Jump to content
UltravioletPhotography

Helianthus annuus [Common Sunflower]


Chelidon

Recommended Posts

Giglio, F. (2020) Helianthus annuus L. (Asteraceae) Common Sunflower. Flowers photographed in ultraviolet and visible light. UV-induced visible fluorescence also shown. https://www.ultravio...nuus-sunflower/

 

Specimen

Sunflower at the early stage of blossoming collected from a cultivated crop. Flower stem was kept for some days in a water jug to follow the complete blossoming, all the photographs were taken in a dark room.

Location

Fiorenzuola, Italy

Date

19-24 July 2020

 

Operations

The UV reflectance photos were shot using long exposure and doing light painting with a Convoy S2+ (Nichia 365 nm), using a modified camera. The second of the two photo was shot after 5 days.

The visible photo was shot with standard tungsten light (dark-body spectrum centered on orange), using a standard camera.

The UV flourescence photo was shot using long exposure and doing light painting with a Convoy S2+ (Nichia 365 nm), using a standard camera.

 

1) VIS, ISO 100, f/8.0, 4 s

post-316-0-88932800-1596203451.jpg

2) UVIF, ISO 100, f/8.0, 15 s

post-316-0-56487700-1596203461.jpg

3) UVa, ISO 80, f/4.0, 4 s

post-316-0-89172300-1596203504.jpg

4) UVa, ISO 80, f/5.6, 8 s

post-316-0-00050100-1596203523.jpg

 

Comments

I know it is a popular subject to start with, but I have found interesting to notice how much change the center disk because of the opening of the disk florets during blossoming. In image 3 only the disk florets on the external circumference are starting to release the pollen, while image 4, after 5 days, shows the disk completely covered with pollen. The UV reflectance of the disk changes mainly because of the pollen fluorescence which brightens up the contrast with the well-known bull's-eye pattern in the corolla. Conversely, the ligulae on the corolla do not show any evident modification. The pollen fluorescence is shown clearly in image 2. I have not taken the same UVIF after 5 days, but it was obviously very brightly fluorescent when illuminated. In image 3 there are even some droplets on the disk that could be seen also on image 1 for reference. I suppose it was nectar and not mist.

 

Reference

1. Wikipedia (2020) Helianthus annuus. Wikimedia Foundation, San Francisco, CA.

 

Hope you enjoyed.

Link to comment
Pardon, lingulae instead of ligulae it is obviously a lapsus linguae (it is a fine verbal joke), due to the closer meaning of tongue in my latin rooted mother language. :lol:
Link to comment
Andy Perrin

Heee. Nice photos! Is there a benefit to going below ISO100?

 

Also, what cameras and lens and filters did you use for the shots? I think that belongs on the formal entries?

Link to comment
My sunflowers still have to bloom. Maybe I planted the seeds too late (I think in May). I hope they will bloom this year.
Link to comment

Fabio, grazie for this excellent contribution to the botanical section.

 

(I will later make minor edits so that the post is index-able and search-able.)

Link to comment

Thanks, I would have liked to edit for the typo errors but I have found the locked edit button.

Heee. Nice photos! Is there a benefit to going below ISO100?

 

Also, what cameras and lens and filters did you use for the shots? I think that belongs on the formal entries?

Ah well... no benefit at all! :lol: They are simply two different cameras (the first two images are taken with a standard not modified, the others two simply cannot) with different base ISO. I will explain later in another thread about this equipment, because I prefer to discuss widely about the pros/cons of this solution that is pretty cheap. Obviously UV reflectance was made with a two filter stack, otherwise I would have collected a lot of fluorescence signal.

 

At the moment I will just let you the spectra for that stack I measured with a spectrometer.

post-316-0-49412700-1596358013.jpg

I think it helps to frame the two UV reflectance images (3, 4).

post-316-0-20258200-1596358789.jpg

For the two visible images (1, 2) the spectral sensitivity should be (not exactly is, probably: pentax, sony never disclose anything about it) similar to this one more or less (taken from this reference).

Link to comment
Andy Perrin

Interesting. Please do make that equipment thread, it’s not good to be too mysterious about these things since the point of having this board is to share technical details as well as photos. And we cannot properly interpret a photo without those details, or help with any problems.

 

Re your stack - that will certainly leak infrared in sunlight. In general if any IR bump is visible on a linear scale spectrum then it will contaminate an image in sun.

Link to comment

Re your stack - that will certainly leak infrared in sunlight. In general if any IR bump is visible on a linear scale spectrum then it will contaminate an image in sun.

Maybe it is a second-order diffraction spectrum (if his spectrometer uses a diffraction grating). Otherwise, if that is infrared, it will certainly leak quite a lot.
Link to comment
The Asteraceae species like Helianthus have ligulate florets (peripheral rays) and disc florets (centre).
Link to comment

Editor's Note: Minor changes made for indexing and terminology. Typo fixed.

Chelidon, please let me know of any problems with changes.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
Depending on which camera you have, I've measured the spectral response of the Sony A7III here (modified for multispectral and standard); https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/project-mirrorless-part-1-the-beginning/ https://jmcscientificconsulting.com/imaging/project-mirrorless-part-2-the-camera-conversion/

Really interesting, have you used 10 nm data resolution on the whole range from 280 to 800 nm? Basically you are measuring the combination response so different result could be due both to filters array and sensor sensitivity; it would be interesting compare other cameras.

Interesting. Please do make that equipment thread, it’s not good to be too mysterious about these things since the point of having this board is to share technical details as well as photos. And we cannot properly interpret a photo without those details, or help with any problems. Re your stack - that will certainly leak infrared in sunlight. In general if any IR bump is visible on a linear scale spectrum then it will contaminate an image in sun.

Yes the mentioned stack has a clear leakage, anyway, it is not so worrisome in a controlled stage as in this case. Obviously with sun illumination, outside on the field, the results are partly contaminated, but in some cases I have reached a decent outcome adding a third filter to the stack.

I will do make the equipment thread, but I want to do properly with data (that's why I am characterizing the stacks spectra) and not claiming something on impressions. At the moment the biggest issue I have been facing is the little amount of time I have and the limited internet connection due to moving home. I wish to have more material to post soon.

Link to comment

Really interesting, have you used 10 nm data resolution on the whole range from 280 to 800 nm? Basically you are measuring the combination response so different result could be due both to filters array and sensor sensitivity; it would be interesting compare other cameras.

 

My resolution is 20nm. I do my measurements using a Rayfact 105mm UV lens on the camera where the transmission is essentially flat from 280nm to 800nm which is the region I can measure. Unless stated with the measurement details I do not put filters on the lens for those measurements. So these are sensor response (with the filters on the sensor present if they haven't been removed). I've measured a few Canon and Nikon cameras too (in various states of modification), and a Sigma SD14.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...