Microscope pictures - photomicrographs

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the sharing and appreciation of photomicrographs taken through microscopes, with a focus on various substances including recrystallized ascorbic acid and other chemical compounds. Participants share their images, express admiration, and discuss the techniques and experiences related to microscopy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Participants share various photomicrographs, highlighting the beauty of the images and the effects of polarized light.
  • Some participants express that the images would be suitable for display in an art gallery.
  • There is a discussion about the visual interpretations of the images, with some participants seeing faces or other shapes in the crystals.
  • One participant mentions their experience with petrological microscopes and the aesthetics of rocks under magnification.
  • Another participant shares their own photomicrographs taken with a new camera setup, detailing the types of microscopy used (epi-DIC and trans-DIC).
  • There is a conversation about the evolution of digital cameras and their capabilities in capturing microscope images compared to disposable film cameras.
  • Some participants inquire about the specifics of the microscopes used and the types of images produced.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express admiration for the shared images, but there are varying opinions on the interpretation of the visuals and the technical aspects of microscopy. The discussion includes both agreement on the beauty of the images and differing views on the technical capabilities of cameras used in microscopy.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions touch on the limitations of earlier digital cameras in capturing quality images through microscopes, as well as the specific characteristics of various microscope types and their effects on image quality.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in microscopy, photography, crystallography, and the aesthetic aspects of scientific imaging may find this discussion valuable.

~christina~
Gold Member
Messages
714
Reaction score
0
These are some pictures I have taken through the microscope. All of the pictures are of recrystalized ascorbic acid except for the last two. The last two are of NH4 with perchloric acid (clear crystals) and chloroplatinic acid (yellow) respectively.

[PLAIN]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/40/img0157w.jpg [PLAIN]http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/3545/img0176y.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/8564/img0092w.jpg [PLAIN]http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/1771/img0095t.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/8066/img0085v.jpg [PLAIN]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/824/img0169x.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/9308/img0140lq.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/6563/img0158s.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/6413/img0143e.jpg [PLAIN]http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/3142/dsc5419.jpg

[PLAIN]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/4408/imgp8592.jpg [PLAIN]http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/6676/imgp8744.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Wow, those are really cool!
 
lisab said:
Wow, those are really cool!

Thanks lisab :smile:
 
Nice ones, polarized light makes wonders.
 
Borek said:
Nice ones, polarized light makes wonders.

I wholeheartedly agree, Borek. Thanks
 
Excellent .They would look great hanging on the walls of an art gallery.
:approve:
 
Funny thing, many years ago I was playing with computer graphic effect called plasma - there many variants, some of them very similar to some of the pictures.
 
Dadface said:
Excellent .They would look great hanging on the walls of an art gallery.
:approve:
thanks Dadface :smile:

Borek said:
Funny thing, many years ago I was playing with computer graphic effect called plasma - there many variants, some of them very similar to some of the pictures.

Really? It sounds colourful :biggrin:

P.S. I think I've caught your condition for seeing faces in random places. I see odd faces in the first picture on the bottom (yellow one). Maybe it's just me? lol :rolleyes:
 
~christina~ said:
I think I've caught your condition for seeing faces in random places. I see odd faces in the first picture on the bottom (yellow one). Maybe it's just me? lol :rolleyes:

You mean it is contagious?
 
  • #10
Borek said:
You mean it is contagious?

:bugeye: It must be!
 
  • #11
~christina~ said:
thanks Dadface :smile:



Really? It sounds colourful :biggrin:

P.S. I think I've caught your condition for seeing faces in random places. I see odd faces in the first picture on the bottom (yellow one). Maybe it's just me? lol :rolleyes:

I see hungry baby birds, with their mouths wide open :eek:.
 
  • #12
I said it in chat, and I'll say it again. Those are awesome christina! You have a great eye.
 
  • #13
Excellent! I love cross polarisation. I used petrological microscopes a lot a few years ago and rocks look very very pretty massively magnified. I wish we'd had a decent microscope camera and I wish I'd had chance to use the one we had more often.

Here's some of the rock I'd studied for my dissertation:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the-matt/tags/dinantian/
 
  • #14
lisab said:
I see hungry baby birds, with their mouths wide open :eek:.
:bugeye: I see oddly grinning faces.
Evo said:
I said it in chat, and I'll say it again. Those are awesome christina! You have a great eye.
Thanks again, Evo! :biggrin:
matthyaouw said:
Excellent! I love cross polarisation. I used petrological microscopes a lot a few years ago and rocks look very very pretty massively magnified. I wish we'd had a decent microscope camera and I wish I'd had chance to use the one we had more often.

Here's some of the rock I'd studied for my dissertation:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/the-matt/tags/dinantian/
Thanks matthhyaouw!

