One of my macro heros: Nicolas Reusens
Jan 26, 2013 02:26:14 #
10x magnification of this wonderful and very tiny salticid, via 168 focus-stacked images.
View hi-rez image here: http://www.nicolasreusens.com/MicroMacrophotography/Extreme-Macros/20796687_Qct6jm#!i=2335887269&k=CMdrXVc&lb=1&s=X3
View hi-rez image here: http://www.nicolasreusens.com/MicroMacrophotography/Extreme-Macros/20796687_Qct6jm#!i=2335887269&k=CMdrXVc&lb=1&s=X3
Same itty-bitty jumper on geletin capsule.
Jan 26, 2013 03:58:18 #
Do you think this is a fractal image?
A fractal is a mathematical set that has a fractal dimension that usually exceeds its topological dimension[1] and may fall between the integers.[2] Fractals are typically self-similar patterns, where self-similar means they are "the same from near as from far".[3] Fractals may be exactly the same at every scale, or, as illustrated in Figure 1, they may be nearly the same at different scales.[2][4][5][6] The definition of fractal goes beyond self-similarity per se to exclude trivial self-similarity and include the idea of a detailed pattern repeating itself.[2]:166; 18[4][7]
As mathematical equations, fractals are usually nowhere differentiable, which means that they cannot be measured in traditional ways[clarify].[2][6][8] An infinite fractal curve can be perceived of as winding through space differently from an ordinary line, still being a 1-dimensional line yet having a fractal dimension indicating it also resembles a surface.[1]:48[2]:15
The mathematical roots of the idea of fractals have been traced through a formal path of published works, starting in the 17th century with notions of recursion, then moving through increasingly rigorous mathematical treatment of the concept to the study of continuous but not differentiable functions in the 19th century, and on to the coining of the word fractal in the 20th century with a subsequent burgeoning of interest in fractals and computer-based modelling in the 21st century.[9][10] The term "fractal" was first used by mathematician Benoît Mandelbrot in 1975. Mandelbrot based it on the Latin frāctus meaning "broken" or "fractured", and used it to extend the concept of theoretical fractional dimensions to geometric patterns in nature.[2]:405[7]
There is some disagreement amongst authorities about how the concept of a fractal should be formally defined. The general consensus is that theoretical fractals are infinitely self-similar, iterated, and detailed mathematical constructs having fractal dimensions, of which many examples have been formulated and studied in great depth.[2][4][5] Fractals are not limited to geometric patterns, but can also describe processes in time.[3][6][11] Fractal patterns with various degrees of self-similarity have been rendered or studied in images, structures and sounds[12] and found in nature,[13][14][15][16][17] technology,[18][19][20][21] art,[22][23][24] and law.[25]
A fractal is a mathematical set that has a fractal dimension that usually exceeds its topological dimension[1] and may fall between the integers.[2] Fractals are typically self-similar patterns, where self-similar means they are "the same from near as from far".[3] Fractals may be exactly the same at every scale, or, as illustrated in Figure 1, they may be nearly the same at different scales.[2][4][5][6] The definition of fractal goes beyond self-similarity per se to exclude trivial self-similarity and include the idea of a detailed pattern repeating itself.[2]:166; 18[4][7]
As mathematical equations, fractals are usually nowhere differentiable, which means that they cannot be measured in traditional ways[clarify].[2][6][8] An infinite fractal curve can be perceived of as winding through space differently from an ordinary line, still being a 1-dimensional line yet having a fractal dimension indicating it also resembles a surface.[1]:48[2]:15
The mathematical roots of the idea of fractals have been traced through a formal path of published works, starting in the 17th century with notions of recursion, then moving through increasingly rigorous mathematical treatment of the concept to the study of continuous but not differentiable functions in the 19th century, and on to the coining of the word fractal in the 20th century with a subsequent burgeoning of interest in fractals and computer-based modelling in the 21st century.[9][10] The term "fractal" was first used by mathematician Benoît Mandelbrot in 1975. Mandelbrot based it on the Latin frāctus meaning "broken" or "fractured", and used it to extend the concept of theoretical fractional dimensions to geometric patterns in nature.[2]:405[7]
There is some disagreement amongst authorities about how the concept of a fractal should be formally defined. The general consensus is that theoretical fractals are infinitely self-similar, iterated, and detailed mathematical constructs having fractal dimensions, of which many examples have been formulated and studied in great depth.[2][4][5] Fractals are not limited to geometric patterns, but can also describe processes in time.[3][6][11] Fractal patterns with various degrees of self-similarity have been rendered or studied in images, structures and sounds[12] and found in nature,[13][14][15][16][17] technology,[18][19][20][21] art,[22][23][24] and law.[25]
Jan 26, 2013 05:26:13 #
NOT a fractal, but a focus-stack of 168 images at 10:1 magnification (10x life-size).
