Damon Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I took some even closer up UVIVFL pics of my little sunflower. This process of stacking images is also a process of patience. No joke, I literally, ever so slightly, touched my rig with the bottom of a Sam Adams Octoberfest and my 30 shot stack was ruined! It put the subsequent photos out of alignment too much. Since I had to wait 20 seconds in between shots--time becomes something you pay when doing this. But who cares if you are doing something you like I suppose. So I put 93mm of extension tubes between my canon 20D and my 100mm macro--it looked almost humorous. But it worked! I had to rig up a support for the lens as just hooking it up by using the camera screw mount was not a sound way because the whole combination was bending a little--kinda scary. I also had to dig out an old Minolta focusing rail I got from a yard sale years ago because I couldn't turn the lens barrel with enough accuracy to work for my taste. I will post a pic of it under the techniques section.Loss of light was significant but not impossible to overcome with my closely placed Blak-Rays screaming UV. I also decided at least for now to eliminate the visible light shot to compare--it just takes too long. Shorter stacks maybe I will do both. For this one--a regular shot compared to the macro. UVIVFL: Canon 20D Unmodified, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 5 s @ f/8 ISO 100, No Filters. UVIVFL: Canon 20D Unmodified, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 20 s @ f/6.3 ISO 100, No Filters. -D Link to comment
nfoto Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 As other members have commented, these images are coming out very well. Kudos for patience and invested efforts. However, I notice that your Blak-Rays apparently leads to much longer exposure times than I see with my Nichia UV-LED torch shooting otherwise similar setups. A typical exposure there being around f/11 @ 4-8 seconds. Link to comment
Damon Posted November 24, 2014 Author Share Posted November 24, 2014 Thanks! What ISO are you shooting in your typical exposure? I am shooting iso 80 or 100.I guess the LED is just brighter than this old technology. When I wasn't stacking so many extension tubes I was getting much faster times.I think the Blak-Rays are not super bright like I mentioned somewhere else, but the quality of light is very good. I was able to get a UV meter off ebay that should tell me what the wavelength they really are. Someday I will get one of those Nichia UV-LED torches and try it out--and then maybe pile all my Blak-Rays in a corner. :) I would love to take one of those torches and walk around at night side by side with a Blak-Ray.For now, as long as my setup is working I'll keep plugging along. -D Link to comment
nfoto Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 ISO 100, like you specified for your own work. Link to comment
Damon Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 I did realize something today regarding my long exposure times. It is not always the case. It is dependent on the brightness of the fluorescence occurring. For example, even with my half a foot long extension tube I was getting 2.5s shutter speeds @ f8 tonight while taking a sphagnum. The one which is seen below was taken with the small extension removed. That is some strange stuff. When I went in as far I as could, I started seeing what looked like cellular structures. Pretty translucent--and cool! Sphagnum moss spp.UVIVFL: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 100mm macro & extension tubes, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 2 s @ f/9 ISO 100, No Filters. Shield lichen spp.UVIVFL: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 100mm macro & extension tubes, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 2 s @ f/8 ISO 200, No Filters. -D Link to comment
colinbm Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Beaut work DamonWhat magnification are you getting with this magnificent photography ?Col Link to comment
Damon Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 Good question. How do I figure that out?I have a 1.6X crop factor camera, 100 macro, & 93 mm of extension tubes. The sphagnum above I now think was taken with the 20 mm removed. That sphagnum looks almost alien.That same lichen pic when fully maxed out, I got the whole center filled in by that larger purple fruiting body thing to the left. This is the most fun I have had with photography in a while. -D Link to comment
Damon Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 100mm macro I meant. Link to comment
colinbm Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Hi DamonLook at the specs for your cameras sensor size, about 20 something mm.If you place a ruler in the image & it shows the same measure as the sensor's width, then you have 1:1 ratio, the same size.If the ruler is showing half the sensors width then, you have 2:1 magnification, double size :)Col Link to comment
