Not sure why you'd want an oval aperture on a lens... but if you wanted the thinnest possible light blocking area while maintaining material strength, could you make a thicker print which tapers down to a thin opening at the edges of the aperture?
The article says: “to produce the type of anamorphic boke you can see in the movies”.
It's funny that we chase what amounts to an (unfortunate?) artifact that a normally round aperture becomes oval.
An actual anamorphic lens on a 35mm camera body would be interesting as you would actually also get the wider aspect ratio. I imagine they either do not exist or that they would be prohibitively expensive — thus this "hack" (and I use the term with fondness).
Edit: I see there are anamorphic lenses in the $600 to $1200 or so range on Amazon. Kind of annoying I suppose to have to stretch everything in post.
https://www.diyphotography.net/the-smallest-full-frame-anamo...
You can see a hint of lens flare in the final example image and it's what I'd expect from a normal lens. This ultimately is a creative decision, but a mix of anamorphic bokeh and normal lens flair may not meet viewers' expectations depending on the execution.
1. See Abrams and Mindel's 2009 Star Trek(&c) as an example of anamorphic lens flare https://www.businessinsider.com/why-star-trek-has-so-much-le...
> Also, I have to say that I didn’t notice a significant sharpness difference between 0.1mm and 2mm disks. I usually aim for a thickness of around 0.33mm (or 2/3 printing layers) This will produce plastic disks that are firm, thin, and a bit flexible.