Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: capsar050
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 44 next>>
Jun 1, 2018 22:42:56   #
Dang it, I missed one. Must have been that time I slept.
Go to
Jun 1, 2018 20:41:08   #
:>) I wouldn't be able to pass it up either. The laser or the other.
Go to
Jun 1, 2018 20:20:23   #
Thank you for sharing. It always brings a smile when I remember times like that.
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 22:18:02   #
I'll give it a solid :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 22:14:15   #
My favorite is #3. Nice set!
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 22:12:21   #
I also like the two wine glasses best. Very nice set. :thumbup:
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 22:10:00   #
:thumbup:
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 20:36:02   #
GARGLEBLASTER wrote:
That is one plausible explanation but there is also another one but you really have to have a filthy mind to see it.


DARN!!! I saw it. :) :) :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Go to
Dec 31, 2015 19:54:07   #
azphotobug wrote:
The way the lighting looks IR, to me, is reminiscent of Ansel Adams' work. He performed chemical magic in the darkroom with lighting and exposure.


It is IR I did wash out the redish color as I didn't resset my WB beforr I went out.
Go to
Dec 26, 2015 20:00:55   #
Such an amazing amount of information. For the record, I would like to say we were interested in seeing the sand grains that made up the pottery sample. It took over two days to get the shot we needed, with stacked lenses, a stage made from a milling vise, and a heap of lights. A fun project, but hardly worth the cost and effort. I think I will stay with CLOSE UP photography. At least until I read and re-read the mountain of information I now have. Thank you to all who have contributed to my understanding.
Go to
Dec 25, 2015 21:49:29   #
Then I would guess that I would still be doing macro photography as I only go to sand grain or slightly smaller size. I have seen plant cell structure but not what is in a cell. I don't think that is getting as small as 10:1.
....
Reading the links and using the calculator provided I am able to get 10.714:1 with the 150mm base + 14mm stacked mount and 21.429:1 with the 300mm base + 14mm stack. They give the formula of 1/S1 + 1/S2 = 1/F but I don't know what the ratio is for the reverse mount with the 300mm as I don't know my cameras optical center dimension, but it has to be smaller. I think I understand this is now called extreme macro and not MICRO because of the equipment used. I'll stay with that understanding unless corrected. Thank you all for helping me to grow. Also didn't know about ho to geeet to forums and search them.. My appologies. I will learn to do that now.
Go to
Dec 25, 2015 21:24:51   #
That is the kind of shot I have hoped for. I wouldn't pick at it. The downloaded shot is even better. Thanks for sharing.
Go to
Dec 25, 2015 21:14:21   #
I have done a bit of photography using a reverse lens mount for a local museum. They didn't need anything super small and were only interested in the sand grains and crystallization on some native american pottery. I also play around using the macro setting or macro lenses to take pics of bugs and things. Is what I am I doing with both setups referred to as macro photography or are they differentiated by other terminology? I figured what I do is all macro as I don't use a dedicated microscope (even though my reverse mount is about the strength of a grade school microscope).
Go to
Dec 25, 2015 20:50:14   #
How did they taste? :)
Seriously though I think it is a very nice image. I'd like to see the downloaded view. It looks like you captured a good bit of detail. I also like the background. You composed the shot very well.
Go to
Dec 25, 2015 20:37:29   #
Nothing but a mix of heavy fog, drizzle, and downpour here in the Piedmont. No chance to see the moon tonight. Perhaps it will be visible tomorrow night.
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 44 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.