• Ultraviolet Photography
  •  

Smooth Oxeye flower, and insect movie (Vis, UV-A, UVIVF, SWIR 1500-1600nm)

Fluorescence Insect Vision Infrared Multispectral SWIR UV Video
12 replies to this topic

#1 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,459 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 07 August 2019 - 23:43

Visible (sunshine, Resolve 60mm quartz lens, S8612 1.75mm + DB850 filter, Sony A7S camera, F16 ISO200 1/60")
Attached Image: _DSC2955 sunshine Resolve60mm F16 iso200 0.0166%22 vis UVP.jpg

UV-A (sunshine, Resolve 60mm quartz lens, 330WB80 filter, Sony A7S camera, F16 ISO3200 2")
Attached Image: _DSC2949 sunshine Resolve60mm F16 iso3200 2%22 UV UVP.jpg

UV video of tiny insects or arachnids coming out of center of flower when UV light is shined on it. They would not come out for visible light. Click through to make it big to see them better. They are very very tiny.


Visible (halogen, Resolve 60mm quartz lens, S8612 1.75mm + DB850 filter, Sony A7S camera, F8 ISO80 0.4")
Attached Image: _DSC2921 halogen Resolve60mm F8 iso80 0.4%22 vis UVP.jpg

UVIVF (Convoy S2+ torch, Resolve 60mm quartz lens, S8612 1.75mm + DB850 filter, Sony A7S camera, F8 ISO1600 15")
Attached Image: _DSC2936 UVIVF Resolve60mm F8 iso1600 15%22 small UVP.jpg

SWIR (halogen, Wollensak 25mm lens, Thorlabs 1500nm LP filter, Triwave camera, and god only knows how to quantify the exposure for this.)
This is a pano.
Attached Image: yellow flower SWIR pano_res.tif.jpg

In situ photo for ID help.
Attached Image: sunflower in the wild.jpg

Edited by Andy Perrin, 10 August 2019 - 23:04.


#2 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members(+)
  • 1,122 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 08 August 2019 - 03:30

I hope that video doesn't qualify as animal curalty. Did they leave the flower or just buzz around?
I have had flies come into my shots, but they come and go on their own. Also the exposure is long enough that you don't see them, unless they slow down and add a blur.


#3 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,459 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 08 August 2019 - 04:03

I don't think I was cruel to them, it just woke them up or something. They did exactly what you saw, crawled around briefly and went back inside. No wings that I could detect. My best guess is that they are earwigs:

Quote

Earwigs are generally nocturnal, and typically hide in small, dark, and often moist areas in the daytime. They can usually be seen on household walls and ceilings. Interaction with earwigs at this time results in a defensive free-fall to the ground followed by a scramble to a nearby cleft or crevice.[25] During the summer they can be found around damp areas such as near sinks and in bathrooms. Earwigs tend to gather in shady cracks or openings or anywhere that they can remain concealed during daylight. Picnic tables, compost and waste bins, patios, lawn furniture, window frames, or anything with minute spaces (even artichoke blossoms) can potentially harbour them.[28]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earwig

#4 Nemo Andrea

    488nm enthusiast

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Location: The Netherlands

Posted 08 August 2019 - 08:03

Wow interesting, you should try to get a macro lens on it to confirm their species!

#5 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members(+)
  • 1,122 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 08 August 2019 - 11:03

Funny you say he should use a macro lens.
The Resolve 60mm Macro lens he is useing is very good. He could take a closer 1.25x macro shot to see the things.

#6 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,459 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 08 August 2019 - 13:50

That was pretty much as close as I could get! Keep in mind I have a full frame camera with just 12 megapixels. On a micro 4/3 the image would be a lot bigger.

#7 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,425 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 08 August 2019 - 17:34

They are probably thrips. Usually very slender. May be light or dark. The behaviour in the video is typical of the ones I've seen. They roam around in the flower appearing and disappearing.

Insects on flowers do live in the sun so are probably ok with UV as long as the exposure to the "extra" UV is not too long. I do not say this with any certainty, so please let your own conscience be your guide. And your UV illumination should not be hot - a flash will certainly fry flower and insect if held too close.

If I'm using flash on flowers, I try to shake off insects. But there's always a few which remain. For anything large and lovely (bee, butterfly, caterpillar, etc.) I will only flash *once* and at a distance. If you are patient and the sunlight is strong and your ISO is set high, you can usually get a bee or butterfly without using a flash.

It is of course impossible to completely shake off all tiny things like thrips or "no-see-ums". More than once I've been working on a close scene and have not noticed that some critter has wandered into the frame. So far I've not killed anything with my UV flash. And I have gone back more than once to check on somebody I accidently flashed too close.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#8 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,425 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 08 August 2019 - 17:37

The flower is most likely a Heliopsis.

