Crane Fly Face
Apr 9, 2019 19:41:18 #
Our lawn (weeds) was teaming with Crane Flies yesterday and this is one of them. I know that it's not the best image however it was a very challenging image due to their size and how fragile they are.
Apr 9, 2019 20:25:58 #
crane flies and dragonflies must have got their names mixed up.looks like it to me anyway.
Apr 9, 2019 21:30:18 #
Apr 10, 2019 08:05:22 #
Apr 10, 2019 14:36:50 #
sippyjug104 wrote:
Our lawn (weeds) was teaming with Crane Flies yesterday and this is one of them. I know that it's not the best image however it was a very challenging image due to their size and how fragile they are.
Regarding your commenting "...not the best image..." above: I believe the image works quite successfully as an excellent photo! I realize that the technical aspects of really high-end macro photography these days is constantly pushing the limits of what can be done and wow! -- that is producing some absolutely astounding photos that I greatly appreciate and and can only marvel at. What I like about this photo is the terrific composition and arrangement of colors combining to describe the subject in a very interesting and pleasing way. I can only assume that you know of some details you'd rather see more "perfect," what photographer doesn't think that of their own work, but there are no apologies due or necessary for this image. Good work -- glad you posted it!
Apr 10, 2019 15:15:56 #
Thanks ever so much for the kind words and inspiring me to continue on this journey. Some subjects are simply ever so small that it becomes quite difficult to stage them by hand. The slightest move appears to move miles in the viewfinder. Many micro-macro photographers use micrometer controlled movement stages however that's an investment that I've yet to make.
This image consists of 360 shots that were taken in 8-micron increments with two camera clicks per shot and one second between shots to allow the camera to return to still. It takes somewhere between 20 to 40 minutes to complete the series of shots and then over two hours to process them all into a single image.
Because I never know how they will turn out until it's complete I'm always looking for the best results in the end which I imagine is much like looking for the Holy Grail...I know that it's out there somewhere, I just don't know where.
This image consists of 360 shots that were taken in 8-micron increments with two camera clicks per shot and one second between shots to allow the camera to return to still. It takes somewhere between 20 to 40 minutes to complete the series of shots and then over two hours to process them all into a single image.
Because I never know how they will turn out until it's complete I'm always looking for the best results in the end which I imagine is much like looking for the Holy Grail...I know that it's out there somewhere, I just don't know where.
Apr 11, 2019 08:48:01 #
Apr 11, 2019 15:08:47 #
Apr 11, 2019 20:56:21 #
Apr 15, 2019 00:00:26 #
Apr 15, 2019 16:10:00 #
sippyjug104 wrote:
Thanks ever so much for the kind words and inspiri... (show quote)
Question: If you don't have a micrometer head on your slide, how do you control 8 micron increments?
Apr 15, 2019 18:17:50 #
Thanks for the question. I have a digitally controlled motorized slide that is connected to a laptop computer.
The process is to determine the distance of the steps required which are based on amount of magnification and the f-stop to be used. When using a microscope objective as the camera lens the step distance is determined by the "NA" value of the objective. The 4X microscope objective that I use is a 0.10 NA and the 10X is 0.25 NA so I set it to what the recommended values are for the distance to be traveled between shots.
The number of shots required is then determined by the point of the closest part of the subject in focus as the "start" and then advancing the rail until the farthest point of the subject is in focus as the "end". The computer divides the distance between those to in millimeters or microns for the session.
Because it is all automated, I hit the "run" button. I shoot with the "mirror up" to avoid shutter vibration and I set a one second pause between shots to let everything settle to avoid any vibration.
It typically takes between 20 to 45 minutes to shoot as session which may have as many as 500+ images to be stacked when done. I use Zerene Stacker as my go-to program to put them into one image.
I started doing this by hand however I was using a macro lens and not a microscope objective which is way different in their depth of field. For example, my 105mm Lester A. Dine needs one millimeter per shot (which I can do by hand) where the 10X microscope objective requires 8-microns per shot (which I cannot do by hand).
I enjoy sharing what I do so if you have any questions or would like any additional info, simply let me know.
The process is to determine the distance of the steps required which are based on amount of magnification and the f-stop to be used. When using a microscope objective as the camera lens the step distance is determined by the "NA" value of the objective. The 4X microscope objective that I use is a 0.10 NA and the 10X is 0.25 NA so I set it to what the recommended values are for the distance to be traveled between shots.
The number of shots required is then determined by the point of the closest part of the subject in focus as the "start" and then advancing the rail until the farthest point of the subject is in focus as the "end". The computer divides the distance between those to in millimeters or microns for the session.
Because it is all automated, I hit the "run" button. I shoot with the "mirror up" to avoid shutter vibration and I set a one second pause between shots to let everything settle to avoid any vibration.
It typically takes between 20 to 45 minutes to shoot as session which may have as many as 500+ images to be stacked when done. I use Zerene Stacker as my go-to program to put them into one image.
I started doing this by hand however I was using a macro lens and not a microscope objective which is way different in their depth of field. For example, my 105mm Lester A. Dine needs one millimeter per shot (which I can do by hand) where the 10X microscope objective requires 8-microns per shot (which I cannot do by hand).
I enjoy sharing what I do so if you have any questions or would like any additional info, simply let me know.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.