Triceratium sp. A view inside and out in one image.

Images taken in a controlled environment or with a posed subject. All subject types.

Moderators: Pau, rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S.

Beatsy
Posts: 1648
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Triceratium sp. A view inside and out in one image.

Post by Beatsy »

The scene was constructed to simultaneously show the view from "inside" as a reflection. I'm rather pleased how it turned out. A 300-image stack shot with a 50x mitty running 33.75x onto crop mode sensor.
Image

Sym P. le
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Jul 04, 2019 9:53 pm
Location: BC

Post by Sym P. le »

I like it. The perspective and setting is very informative.

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1710
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

How did you setup for that?

Olympusman
Posts: 4600
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:31 pm

Triceratium

Post by Olympusman »

Wonderful shot.

Mike
Michael Reese Much FRMS EMS Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA

Sumguy01
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:05 pm
Location: Ketchikan Alaska USA

Post by Sumguy01 »

=D> Amazing.
Thanks for sharing.

Troels
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:06 am
Location: Denmark, Engesvang
Contact:

Post by Troels »

I really like when an extreme macro photo looks as if an ordinary 0.02 mm tall photographer has taken an picture with his ordinary 0.001 mm big camera. No problems, just a good photo.
Troels Holm, biologist (retired), environmentalist, amateur photographer.
Visit my Flickr albums

Beatsy
Posts: 1648
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Post by Beatsy »

Troels wrote:I really like when an extreme macro photo looks as if an ordinary 0.02 mm tall photographer has taken an picture with his ordinary 0.001 mm big camera. No problems, just a good photo.
Troels, you have absolutely made my day! Thanks for that comment. In one short phrase you described *exactly* the core goal within all my photography, but the high mag stuff in particular (because it's harder to do). I wouldn't have phrased it quite that way - but I think I might in future :D

The "...just a good photo" part is key. A little background: I have a deep and ongoing (but wholly good-natured) disagreement with a friend at our camera club. He says I should make sure people know that the "thing in the picture" is only a quarter of a millimetre tall so that they are completely wowed. Etc, etc. I strongly disagree. They must first be wowed by the picture *alone*. It doesn't matter if they never figure out it was something microscopic - if they like the picture, it worked. But it really is the icing on the cake when they do know (or learn) the scale involved.

Anyway - thanks again. It may only be confirmation bias on my part, but it feels nice when someone else "gets it" too!

Cheers
Beats

Beatsy
Posts: 1648
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Post by Beatsy »

Thanks everyone for your comments - appreciated as always.
Smokedaddy wrote:How did you setup for that?
The stack is standard stuff, 50x mitty on a rail. The diatom prep was pretty straightforward too. I just stuck it to a small glass bead melted onto the end of a capillary tube and bunged that in front of the mitty.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21034
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Beatsy wrote:The stack is standard stuff, 50x mitty on a rail. The diatom prep was pretty straightforward too. I just stuck it to a small glass bead melted onto the end of a capillary tube and bunged that in front of the mitty.
I love it! "Standard stuff", "pretty straightforward", but describing a result that 15 years ago would have been a heroic effort if even conceivable. This is why I sink so much time into supporting photomacrography.net.

--Rik

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 5164
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

Beatsy wrote:The "...just a good photo" part is key. A little background: I have a deep and ongoing (but wholly good-natured) disagreement with a friend at our camera club. He says I should make sure people know that the "thing in the picture" is only a quarter of a millimetre tall so that they are completely wowed. Etc, etc. I strongly disagree. They must first be wowed by the picture *alone*. It doesn't matter if they never figure out it was something microscopic - if they like the picture, it worked. But it really is the icing on the cake when they do know (or learn) the scale involved.
I only partially agree: I'm familiar with Triceratium and I find the picture absolutely amazing, although without a sense of the scale -and of the difficulty of imaging it with glass optics- the image alone would be just good: imagine that it was an ashtray on a gift store shelf :-k
Pau

Beatsy
Posts: 1648
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Post by Beatsy »

Pau wrote:
Beatsy wrote:The "...just a good photo" part is key. A little background: I have a deep and ongoing (but wholly good-natured) disagreement with a friend at our camera club. He says I should make sure people know that the "thing in the picture" is only a quarter of a millimetre tall so that they are completely wowed. Etc, etc. I strongly disagree. They must first be wowed by the picture *alone*. It doesn't matter if they never figure out it was something microscopic - if they like the picture, it worked. But it really is the icing on the cake when they do know (or learn) the scale involved.
I only partially agree: I'm familiar with Triceratium and I find the picture absolutely amazing, although without a sense of the scale -and of the difficulty of imaging it with glass optics- the image alone would be just good: imagine that it was an ashtray on a gift store shelf :-k
Oh sure - I didn't mean to say this image was a "wow" on it's own. It isn't, but the audience here is well aware of the scale and the difficulties making it - so it gets a "lift" from that. :) I meant images presented to the general public, exhibition or book or just prints etc.

Edit: and that's what I'm aiming for. One day. This image *is* a stepping stone in that direction - for me.
Last edited by Beatsy on Fri May 15, 2020 2:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Beatsy
Posts: 1648
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 3:10 am
Location: Malvern, UK

Post by Beatsy »

rjlittlefield wrote:
Beatsy wrote:The stack is standard stuff, 50x mitty on a rail. The diatom prep was pretty straightforward too. I just stuck it to a small glass bead melted onto the end of a capillary tube and bunged that in front of the mitty.
I love it! "Standard stuff", "pretty straightforward", but describing a result that 15 years ago would have been a heroic effort if even conceivable. This is why I sink so much time into supporting photomacrography.net.

--Rik
Haha. Sorry, I didn't mean to be flippant about it, but thanks to your much-appreciated efforts and input from so many other contributors on this site, a lot of these things have become simply routine now. Took 7 years to get there though. Slow learner... :)

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21034
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Beatsy wrote: Sorry, I didn't mean to be flippant about it
No worries -- I did not read flippancy, just acknowledgement that, as you say, a lot of these things have become simply routine now. It's been great fun, and very rewarding, to watch the evolution.

--Rik

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic