Cranefly genitalia

[flynet]

I found that the fine focus was slipping a bit in two parts of the range. I phoned the suppliers to ask if there was and tightening adjustment I could do, but they said " We will pick it up and check it and repair".

So it wlll be a while before I can resume work. I am not convinced that this is the problem of 'jumping' while stacking as it still happens if I hold the knob firmly.

[flynet]

As my new monocular is being fixed, I tried using an old Watson (100Years old?). As it has only a mirror for lighting, it is tricky to get this right. After some experimenting I found that closing down the diaphragm to the smallest aperture the details of the bristling (it is an oblique view of the hypopygium of an anthomyiid fly belonging to the genus Delia) were most distinct and in focus. But this made the photos dark. There were 23 stacks.

I rendered them with Helicon and the setse at each level were all clear but he output was dark. However after editing with Picasa (I generally use this and PSE12 for some tools) it was surprising how well the photo came to life.

I attach one of the stack photos and the finished result.

I originally thought that getting the best photo requiring little editing was the aim, but am not so sure now.

[flynet]

Photos seem to be missing!

[ChrisR]

If you've succeeded in Uploading them, but not inserted into the post,
Click Upload and you'll see a blue link Gallery .
Click that and all your pictures should appear (ater a delay).
Click Standard under the picture you want to insert.

Hope that helps!

[flynet]

[flynet]

Thanks Chris! I did not realise there was a gallery. The stack example is only shown in part? Any way to reduce the size on screen?

It surprises me that such a reasonable picture can be ediited from the poor stack, though all the 23 pictures have all the levels focussed.