X-Ray) of my P7M13 last night.
    I took 3 until I got a decent pic. The best picture was at 95 kVp and 7.5 mAs.

    Now I have to figure out the best way to post it. I don't have a scanner. :eek:
     
  16. Owen

    Owen Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,928
    Location:
    Georgetown, TX
    It looks like a CAD rendering to me also, although with some sort of fish-eye camera effect.
     
  17. Gifted

    Gifted Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,009
    Location:
    Missouri
    Something I'd like to see is slow motion x-ray video of guns in action. Don't know how practical that is though.
     
  18. Stiletto Null

    Stiletto Null Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    Hmm.

    How quickly can digital X-ray sensors image?
     
  19. rwc

    rwc Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    596
    Location:
    Bainbridge Island, WA
    I've seen my wife do some amazing things with photoshop on much more complex images. It's not my field, but I think you can "sample" sections of an image and then enhance the contrast of the sample. Bottomline - I wouldn't rule out digital shenanigans.
     
  20. Stiletto Null

    Stiletto Null Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    863
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    Sure, except that this would require pixel-by-pixel edits to get the clarity of gradients necessary.

    It looks like a Solidworks render. It has the right colors for someone using default material properties. And there's no scatter artifacting around the stippling of the grip (tight patterns + X-ray film = ***).
     
  21. ARTiger

    ARTiger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    803
    My guess is that this was an artist's rendering based on the engineering blueprint. CAD or freehand is what I'm wondering. I just don't think any current radiographic, sonic or magenetic imaging device could produce so even an image through varied material compositions.
     
  22. mondocomputerman

    mondocomputerman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    540
    Location:
    Kansas City
    The machines I work on (GE OEC 9800 C-Arm) will take 30 frames per second digital cine video. The files are big, and are stored in a proprietary format. I don't think the hospitals will take kindly to firing a round in the OR. It would be cool to cycle the action and record the output to my laptop.

    The process is totally digital on the c-arms now, but they used to actually record cine runs (live video) on 35mm film. I think they could get up to 60 fps or more, but they would always jam so I've heard (before my time). Those were used mainly in the cath lab for later review.

    In my experience, the live video from cine runs can get a little blurry with motion at first. I think it is due to the persistance of the phosphorus on the image intensifier. I don't think it would capture the fast cycling of a gun very well.

    To get around film, the x-ray machine uses an image intensifier to intensify the green image from x-rays hitting phosphorus. The image intensifier is similar to a night vision scope, only the input does not amplify light from outside the tube, but from light on the inside after x-rays activate the phosphorus. The size is usually 9 or 12 inches on a portable, and 12, 14, or 16 inches on a stationary table. The output is then captured by a black and white CCD camera with a resolution of 1000 by 1000 pixels. Images are stored on the main hard drive, and video is stored on two fiber channel 15K hard drives running in raid 0. The video can be played back and recorded on a composite output.
     
  23. Greywolf

    Greywolf Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    I am an X-ray tech, working with AMX, Shimatsu, and OEC 9800 (and, as God as my witness, much OLDER C-arms - ugh) systems. I don't know if I can get a gun in to the hospital to X-ray, but I may try.

    Problem is we are not digital yet. Would have to take the x-ray and then take a digital photo. Neat idea, though.

    Don't get me started on x-raying 830 pound women portably - ACK! :what:
     
  24. Owen

    Owen Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,928
    Location:
    Georgetown, TX
    30 fps isn't nearly fast enough. You'd get about 2 images per cycle. It would take a lot o film, and a lot of frame by frame editing to get a decent framerate in the final film. When I was doing a lot of of highspeed video, we'd generally run around 2000fps. If we wanted to watch a bullet exiting the barrel, we would have to be up past 20k fps, just to get more than one frame with a bullet in it.
     
  25. goalie

    goalie Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,168
    Location:
    Minnetonka, Minnesota
    I work as an RN in the Interventional Radiology department of a large hospital. We do have equipment that could take the pictures you are asking about, and we are digital, but, unfortunately, pictures are not worth losing my job over.

    :banghead:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page