1999 AMI Wafer

Images made through a microscope. All subject types.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

1999 AMI Wafer

Post by Smokedaddy »

Yet another different wafer. I think the BW are interesting. Can't wait to do a nice panorama.

Image

Image

Image

Image

-JW:

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Here's a quick video of the 1999 5" AMI Idaho Wafer at 40x with a Mirau Interferometer objective on a Nikon MM-11 with universal epi illuminator using bright field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ-ke9Y0dB0

-JW:

Saul
Posts: 1780
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:59 am
Location: Naperville, IL USA
Contact:

Post by Saul »

3rd is impressive
Saul
μ-stuff

Olympusman
Posts: 5090
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:31 pm

Microprocessor

Post by Olympusman »

Lovely images.

Mike
Michael Reese Much FRMS EMS Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

... thanks.

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Image

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Thought I'd try a stereo image with Zerene. I struggled with this particular stereo image subject but Rik had the patience to work it out with me. I'm not stupid but sometimes procedures and terminology simply aren't clear to me. I thought it turned out pretty well considering the subject.

Image

-JW:

Saul
Posts: 1780
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:59 am
Location: Naperville, IL USA
Contact:

Post by Saul »

Smokedaddy wrote:...it turned out pretty well considering the subject...
Fully agree. Nice stereo
Saul
μ-stuff

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Challenging subject, nice result!

This one is entirely JW's work, by the way. The one I helped him with was a completely different stack.

I do wonder whether this is intended to be cross-eyed or parallel. It looks more "natural" to me if viewed parallel. That puts the big contact pads in front of the other structures, versus pads behind when viewed cross-eyed.

--Rik

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

My intent was only viewing with my Berezin Pocket 3Dvu glasses.

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

I shot this one with a green filter and converted it to BW. This turned out excellent 3D wise with my Pocket 3Duv glasses. Lot's of dept and layers are visible. Probably at least 6 layers .. very cool. Same camera 50D with 2.5x relay lens and a Nikon BD Plan APO 100/0.90. Only a 9 image stack.

Image

-JW:
Last edited by Smokedaddy on Mon Feb 26, 2018 9:14 am, edited 3 times in total.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Smokedaddy wrote:My intent was only viewing with my Berezin Pocket 3Dvu glasses.
Those are nice little tools, aren't they?

They give what I've called "parallel" view, with each eye seeing the image on its same side.
I shot this one with a green filter and converted it to BW.
That's beautiful! Much less obvious artifacts than the full-color version.

--Rik

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Thanks ... I really like the monochrome stereo image.

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Here's the same one with the green filter.

Image

-JW:

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23543
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Adding some technical information about the stereo...

JW tells me that the image is not cropped, but in addition to the 100X objective there was a 2.5X relay lens.

So then I work the numbers like this...

Depth is about 3 microns (9 frames @ 1/3 micron per frame)

Width is nominally 89.2 microns (22.3 mm sensor width, divided by 250X total optical magnification (=100*2.5))

-2% corresponds to view angle about -30.7 degrees. (Crosscheck using the formulas at zerenesystems.com: TAN(RADIANS(-30.7)) * (3/89.2) * 100 = -1.997)

+4% corresponds to view angle about 49.9 degrees. (Crosscheck: TAN(RADIANS(49.9)) * (3/89.2) * 100 = 3.994)

Total viewing angle is 80.7 degrees (=49.9+30.7, rounded from extra digits not shown) .

Typical max viewing angle in real life is only about 8-10 degrees (10 degrees = 2.5 inches between eyes, 14" viewing distance), so the stereo pair is exaggerating depth by about 10X. If you were able to look at something this small through a real stereo microscope, it would look a lot more flat.

Looking again this morning, I'm still really pleased by the gray-scale pair. Nice job, JW!

--Rik

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic