Moth prisoner of the Venus flytrap - 100 stack

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

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

ckatosmith
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:59 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Moth prisoner of the Venus flytrap - 100 stack

Post by ckatosmith »

I've had this Venus flytrap for over a year. Recently I mentioned it was probably time to feed it. Ahem, I didn't know the 'boys' in the house would try this! I am not sure if the black eye was congenital or a post mortem effect, as I didn't even notice this until doing the StackShot series. (Nikon D800E, Micro Zoom Nikkor 70-180mm with a Raynox Macroscopic lens DCR-250)

I also decided to revisit the Zerene tutorials for a 'refresher' and decided to do a second Dmap, as suggested in the Advanced tutorial. Wow, so glad I did. It really cleans up the distortions in the background :)

Another change I have personally made this year is to use continuous lighting for stack shots instead of flash/strobes... soooo much easier, and it would never have occurred to me if I hadn't bought some (continuous) lighting since I am learning videography.

Next on my adventure list is to try and hook up a StackShot motor to my Nikon Eclipse E200 fine tune knob, as shown by Rik. I ordered the Stepper Motor from Cognisys today. Rik's 'embarrassingly simple' (his words, not mine!) post is right at my level of understanding.... so thanks!

Carolina


Image

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23626
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Carolina, this looks excellent except I'm wondering about the color balance. It seems too green. But if it really is, then I can't tell whether that's due to the illumination or due to reflections from the green plant. What illumination are you using? Have you done a custom white balance with it?

--Rik

PS. I'm glad you found that StackShot / fine focus post helpful. I see in a quick scan of the forum index that that thread has been read 14,297 times as of today. There's no telling how many of those (more likely how few!) got anything useful from it, but at least it has some possibility of impact.

ckatosmith
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:59 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Post by ckatosmith »

Rik,

Thank you for your comments. I thought similar but decided to leave it as is since the flytrap really is that bright green, so I chalked it up to color cast from the plant spilling to the underside of the moth.

I did not do a grey card custom balance. I did use the WB setting of Kelvin on my camera to match my CFL lights (2700 Kelvin) which has served me well for other shots. And there were 12 bulbs, so a lot of light.

So I wasn't sure if I should/could correct the color light spill??

The setup is still up, so I'll look again tomorrow for a cast with my naked eyes when the lights are on versus off.

If I have any questions re the StackShot to microscope focus knob setup, should I start a new thread or continue on your original post?

I'm thinking your post should be kept 'on top' for the topic.

I also just ordered a CamRanger and think it would be nice to continue on a CamRanger thread instead of making every question a 'new post'. Any druthers in that regard?

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23626
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

About the color, you really can't trust your eyes. Fluorescent bulbs of all sorts are notorious for looking green to the camera even when they look fine to your eyes. The problem is that the spectrum they produce is quiite spiky, not smooth and continuous like what a hot black body radiator produces. As a result, that specification of "2700 Kelvin" is not a true color temperature, it's just a statement of what the light from the CFL looks like to human eyes.

I strongly recommend doing a custom white balance. Even then, there's some possibility that some subjects won't look quite right, because of a problem called "metamerism". You can read about that elsewhere. Basically it's a matter of how wiggles in the illumination spectrum match up with wiggles in the reflectance spectra of different subjects. Illuminate with one light and two subjects look the same, illuminate with a different light and they look different.

About your other questions, it's OK to post as replies to old threads if that seems to produce a better flow.

--Rik

ckatosmith
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:59 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Post by ckatosmith »

Thanks for your thoughts. Yes, I should progress to custom WB. At least I try to move beyond Auto WB! I am roughly acquainted with metamerism from my printing forays with different papers (inkjet).

I still think there is a color cast from the light reflecting onto the moth from the plant... the moth 'collar' higher up seems to have fared better. But a custom WB would have reduced the confounding variables.

And I am not sure (lack of knowledge) if that (reflected color cast) can be corrected/avoided, though perhaps using less light, but longer exposures might be something to consider? In time, I will likely upgrade the continuous lighting to 5000K LEDs, but this is what I have for now.

Open to suggestions/comments for future shoots from all. Thank you again. Carolina

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23626
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

ckatosmith wrote:And I am not sure (lack of knowledge) if that (reflected color cast) can be corrected/avoided, though perhaps using less light, but longer exposures might be something to consider?
If there's a color cast on the moth due to light bouncing off the leaf, then that cast would be very difficult to take out. I won't even say "difficult to correct" because in that case the camera would be capturing a real effect that would be seen by any sensor. Taking it out would be more like painting a picture based on imagination of what the scene would look like if only the light were not bouncing around as it actually does. The cast might be reduced or avoided by altering the scene and directing the light differently so as to light the moth with more direct light and less reflected light, but that seems far more trouble than it's worth.

Simply changing the amount of light and the length of exposure will not affect color casts very much, or in any predictable way.

In the bad old days of film there was an issue with "reciprocity" that could introduce consistent and noticeable color shifts on very long or very short exposures. In principle something similar could occur with digital because of charge buildup due to leakage instead of photons, but as a matter of practice I've never heard anybody talk about it. If it does occur at all, it would be automatically backed out by custom WB shot at the same shutter speed as the images of subject.

There is still an issue that some types of illumination change color depending on exactly when you trigger the exposure. I have seen some old-style fluorescent bulbs change color noticeably and cyclically in sync with the AC line power. This is most evident in videos shot to the NTSC spec of 29.97 frames/sec versus 60 Hz AC power to the illumination, especially when the camera is set to use an effective exposure time of 1/125 second or shorter. What happens then is that the exposure window for each frame slowly drifts across the AC power cycle, so that for a while the camera is exposing near the start of every power cycle, then the middle, then the end, then the start again, and so on. As a result, any color shift that is synced to the AC power drifts slowly back and forth with a period of several seconds in the video. The effect had me really confused the first few times I saw it, because I thought it was the auto WB "hunting" and I couldn't understand why it might do that with fluorescent lighting but not with daylight or incandescent. That was the wrong idea. In fact the auto WB was locked in fine, it was the illumination that was hunting!

Flash units also change color a little depending on what power they're run at, plus some units vary in color randomly from one flash to the next, especially when they're run on low power such as 1/64. Those can be annoying, especially for stacking.

These are all really fine points. I mention them only because you seemed interested.

--Rik

ckatosmith
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 8:59 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Post by ckatosmith »

Thanks Rik,

Yes, always interested in explanations, even though I may not understand them fully after nth reading. Sometimes time (because of newly acquired knowledge base) helps... so always valued even though at many points I go, 'huh'? so thanks!

Lightbender57
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:05 am
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by Lightbender57 »

Newbie here....

Just for the sake of discussion, in Photoshop CC, open a new adjustment layer , Selective Color>Neutrals, Magenta +30 or so. This gets the moth to correct color but leaves the Venus bright green.
Nice work, sir!

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic