How Does Macro and Micro Photography Enhance Our Understanding of Butterflies?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andy Resnick
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photography
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around macro photography techniques and the challenges of achieving sharp images at high magnifications. A user shares their experience photographing flowers and small objects like a ball bearing, highlighting the need for stable optomechanical equipment due to the minuscule depth of focus at high magnifications. They showcase various images taken with different lenses, noting the sharpness and minimal chromatic aberration, while also pointing out the optical effects observed at extreme magnifications, such as speckle and diffraction. The conversation also touches on solutions for enhancing depth of field in macro photography, including using multiple images focused at different planes to create a composite with greater depth of field. Links to resources and programs for depth of field enhancement are shared, alongside a mention of deconvolution techniques. The thread concludes with a light-hearted exchange about photographing insects, with references to parasitic relationships in nature, showcasing the blend of scientific observation and artistic photography.
Andy Resnick
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
7,663
Reaction score
3,709
The "butterflies" thread has inspired me to get my act together and take some proper images. I spent a couple hours (!) last night trying to take a picture of a flower, but at the magnifications I am working at, I need the optomechanical equipment in my lab to keep everything stable. To see why, here's the flower:

http://a.imageshack.us/img686/2918/dsc00403t.jpg

It looks ok, but that's my limit. Here's a 100% crop of the same flower, using the 16mm Luminar:

http://a.imageshack.us/img153/2244/16flower.jpg

I got lucky with this shot- notice the miniscule depth of focus.

So today, I set up everything on some rail and took images of a 1/32" ball bearing sitting on some foam. I illuminated it with a LumenPro metal halide source coupled into a liquid light guide- no diffuser. The light is so bright the glint off the bearing was enough to blind me. Here it is with the 63mm, stopped down most of the way:

http://a.imageshack.us/img266/6576/dsc00468xc.jpg

And here it is wide open, followed by a 100% crop-
http://a.imageshack.us/img266/2705/dsc00461i.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img294/1764/63mmball.jpg

The detail is quite good, and there is little chromatic aberration- dig the bokeh!

Now stepping up the the 25mm: again, full frame and a 100% crop

http://a.imageshack.us/img840/4047/dsc00465e.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img294/5230/25mmball.jpg

Again, the image is quite sharp, but the depth of focus is so small that the detail appears out of focus.

Now the 16mm:

http://a.imageshack.us/img294/6281/dsc00470eo.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img840/1953/16mmball.png

This is where things get interesting- the depth of focus is negligible, and what you are seeing in the crop is not blur, but speckle. The magnification and sharpness of this lens is sufficient to resolve speckle from an extended, broadband source.

Just for fun, I stuck on a 16x epiplan objective and took an image of one of the plastic foam flecks. The full-frame image is rather dull, but the 100% crop shows an interesting optical effect: diffraction off the sharp edge and interference:

http://a.imageshack.us/img251/2343/16xfoam.jpg

The colors are real, not chromatic aberration. I suspect they are interference fringes caused by a varying thickness of the 'flake'. The diffraction off the edge is pretty cool, too (IMO)- I count 7 periods.

Something I find interesting in this sequence, is that there is a definite change around 10X magnification- the images change from being recognizable (but magnified), to unfamiliar and confusing. Hopefully there's enough time left in the summer to explore this a little more...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Andy Resnick said:
... notice the miniscule depth of focus...

To solve that issue, maybe notice this post in the photomanipulation thread:

Andre said:
Another trick I stumbled upon is depth of field enhancing. Especially when shooting macro the very shallow depth of field can be embarrashing like this:


2rp6yab.jpg


Body crisp, wings blurry.

The Depth of Field enhancing works with multiple pictures too, focussed in different planes also merged together. Obviously taking multiple pix requires an absolute static situation, so you'd have to work with static objects too e.g. dead insects. Not my style.

Anyway I found some info and programs for that, maybe I give it a try:

http://www.microscopy-analysis.com/files/jwiley_microscopy/2008_May_Piper.pdf
http://www.janrik.net/ptools/ExtendedFocusPano12/index.html
http://www.saphicon.com/extended-depth-field.htm
http://hadleyweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/CZM/News.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've heard of those programs, but haven't tried them.

I use a deconvolution program (an ImageJ plugin), and from what I can tell, the concept is the same. I should compare it to, say, Combine ZP..

Thanks!
 
Here's a Panasonic pocket-cam pic of a Japanese beetle. See the raised white dot on the carapace? This beetle is a goner. That's the egg of a parasitic fly, and in a couple of days the wonderful little maggot will burrow into the beetle and start eating it alive. The beetle will drop to the ground and dig into try to get away from the attack, giving the maggot a nice safe place to eat and mature.
JapanesePar.jpg
 
turbo-1 said:
Here's a Panasonic pocket-cam pic of a Japanese beetle. See the raised white dot on the carapace? This beetle is a goner. That's the egg of a parasitic fly, and in a couple of days the wonderful little maggot will burrow into the beetle and start eating it alive. The beetle will drop to the ground and dig into try to get away from the attack, giving the maggot a nice safe place to eat and mature.

Heh... I guess that makes you a photo*journalist*. Prime directive and all that...
 
Andy Resnick said:
Heh... I guess that makes you a photo*journalist*. Prime directive and all that...
Well, at least I don't deal in "bug porn" like Pooh does. :devil:
 
Would that bug you? :biggrin:

20z1nh5.jpg
 
:smile::smile:
 
Talking about bugs, I was cleaning out my bug folder and came across some nice ones that I had not shared before.

Hovering bumble bee visits fuchsia.

256afs9.jpg


more to follow
 
  • #10
Hornet, busy with 'harvesting' wood for her nest

vi1mq8.jpg



Aphids on a rosebud

2nib4b8.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • #11
All animals eat. Damselflies eat other flies.

2uepw9e.jpg
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top