-Updated Pictures, -Bling Prototype

[tp4tissue]

Update

Prototype complete. I have the basics down. The math people might recognize some things off the bat.

The crystals are all 2mm.

I don't know if you see the silver flakes, camera has low resolution.

Note: it's silver flakes in the pearl white background, NOT glitter.

Final piece may have a thick crystal curtain, I am not certain because too many crystals just looks dull. Kinda like greasy food, it's good for the first few bites, but you get sick of it real quick.

Now hunting down crystals, the real swarovski crystals are way overpriced. DO NOT buy them on ebay, because it's littered with fake, counterfeit crystals..

If anyone's interested in a Swarovski Crystal Group buy, Post about it.



I wasn't even trying to be subtle about the ratios.

[tp4tissue]

argaergaerg

[dorkvader]

I think it's a waste, but personally, I hate "bling".

It would certainly be a unique keyboard, though. Are you planning on coating the keycaps with this madness as well? I had thought so, based on your larger surface area estimate.

I would not recommend putting anything on the side of a keycap, though. They will hit eachother.

[tp4tissue]

I think it's a waste, but personally, I hate "bling".

It would certainly be a unique keyboard, though. Are you planning on coating the keycaps with this madness as well? I had thought so, based on your larger surface area estimate.

I would not recommend putting anything on the side of a keycap, though. They will hit eachother.

Actually, I was surprised myself, but I hadn't even included the keycap surfaces. Yup that's $300 just to do the sides and the top sans the keys.

If I include the keycap surfaces that's at least another $60 if I do lettering only, probably $150 for complete top coverage.

LOL... so we're looking at $500 to go full gangsta'

[longweight]

Please do it!

[Hyde]

Personally I don't like bling and another thing to keep in mind is that keyboard is a computer item, it will always have newer / more advanced ones coming out every year and personally I've bought 2 keyboards this year and is already thinking about my 3rd one.

So unless you know you're going to like it and stick it for a longggggg time, I'd rather spend the money on a Topre (unless you already have one) or something

[hazeluff]

I want to see it... >.>

[IvanIvanovich]

You should do it, but not the keycap. For keycap, go full titanium, or one of the sets of the gold color zinc for that. Blingy and iced out like a mutha...

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

You should do it, but not the keycap. For keycap, go full titanium, or one of the sets of the gold color zinc for that. Blingy and iced out like a mutha...

I was going to mention that he should get a gold Zinc 37 kit to go along with all the bling... that'd look badass.

[absyrd]

Please do it!

This. I assume this is just thread is just a troll, but perhaps we can convince you to take it to the next level.

[Alessandro]

Please do it to the case, but not the keycaps!

[swagpiratex]

Naw, dude. Haters gon' hate. Take it next level and swag that ****. Copy on the metallic keys and spacebar.

Sent from my HTC Sensation

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

Naw, dude. Haters gon' hate. Take it next level and swag that ****. Copy on the metallic keys and spacebar.

Sent from my HTC Sensation

Uhh... what he said.

[tp4tissue]

I'll admit, I got this weakness for 'outlandish

I just ordered some cheap acrylic crystals off ebay to make a prototype. Because I want to make sure I DON'T buy more swarovski crystals than I need, because that would be a ridiculous waste, since it's not like I got anything else to bling.

Does anyone have suggestion as to back'ground color?

THe crystal beads have foil backs, so the background would only appear between the crystals.

I'm pretty firm on clear crystals. So I'm wondering what would be a good background color for this type

[Djuzuh]

I'd put white as background.

[Alessandro]

Yep, white is your best bet.

[spiralsc2]

i think white or a pastel pink

[IvanIvanovich]

So if the foil is chrome, then paint casebody chrome obviously.

[whiskerBox]

Oh my

[Skull_Angel]

Bling factor tells me to say platinum.

[dorkvader]

What's the area one crystal covers?

The reason I ask in because, for a one-size 2D unit, the theoretical maximum packing factor is 90.6% (I just derived it again). and 2mm Zirconia crystals are $0.01/each in bulk [1] .

There used to be a dealer with sweet bulk prices on synthetic corundum (Crystalline Al2O3) (called ruby or sapphire by crystalline ceramic "gem" "experts".) but I cant find it again.

I'd recommend that over a coloured backing.
--

Hmm, 29,000 mm^2 of SA
2mm diameter crystals
.906 packing factor
---
3.14mm^2 area
3.46 -> ~3.5mm^2 of "covered area" (accounting for PF)

29000/3.5= 8285 crystals -> ~8300 crystals
$0.01 each is only $83 for a full set. Not bad at all.

[1] (First vendor I found) http://cubiczirconia-labgems.com/czprices.html

[tp4tissue]

What's the area one crystal covers?

The reason I ask in because, for a one-size 2D unit, the theoretical maximum packing factor is 90.6% (I just derived it again). and 2mm Zirconia crystals are $0.01/each in bulk [1] .

There used to be a dealer with sweet bulk prices on synthetic corundum (Crystalline Al2O3) (called ruby or sapphire by crystalline ceramic "gem" "experts".) but I cant find it again.

I'd recommend that over a coloured backing.
--

Hmm, 29,000 mm^2 of SA
2mm diameter crystals
.906 packing factor
---
3.14mm^2 area
3.46 -> ~3.5mm^2 of "covered area" (accounting for PF)

29000/3.5= 8285 crystals -> ~8300 crystals
$0.01 each is only $83 for a full set. Not bad at all.

[1] (First vendor I found) http://cubiczirconia-labgems.com/czprices.html

Wow, ok, that's way cheaper than swarovski. Thanks for the insite dorkvader. 

Here's my current concerns.

Do you think maybe the "brand" matters here, because it's a vanity item, it's like how people buy filco, even though quickfire is even better with the cable and 1/3 the price.


I mean, I can make the final version from acrylic which will only cost me 15$ for 6000 beads, LOL.

But, then I can't say oh yea, this is 8000 swarovski crystals, LOL.

[swagpiratex]

Doesn't even matter if they were crystals or not. it's like paying three dollars for a fancy name. In the end it's still compressed carbon. Or whatever cubic zirconia is made out of.

What's important is that it's SHINY.

[tp4tissue]

Doesn't even matter if they were crystals or not. it's like paying three dollars for a fancy name. In the end it's still compressed carbon. Or whatever cubic zirconia is made out of.

What's important is that it's SHINY.

I understand that functionally it'll be quite similar, with the swarovski having a better light diffusion pattern and internal reflection.

But, does not being name brand "diminish" the swagger??

I mean the brand seems vital to the vanity, or am I mis'interpreting this.

[IvanIvanovich]

I think this only matters if you only intend to sell it to a rapper or something once finished. I could see Plies using it as a necklace maybe... lol.

[dorkvader]

Doesn't even matter if they were crystals or not. it's like paying three dollars for a fancy name. In the end it's still compressed carbon. Or whatever cubic zirconia is made out of.

What's important is that it's SHINY.

I understand that functionally it'll be quite similar, with the swarovski having a better light diffusion pattern and internal reflection.

But, does not being name brand "diminish" the swagger??

I mean the brand seems vital to the vanity, or am I mis'interpreting this.

TP4 is right, different crystals are made from completely different ceramics. Sapphire/ruby contain no carbon at all. I don't think it's fair to say that diamond is "compressed" carbon. It's just that the crystal lattice is very efficient (one good reason why the young's modulus is a close approximation of infinity. Diamonds don't really yield before breaking) That's why high pressure can make one. If you can get enough pressure, the phase of carbon will change (to diamond phase) because that's the only lattice that will support said pressure. Currently, we also need high heat for various reasons.

It's because of the lattice that Diamond gets it properties. Light can only travel through it really slowly. (Though not as slow as some other elements. It's very interesting: Look it up!) A different "clear" crystal will have different looks, different reflective and refractive properties, etc.

I can tell the difference between CZ and Diamond, but I rather like CZ. If I ever find someone crazy enough to marry, I'd much prefer a "moissanite" (Crystalline Silicon Carbide) ring. Moissanite isn't as clear as diamond, but the optical properties meet or exceed it. It also has almost the same hardness.

This is why I enjoy the study of Ceramics. They are pretty badass all 'round.

We need to find a "bling" forum and post the results there once it's done.
----
So, looking it up, Swarovski crystal is "lead crystal" or glass. Because of this I would highly recommend CZ, as it's harder, and should have much better optical properties.

The chemical formula for Cubic Zirconia is ZrO2.

[Alessandro]

Awesome post dorkvader!

