Fossil Fly
May 4, 2015 23:19:05 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
thanks Scott, that's good to know.They have a Facebook presence as wel: http://www.facebook.com/groups/19833784207
Muddyvalley wrote:
That is a great idea!!!!! I am hopeful Muddy that your idea will work. I think I will attempt taping one to the front of the objective.Douglass, you are no fun at all sometimes. :-) Maybe on April 1st?
I wonder what a polarizing filter would do?
I wonder what a polarizing filter would do?
I took two shots, first without second one with. Unfortunately, since working distance is so small, I pushed things around, knocked them over and could not get the same shot... And neither shot is particularly well focused on an interesting thing.
However: the second shot seems to have such beautiful light. I don't know if this is just coincidence or if it is truly working. I will know tomorrow night.
I might owe you way more than a beer!!!
May 5, 2015 03:40:19 #
May 5, 2015 11:00:35 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Wouldn't it also reduce surface reflection from the oil on the amber?Eat light!
May 5, 2015 11:29:03 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
yeah, I am thinking that I will lose a lot of light (in a situation where I already lose a lot of light).(Polarizing filters) eat light!
In shooting amber through the objective, I am finding my light less, and I am finding my light harsh - probably from the way that it reflects all over the place.
I plan to bring my concave diffuser closer and have it on the top -- and have it closer than normal.
1) I will shoot a stack and post Zerene output with no post-processing other than to turn the file to 8-bit jpg.
2) I will shoot a stack with circular polarizer taped to the front of the objective. It is larger than the objective, and will make the working distance even smaller (meaning even less light), and it will steal light. I will post no post-processing output of that stack also.
3) then just for fun, if I like number 2 above, I will do my normal post-processing routine, and post third image.
I am hopeful that while there will be less light, there will be way less bad light - with the net result of a darker image with greater clarity.
May 5, 2015 19:22:41 #
Image 1 - polarized, 36 frames, in photo-shop changed to 8-bit image and saved as jpg with level 10 quality (to get it under 5 meg)
Image 2 - not polarized, 36 frames, in photo-shop changed to 8-bit image and saved as jpg with level 11 quality (to get it under 5 meg)
Got exact same flash (however, it WAS overexposed), subject and flash in same place, however I had to move the camera to remove polarized lens (which was taped to front of objective with three strips of tape). So start and stop might not be identical.
Please let me know if you think polarized version was better in any way, or if not polarized would have been better if it wasn't over-exposed. In other words, your thinking and comments on these two images are much appreciated.
EDIT... ARGGG, metinks I have to do this all over but use ETTL instead of manual on flash...
Image 2 - not polarized, 36 frames, in photo-shop changed to 8-bit image and saved as jpg with level 11 quality (to get it under 5 meg)
Got exact same flash (however, it WAS overexposed), subject and flash in same place, however I had to move the camera to remove polarized lens (which was taped to front of objective with three strips of tape). So start and stop might not be identical.
Please let me know if you think polarized version was better in any way, or if not polarized would have been better if it wasn't over-exposed. In other words, your thinking and comments on these two images are much appreciated.
EDIT... ARGGG, metinks I have to do this all over but use ETTL instead of manual on flash...
May 5, 2015 20:12:59 #
Playing with them both in elements 2, I think I can pull more detail out on the shot w/o the polarizer. Which I don't really understand because that one is so much brighter. You are probably better off without it. Of course I really don't know what I'm doing. Take any suggestions from me with a grain of salt & a beer. :-)
May 5, 2015 20:42:32 #
Muddyvalley wrote:
I fear I need to shoot with the polarizer one more time, but increase flag intensity..Playing with them both in elements 2, I think I can pull more detail out on the shot w/o the polarizer. Which I don't really understand because that one is so much brighter. You are probably better off without it. Of course I really don't know what I'm doing. Take any suggestions from me with a grain of salt & a beer. :-)
Edit... And I am fearful that I will learn that ettr works and will have to learn how to work with such images...
May 5, 2015 21:31:37 #
here is second polarized image. I bumped ISO to 200 and manual flash went from 1/2 to full 1. (probably too bright now...) thoughts please.. very please.
May 5, 2015 22:00:29 #
yeah, I think too much light. Just for fun & to see what would happen, I stacked the first two images together after playing with the light. I hope you don't mind.
May 5, 2015 22:13:21 #
Muddyvalley wrote:
no, of course not. You did a nice job. I think it looks very cool. How did you stack them? (I attempted to stack the first two images in zerene since I still had both tif files (much better in theory than the stinking 8 bit files you had to work with) I hope you don't mind.
I'm tempted to combine them as HDR iputs just for the fun of it also. And I'm tempted to still run an ETTL stack with the polarized lens attached. I just hate to admit to Douglass that he was right!!! LOL
May 5, 2015 22:19:55 #
pfrancke wrote:
Thanks! I'm just having fun. You're doing all the hard work. :-)no, of course not. You did a nice job. I think it looks very cool. How did you stack them?
I used the Zerene align feature first, then pmax and edited just a little to replace some streaks in the upper right over the wing.
May 5, 2015 22:59:04 #
Muddyvalley wrote:
I tried zerene stack and quickly gave up, the colors came out garish for me (if that was going to happen I wanted to control it myself). I liked your zerene stack of the two very much. Anyway, I DID learn how to photoshop align and stack, so that was cool. And ran it thru some processes attempting to bring out detail. This is what I ended up with (thank God I can quit trying to use that polarized lens, too much work).Thanks! I'm just having fun. You're doing all the hard work. :-)
I used the Zerene align feature first, then pmax and edited just a little to replace some streaks in the upper right over the wing.
I used the Zerene align feature first, then pmax and edited just a little to replace some streaks in the upper right over the wing.
And also, here is hdr blend of the two.
May 5, 2015 23:20:01 #
pfrancke wrote:
That looks really good! I admire your persistence. I think a big part of the problem is that the light changes in intensity as it gets farther into the amber. The other big drawback is that the subject is so small that it's going to be darned hard to hold it, manipulate it, and light it all at the same time. Not to mention the camera side of it. I'll buy the beer!I tried zerene stack and quickly gave up, the colors came out garish for me (if that was going to happen I wanted to control it myself).. I liked your zerene stack of the two very much. Anyway, I DID learn how to photoshop align and stack, so that was cool. And ran it thru some processes attempting to bring out detail.. This is what I ended up with (thank God I can quit trying to use that polarized lens, too much work) And also, here is hdr blend of the two.
May 6, 2015 08:18:35 #
LOL, I think you have a valid point about how amber seems unpredictable with lighting - it eats light and then spits it out in strange ways.
With smaller LED lights, you can control the lights easier, but still the small working distance makes things difficult. I don't think von Hammerstein would entrust me with any responsibility...
With smaller LED lights, you can control the lights easier, but still the small working distance makes things difficult. I don't think von Hammerstein would entrust me with any responsibility...
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.