I'm going to look through my stuff and see if I have a Heliopsis which matches the UV-signature on yours.

ADDED: https://www.ultravio...n-smooth-oxeye/
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.

#9 Nemo Andrea

    488nm enthusiast

  • Members
  • 36 posts
  • Location: The Netherlands

Posted 09 August 2019 - 10:22

View Postdabateman, on 08 August 2019 - 11:03, said:

Funny you say he should use a macro lens.
The Resolve 60mm Macro lens he is useing is very good. He could take a closer 1.25x macro shot to see the things.

Ah I didn't realise that was a macro lens. On the topic, how would this macro lens stack up against something like a nikon fluor objective? Of course they gather less light due to different NA, but in terms of relative transmittance of ratio of UV to Visible?

EDIT: I cannot find transmittance data for the macro lens (the main website for the company is not working for me?) so im curious if its much better for UV than a UV compatible objective. I can imagine anything <350nm is not so interesting for microscopy and that only such dedicated lenses go beyond that.

Edited by Nemo Andrea, 09 August 2019 - 10:31.


#10 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,459 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 09 August 2019 - 15:32

Ok, so the Resolve is a quartz lens and passes UV and visible roughly the same. It is designed for UV work and has a UV-C coating, which works pretty well even in UV-A from my experience so far. The coating does not work in visible, and I see quite a bit of chromatic aberration in visible light near the corners. So this is really a UV lens that you can use to get a visible snapshot, not one that’s ideal for both bands. But it passes visible light fine, the image quality just suffers.

You can compare the UV and visible flower photos above to see what I mean.

I have never used a Fluor objective before so I can’t say what their transmission is or what the chromatic aberration is like.

Edited by Andy Perrin, 09 August 2019 - 15:37.


#11 Andy Perrin

    Member

  • Members(+)
  • 2,459 posts
  • Location: United States

Posted 09 August 2019 - 16:32

View PostAndrea B., on 08 August 2019 - 17:37, said:

The flower is most likely a Heliopsis.

I'm going to look through my stuff and see if I have a Heliopsis which matches the UV-signature on yours.

ADDED: https://www.ultravio...n-smooth-oxeye/
Wow, your UV photo is so much nicer than mine! This flower’s bullseye was barely distinguishable in my photos, and with the quartz lens, I can be sure the issue is not the bandpass. I still don’t own a Baader however, so I guess it might be the filter.

#12 dabateman

    Da Bateman

  • Members(+)
  • 1,122 posts
  • Location: Maryland

Posted 09 August 2019 - 16:45

View PostNemo Andrea, on 09 August 2019 - 10:22, said:



Ah I didn't realise that was a macro lens. On the topic, how would this macro lens stack up against something like a nikon fluor objective? Of course they gather less light due to different NA, but in terms of relative transmittance of ratio of UV to Visible?

EDIT: I cannot find transmittance data for the macro lens (the main website for the company is not working for me?) so im curious if its much better for UV than a UV compatible objective. I can imagine anything <350nm is not so interesting for microscopy and that only such dedicated lenses go beyond that.

Not too many microscope objectives I know of are rated for less than 340nm. Even the Nikon UV fluor objectives have a mixture of quartz and glass and only rated to 340nm. Regular Fluor are not rated for UV, but can work. Just trial and error on the facility. You must be a microscopist. I haven't seen too many here thinking in terms of objectives. Its been about 10 years now since I have been in front of a proper confocal scope.
But I do have some RMS objectives that I play with. Still haven't tested their UV range though.
The Resolve 60mm Macro lens as Andy mentioned is a C-mount quartz lens. We were lucky to get at about 5 to 10% of the new price. Its optimized for UVC imaging. And I am now learning how to fully use it. Just figured out yesterday, how to image a wider field in UVC. You need to balance the lens focus point with the imagers eye focuser. Seems that they work together. The system we have included a phosphor detector to convert UV signal into visible light. I have mounted a regular Olympus Em5mk2 or Panasonic GM5 to the imager to snap a photo.

#13 Andrea B.

    Desert Dancer

  • Owner-Administrator
  • 7,425 posts
  • Location: USA

Posted 09 August 2019 - 17:22

Wow, your UV photo is so much nicer than mine! This flower’s bullseye was barely distinguishable in my photos, and with the quartz lens, I can be sure the issue is not the bandpass. I still don’t own a Baader however, so I guess it might be the filter.

If you like, send me the raw and I'll see whether processing has anything to do with it.
Andrea G. Blum
Often found hanging out with flowers & bees.