[tp4tissue]

Doesn't even matter if they were crystals or not. it's like paying three dollars for a fancy name. In the end it's still compressed carbon. Or whatever cubic zirconia is made out of.

What's important is that it's SHINY.

I understand that functionally it'll be quite similar, with the swarovski having a better light diffusion pattern and internal reflection.

But, does not being name brand "diminish" the swagger??

I mean the brand seems vital to the vanity, or am I mis'interpreting this.

TP4 is right, different crystals are made from completely different ceramics. Sapphire/ruby contain no carbon at all. I don't think it's fair to say that diamond is "compressed" carbon. It's just that the crystal lattice is very efficient (one good reason why the young's modulus is a close approximation of infinity. Diamonds don't really yield before breaking) That's why high pressure can make one. If you can get enough pressure, the phase of carbon will change (to diamond phase) because that's the only lattice that will support said pressure. Currently, we also need high heat for various reasons.

It's because of the lattice that Diamond gets it properties. Light can only travel through it really slowly. (Though not as slow as some other elements. It's very interesting: Look it up!) A different "clear" crystal will have different looks, different reflective and refractive properties, etc.

I can tell the difference between CZ and Diamond, but I rather like CZ. If I ever find someone crazy enough to marry, I'd much prefer a "moissanite" (Crystalline Silicon Carbide) ring. Moissanite isn't as clear as diamond, but the optical properties meet or exceed it. It also has almost the same hardness.

This is why I enjoy the study of Ceramics. They are pretty badass all 'round.

We need to find a "bling" forum and post the results there once it's done.
----
So, looking it up, Swarovski crystal is "lead crystal" or glass. Because of this I would highly recommend CZ, as it's harder, and should have much better optical properties.

The chemical formula for Cubic Zirconia is ZrO2.

Dorkvader, true to his name. Big dork indeed.   

[swagpiratex]

The devil is in the details, as always.

For all intensive purposes, most people will not have the swag-breaking knowledge of dorkvader. He possesses cheats. However, I'm very glad that learning has occurred. Moissanite looks freaking badass.

I recommended CZ to you because you're literally paying three times the money for permission to call it something 9 letters long. 0 value add in my book. Absolutely zero. Most people are going to be wowed by the fact that you have a badass keyboard that is SHINY. Who cares if it's swarovsky or not. ITS SHINY!! But I had not considered one variable: If you inherently love Swarovsky crystals and don't mind shelling out the cash and would love to tell the world about it, since you're sinking 7 hours of your life gluing the little ****'s to your keyboard, then I defer to your decision and apologize for going too far out of my lane.

But since DV has chimed in and told me that swarovsky is just glass, then my original rec stilil stands. GLASS LOLOLOL.

[tp4tissue]

The devil is in the details, as always.

For all intensive purposes, most people will not have the swag-breaking knowledge of dorkvader. He possesses cheats. However, I'm very glad that learning has occurred. Moissanite looks freaking badass.

I recommended CZ to you because you're literally paying three times the money for permission to call it something 9 letters long. 0 value add in my book. Absolutely zero. Most people are going to be wowed by the fact that you have a badass keyboard that is SHINY. Who cares if it's swarovsky or not. ITS SHINY!! But I had not considered one variable: If you inherently love Swarovsky crystals and don't mind shelling out the cash and would love to tell the world about it, since you're sinking 7 hours of your life gluing the little ****'s to your keyboard, then I defer to your decision and apologize for going too far out of my lane.

But since DV has chimed in and told me that swarovsky is just glass, then my original rec stilil stands. GLASS LOLOLOL.

Wow, so you really thought I could afford to cover my whole keyboard with diamonds? Even though it's tkl, 29000 mm^2 is still prohibitively expensive.

And yes swarovski is glass. But it's really good glass.

They are the best in terms of cutting quality and uniformity. So there is some "technical" advantage.

[xJaPx]

i cannot wait to see this monstrosity lol. 

[Alessandro]

Agreed! Such a beautiful monster!

[digitalleftovers]

Every few years, Swarovski teams up with a high-end piano maker (this is a Bösendorfer) and turns out things like these:


It was the first thing I thought of when I saw this.

[dorkvader]

Swarovski is leaded glass. Some of the high-end glasses are still really nice, though. The major difference is that they are "amorphous" versus a ceramic like CZ is crystalline. This makes a difference, but not a huge one for this purpose. Still, due to the cost, I'd go with CZ, as it is cheaper, and very nice.