Damon Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 I will have to go do some measuring of my items. I am over 1:1 in most of the ones I have shot recently for sure. My lens by itself does that. Here a few more from tonight: Lichen spp. No stacking on this.Visible Light: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 100mm macro, Full spectrum lamp, 2.5 s @ f/25 ISO 100, No Filters. UVIVFL: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 100mm macro, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 1.3 s @ f/8 ISO 100, No Filters. Closer in on the few fruiting bodies in the upper right of the previous image. Same setup but 2s shutter & extension tubes. So you get a sense of scale -D Link to comment
nfoto Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 With all those rings you might go to approx. twice life size when the lens on its own does 1:1. However, shoot a ruler and the question is answered once and for all. Remember magnification is a scale factor so does not depend on the actual film format as such. Meaning the same lens extension gives the same magnification no matter what camera the lens is placed on. Link to comment
colinbm Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 You have some wonderful vegetation types there to photograph Damon.Keep up the great work.Col Link to comment
Damon Posted November 27, 2014 Author Share Posted November 27, 2014 I measured the little blue guys above, horizontally and got ~over 11mm. My sensor is 22.5 across. So around 1.9X. So Bjørn is right, as he seems to be a lot of times. I will trip him up someday. Thanks for the info Col and thanks for the magnification fact Bjørn. I got another lens to try out today. It's getting pretty crazy in my little shed let me tell you! So I tried a Canon MP-E 65mm macro. Which goes from 1-5X natively. So I took some close ups of the sphagnum again. But this time, with the MP-E at 5x and of course all my 93mm's of extension tubes as well. Whoah! I think I have almost 6.5X now! Not totally sure though because I can't measure something that small accurately with my ruler. Not only that, but a whole new set of exciting challenges arrived to test me. First and foremost is the fact that even with my fine focusing Minolta rail, I am having a hard time turning it finely enough. The motor Col showed me should help that though. Enough UV light is becoming an issue too. I may need to start cranking my ISO up and see what happens. I suspect that I am approaching some kind of camera lens limit. Don't know if I can go much further in and not have diffraction and stuff start to happen. Also don't know if I know what I am talking about there so might all be good. But this is far enough for now. :) Check out the photos below: This first one was near the end of one of the long arms of the plant and you can see some kind of cell looking structures. Sphagnum moss spp.UVIVFL: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 65mm macro & 93mm of extension tubes, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 8 s @ f/8 ISO 125, No Filters. This one below has some kind of seeds or something in the some of the ends. Boy are they small. Need something for scale but don't know what yet.UVIVFL: Canon 30D Unmodified, Canon 65mm macro & 93mm of extension tubes, 3 Blak-Rays B-100AP, 30 s @ f/5.6 ISO 125, No Filters. -D Link to comment
colinbm Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Is this an electron microscope you are using Damon ??Col Link to comment
baffe Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Beautiful pics Damon! All of them! What software do you use for stacking? ! da baffe Link to comment
Damon Posted November 27, 2014 Author Share Posted November 27, 2014 Col--I think it's called a Redneck microscope. Thanks Baffe--I have been trying Zerene Stacker software. For me anyway, pics like these would not be possible without it. If I tried to stop down to f32 or something--there would never be enough light unless I had 10 Blak-Rays (hmmm, 10 Blak-Rays). :) Link to comment
baffe Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Perhaps stepped down to infinity and illuminated by a DIY nuclear-powered flash unit Damon? Link to comment
Damon Posted November 28, 2014 Author Share Posted November 28, 2014 We are on the same wavelength now (pun intended) You are good at making things. Can you put one together for me? -D Link to comment
baffe Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Far beyond the limits of my home laboratory... The last attempt at a really large flash led to a magnetic pulse that fried the electronic lens control of my rebel/eos300D! (It really did!) Better to use a stacker... Link to comment
Shane Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Just catching up on some postings I missed recently - Damon you have some nice fluorescence images in this posting. Link to comment
Damon Posted December 25, 2014 Author Share Posted December 25, 2014 Thanks Shane! If this is a holiday for you--hope you have a nice one. -D Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now