Simply clicking on URL would answer your question.
Simply clicking on URL would answer your question.
Jan 26, 2013 06:58:51 #
This image is one of 138. The others are amazing as well. Fantastic detail. I'd like to know a little more about how he got the spider to sit still through 168 slices. Those are incredibly minute incremental movements. I believe the most I've stacked is 28. At 10x, I'm wondering if he used a microscope for his digital imaging.
Jan 26, 2013 07:17:00 #
Malcolm B
Loc: Leicester (UK)
Nikonian, I can understand why he is a hero of yours. They are stunning images, something for us all to aim at. Even if it is only 3, 5 or 7 stacked images, if I could get even close to the quality of these images I would feel very pleased.
Jan 26, 2013 14:14:00 #
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Dead spiders do not move that much.I'd like to know a little more about how he got the spider to sit still through 168 slices. Those are incredibly minute incremental movements.
Jan 26, 2013 14:43:21 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Stacking is quite remarkable, but you pretty much have to kill the bug to get more than just a couple of images in a stack... Kinda seems a little unfair, I know that I will never produce images like this but that does not mean that you can't get kinda close... Shahan does not kill bugs and most of his work is done in the field.. but even his work is being left behind by the images coming out of macro studios.LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Dead spiders do not move that much.I'd like to know a little more about how he got the spider to sit still through 168 slices. Those are incredibly minute incremental movements.
Jan 26, 2013 15:02:16 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
I recently found a UTube video by Shahan and I was very much impressed with his approach to macro and his "leave them alive" philosophy. I feel like that a guy I could have a beer with!Stacking is quite remarkable, but you pretty much have to kill the bug to get more than just a couple of images in a stack... Kinda seems a little unfair, I know that I will never produce images like this but that does not mean that you can't get kinda close... Shahan does not kill bugs and most of his work is done in the field.. but even his work is being left behind by the images coming out of macro studios.
Jan 26, 2013 16:14:29 #
LoneRangeFinder wrote:
Different from these YouTubes, found here? http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-76013-1.htmlI recently found a UTube video by Shahan and I was very much impressed with his approach to macro and his "leave them alive" philosophy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqRn3at0H60&list=UUM80atpL9P_G7_ORlFOzmAg&index=10&feature...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIw9VIfGCwc&list=UUM80atpL9P_G7_ORlFOzmAg&index=2&feature=...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoBm_Hgjc6Y&feature=relmfu
http://www.thomasshahan.com
Jan 26, 2013 16:18:45 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
Yes, it was different. If I can back-track what rabbit hole I went down, I'll attach it. I didn't realize it was Shahan until the video had started. It depicted him walking in the woods, turning over leaves.Different from these YouTubes, found here? http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-76013-1.html
Jan 26, 2013 22:04:29 #
I personally don't see much challenge in photographing Dead Bugs. I have yet to try freezing any, but may some day down the road. I did hear you can get the bugs to sleep by placing under glass in a dark room until the fall asleep. I wish I had a magic dust I could sprinkle on them and they would simply set there until I was done photographing them. I guess I still like the challenge of photographing Live critters in the field where sh__ happens and you don't always get your shot.
Jan 27, 2013 00:49:23 #
fstop22 wrote:
Well said. :thumbup:I personally don't see much challenge in photographing Dead Bugs. I have yet to try freezing any, but may some day down the road. I did hear you can get the bugs to sleep by placing under glass in a dark room until the fall asleep. I wish I had a magic dust I could sprinkle on them and they would simply set there until I was done photographing them. I guess I still like the challenge of photographing Live critters in the field where sh__ happens and you don't always get your shot.
Jan 27, 2013 00:55:22 #
fstop22 wrote:
Agree. This is one reason all of my stacks are plants....I personally don't see much challenge in photographing Dead Bugs. I have yet to try freezing any, but may some day down the road. I did hear you can get the bugs to sleep by placing under glass in a dark room until the fall asleep. I wish I had a magic dust I could sprinkle on them and they would simply set there until I was done photographing them. I guess I still like the challenge of photographing Live critters in the field where sh__ happens and you don't always get your shot.
Jan 27, 2013 08:09:59 #
Jan 27, 2013 09:17:45 #
That is one tiny little spider. Thank you for sharing all the links. I will have to check them out later today.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.