Very interesting photos. Is that microscope, which you call a 'petrolological microscope,' a polarized light microscope? It looks exactly like the microscope I used (Olympus BH-2 PLM).

BTW I love your photos on Flickr!
 
  • #15
~christina~ said:
petrolological microscope

lolol
 
  • #16
~christina~;2765469Thanks matthhyaouw! Very interesting photos. Is that microscope said:
I forget exactly what it was but I'm pretty sure it was polarised light. It would produce similar effects to what's in your photos (though less dramatic on most minerals.)
Also thanks, glad you like them.
 
  • #17
Borek said:
lolol
Petrological :redface:

matthyaouw said:
I forget exactly what it was but I'm pretty sure it was polarised light. It would produce similar effects to what's in your photos (though less dramatic on most minerals.)
Also thanks, glad you like them.

I had to look at various minerals in the lab under polarized light. (i.e. hornblende, gypsum, calcite, etc.) I liked the ones that weren't isotropic. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #18
I envy you, Christina.

Very cool.
 
  • #19
Ms Music said:
I envy you, Christina.

Very cool.

Hehe, thanks Ms Music :smile:
 
  • #20
Cool ~christina~, nice pics.
 
  • #21
drizzle said:
Cool ~christina~, nice pics.

Thanks drizzle :smile:
 
  • #22
[PLAIN]http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/5294/imgp1059f.jpg

Olefin fiber under crossed polars.

[PLAIN]http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3830/imgp0646i.jpg

My hair under crossed polars.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
Here's a few I took today, with my new camera (Sony a850). It's sitting on a Zeiss Ultraphot III, and all except one are taken using epi-DIC. The oddball is trans-DIC. All images were cropped and re-sized (I hope...). I also have a set of Luminars, and those images may appear someday.

Ok- here's a ding in a superpolished quartz window (16x):

http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/904/dsc00170ka.jpg

This is a razor blade (8x):

http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/7838/razorbladefull.jpg

Mica (4x):

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/2848/dsc00194pd.jpg

Pyrite (Fool's gold), 16X:

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9639/dsc00180vx.jpg

Tiger's eye (4x)
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/4481/dsc00177o.jpg

Agate (4x):
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/7128/dsc00183gu.jpg

And finally, dried culture media (trans DIC, 16x)

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/6849/dsc00168b.jpg

There will be more...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
Stunning!
 
  • #25
Thanks! The joke is, in 2010 we finally have digital cameras that can take pictures comparable to a disposable film camera... :)
 
  • #26
Andy, could you please elaborate on that? Thanks.
 
  • #27
Andre said:
Andy, could you please elaborate on that? Thanks.

I think Andy is referring to the fact that the earlier digital cameras took poor quality pictures through a microscope.

The point and shoots were really bad because the auto focus simply wouldn't focus through a microscope.

Fairly good pictures could be taken with an inexpensive fixed focus disposable film camera.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...m=1&hl=en&sa=N&rlz=1R2GGLL_enUS386&tbs=isch:1
 
Last edited:
  • #28
I meant that now we have full-frame 35mm format DSLRs.

I suppose we could argue that an APS-C format just re-scales the focal length of typical lenses (i.e. 85 mm goes to 127 mm, IIRC), but I feel that full-frame sensor let's me take full advantage of certain lenses: my luminars, for example, are actually ok all the way out to a 4x5 camera; why constrain myself to a tiny central area?

The vignetting you are seeing in some of the photomicrographs are from the fact that microscope image sizes have been able to remain small: the human eye only needs a 26mm diameter image size (IIRC), and the c-mount spec didn't force any changes. I have a lens that I am going to try and push to a 35mm image size- a 100x na 1.47; I'm not sure it will work.

So I was being a little snarky- the camera sensor is (nearly) identical to a disposable film camera; obviously putting a good lens on (like my 85/1.4 Planar) is pure glory. Anyone have a spare Noctilux? :)
 
  • #29
Ah well the Sony A-850 is indeed a first, the first full frame DSLR under $2000, but some full frame cameras have been introduced in the beginning of this century like the Canon 1D and the Kodak DCS-14n,
 
  • #30
I was looking at the 1D (also the Nikon D3x)- but as you say, those were >$8k.

You know as well as I do that it's the lens that matters (and the photographer!) at this level of performance.

IMO, the consumer market has completely obliterated the 'film' market- as a result, it's possible to get some amazing lenses for pennies: My Ultraphot was *free*, and came completely tricked out- it was used by a materials science company to evaluate steels, and it could only use polaroid film packs. Since those basically went the way of the dodo, the company had the beast stashed in a corner gathering dust. I was at the right place at the right time- it was mine for the cost of carting it away.

So now, by spending $100 for some adapters, I have a full-on macro lens set (I'll post some pics tomorrow). Not to mention a high-performing metallurgical scope.