Keep in mind that gem-quality moissonite is only made by one company until their patent expires in 2015. Because of this reason (and others) it's much more expensive than CZ (and still a hell of a lot cheaper and more awesome than Diamond)

[posthaste]

You must bling it out.

[Findecanor]

Personally I hate bling, but I won't judge.

Just be aware that crystals are hard and small little buggers with sharp edges. They may not be comfortable in certain places. Remember that you may need to move or reposition the keyboard. I often rest my right hand above the inverted-T cursor keys, and I wouldn't want any crystals there

[WhiteFireDragon]

I'm not endorsing Nike, but JUST DO IT.

No need to consult everyone else's opinion on it, if you have the doe and the desire, go for it. It's your keyboard, not ours. Arguing the merits of using acrylic vs swarovski vs diamond is a moot point. Functionally, they're all the same but if swarovski costs $300 extra, then that's $300 of happiness to you. This is the same thing as using stock plastic case vs a $350 aluminum CNC case, or zinc caps vs titanium caps. Huge price difference but functionally the same, yet people are still willing to shell out the big bucks for it. This is GH after all.

You'll be the first to do this, be sure to post pics when you're done.

[dorkvader]

I got the titanium spacebar solely for the superior wear, and corrosion resistant properties.

Ceramics (amorphis glass like swarovski, or crystalline like ZrO2) are hard, and should hold up to average wear better than plastic, so you should do this for the better material properties.

[tp4tissue]

I got the titanium spacebar solely for the superior wear, and corrosion resistant properties.

Ceramics (amorphis glass like swarovski, or crystalline like ZrO2) are hard, and should hold up to average wear better than plastic, so you should do this for the better material properties.

Everything for the prototype is in the mail, acrylic gems, paint, gloss, sticky tweezer, and 2 different glue in case one reacts the wrong way.

I recalculated my allocation for different crystal layouts, I may be able to do this with only 4000 gems instead of 8000.

And I am sure at this point that I will be using strictly 2mm, because 3mm would make the thin bezel portions look too packed.

The guys at the wholesale zirconia place didn't reply to my email about minimum orders. 

Maybe if this project turns out well, we could do a group buy.  )

[tp4tissue]

Prototype complete.

[tp4tissue]

If anyone's interested in a Swarovski Crystal Group buy, Post about it.

[dorkvader]

Prototype complete.

That's rather nice (much better than I expected). How hard was it to position the "silver flakes" (Glitter) that precisely? I especially like the exponential progression and the golden spiral.

[Alessandro]

That's really cool! You've definitely got the right proportions with the crystals! It's great, without being over the top.

Good job!

[tp4tissue]

Prototype complete.

That's rather nice (much better than I expected). How hard was it to position the "silver flakes" (Glitter) that precisely? I especially like the exponential progression and the golden spiral.

All main shiny stuff are the acrylic crystals. LOL, the silver flakes is more visible on the bottom picture on the lower bezel. It resembles body glitter, and I didn't want the ladies to think I was purposefully making my keyboard feminine.

As for the precision placement, It is ridiculously hard.

These are 2mm crystals.

The ones used by women and their cellphone cases are generally larger crystals. And from what i've seen they are very careless with the glue, and there's more excess glue on the final project than crystal

They also don't use any math. My layout is mathematically excellent as far as casual geometry goes. 

Excess glue makes the surface look bland because it fills the gap between the crystals, taking away the POP.  )

That's really cool! You've definitely got the right proportions with the crystals! It's great, without being over the top.

Good job!

Thanks Alessandro, Now no one can say we keyboarder's aren't hip and fashionable.

[swagpiratex]

I saw the spiral design on a couple of higher math books, but never got around to really studying them. I see the natural ratio thingys though.

[tp4tissue]

I saw the spiral design on a couple of higher math books, but never got around to really studying them. I see the natural ratio thingys though.

I was hoping people wouldn't miss that, it's my favorite.

[absyrd]

Golden ratio in the lines between the number and F row, too, eh?

[tp4tissue]

Golden ratio in the lines between the number and F row, too, eh?

, dorkvader had it almost right saying it was exponential, but it is indeed as you said Golden Ratio'

The Fibonacci ratio can be closely approximated by an exponential ratio, but in the end it is not exponential.


I thought it was appropriate since the hard lines of a keyboard reminds me of architecture.