• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Actinotus forsythii [Pink Flannel Flower]

Fluorescence
8 replies to this topic

#1 Erden

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts
  • Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted 31 January 2018 - 02:51

Sizgek, E. (2018) Actinotus forsythii Maiden & Betche (Apiaceae) Pink flannel flower. Flowers photographed in ultraviolet and visible light. http://www.ultraviol...ythii-apiaceae/

Illawong, New South Wales, Australia
28-30 January 2018
Australian Native Wildflower. This particular plant was cultivated by Menai Wildflower Group (Lloyd Hedges) from the collected seeds of wild plants in Blue Mountains.

Comment: Scattering populations of pink flannel flower is rarely seen in Blue Mountains and north-east Victorian alpine area in the wild as it does not appear every year. Not considered to be at risk in the wild at the species level although it is listed as a high risk/vulnerable plant in Victoria.

Reference:
1. Maiden, J.H. & Betche, E. (1902), Notes from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney, No. 8. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 27(1): 60. http://plantnet.rbgs...notus~forsythii

Visible Light: Nikon D800, EL-Nikkor 150mm 1:5.6 metal body, f/8 for 1" @ ISO 50 Interior daylight light.
Attached Image: DSC_8775-3.jpg
Image Reference: ES8775-3

Ultraviolet Light: Nikon D3200 Full spectrum modified, EL-Nikkor 50mm 1:2.8 metal body lens+Baader UV-Pass Filter, Canon 199A flash modified with Hoya U-340 + Schott S8612 filters stack, f/8 for 2" @ ISO 800.
Attached Image: DSC_1571-3.jpg
Image Reference: ES1571-3

UV-Induced Visible Fluorescence: Nikon D800, EL-Nikkor 50mm 1:2.8 (metal)+Baader UV/IR-Cut Filter, Nichia NVSU233A diode torch with h Baader UV-Pass Filter, f/8 for 10" @ ISO 50, in total darkness.
Partially opened flower head.
Attached Image: DSC_8782-3.jpg
Image Reference: ES8782-3

Partially opened flower head has been disturbed to reveal sub structure.
Attached Image: DSC_8783NX2-3.jpg
Image Reference: ES8783NX2-3

Blue fluorescence is emitted from the underlying stems of the clustered female and male parts.

UV-Induced Visible Fluorescence:
Nikon D800, EL-Nikkor 50mm 1:2.8 (metal)+Baader UV/IR-Cut Filter, Nichia NVSU233A diode torch with Baader UV-Pass Filter, f/8 for 10" @ ISO 50, in total darkness.

Fully opened flower head.
Attached Image: DSC_8802-3.jpg
Image Reference: ES8802-3

With the fully opened flower head, blue glowing stems of the female and male parts are exposed. During 15 seconds of exposure, the intense blue fluorescence becomes dominant and suppresses the reddish fluorescence of the hairs on the petals (bracts) as well as yellow-green fluorescence observed in images ES8782-3 and ES8783NX2-3.

Published 31 January 2018

#2 DaveO

    Aussie Bunyip

  • Members(+)
  • 612 posts
  • Location: Maldon, Victoria, Australia

Posted 31 January 2018 - 03:32

Welcome Erden,

You can offer a different perspective on Australian native wildflowers from your base in NSW. I look forward to seeing more. These images are excellent.

DaveO

#3 Erden

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts
  • Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted 31 January 2018 - 08:28

Thank you Dave. Your great work and photographs have been an inspiration to me.

Erden

#4 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 1,748 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 22:46

Hi Erden, You might give the reflected UV shot a try with no flash filters in place. That may change the UV color palette, and exposure time also.
You should not really need the flash filters for reflected UV only shots. Removing them will broaden the UV-A light band, and increase light power.
So you could give it a try just to compare the difference.

Edited by Cadmium, 31 January 2018 - 22:48.


#5 JCDowdy

    JCDowdy

  • Members
  • 1,139 posts
  • Location: Arlington, TN

Posted 31 January 2018 - 23:07

View PostCadmium, on 31 January 2018 - 22:46, said:

Hi Erden, You might give the reflected UV shot a try with no flash filters in place. That may change the UV color palette, and exposure time also.
You should not really need the flash filters for reflected UV only shots. Removing them will broaden the UV-A light band, and increase light power.
So you could give it a try just to compare the difference.

I second Cadmium's suggestion, started to make a similar comment myself. I would only add that the filtered flash you have is intended to be used for UVIVF in the manner that your 365nm LED excitation source is filtered.

#6 Cadmium

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 1,748 posts

Posted 01 February 2018 - 05:48

I second what John said about the U-340 2mm + S8612 2mm flash filter stack being used for UVIVF or UVIIRF. That stack is intended to emit 365nm, and block visual and IR.
Using no filter should emit a stronger and broader UV range, and the UV-only filter on your lens should block all visual and IR light from your unfiltered flash.

More on flash for fluorescence.
Video at top:
http://photoextremis...graphy-tutorial
(scroll half way down that page for info on 199a and other flashes)

Boon's 199A flash instruction:
http://myphotojourne...the-canon-199a/

#7 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 6,602 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 01 February 2018 - 17:00

Congratulations, Erden, on your first formal botanical post!
We are very happy to have this interesting Flannel Flower.

As editor, I made two very minor corrections:
Added the flower's common name to the title.
Italicized the genus & species name in the post header.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#8 Erden

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts
  • Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted 07 February 2018 - 00:55

Cadmium and JCDowdy, good pointI intend applying bare flash tube during next UV work.

#9 Erden

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts
  • Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted 07 February 2018 - 01:01

Thank you Andrea,