Saw fly details

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 8:33 am

I've been doing some stacking lately. It is really addictive. You can discover all kinds of weird features on the insects you photography. This is a saw fly. Now I know why they are called saw flies. They are actually little wasps (hymenoptera).

Wim

beetleman · Post by **beetleman** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 8:43 am

Just one word "Incredible" Wim

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:47 am

Really excellent -- keep 'em coming!

One cool thing about sawflies is that some of their larvae look very much like little caterpillars. I just about went nuts one time trying to key some out as Lepidoptera -- until I happened to notice that they had the wrong number of prolegs.

--Rik

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 6:43 pm

Wim, I've been looking again at these beautiful pictures, and I notice that they're apparently completely free of halo.

Are you willing to share your tricks for overcoming that problem?

Any other info about subject size and lenses would also be appreciated...

Thanks!

--Rik

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:33 am

Yes, of course I want to share the tricks I used. That's what this forum is for!

What I do at the moment is make 1 picture of the background without the insect. You can use this image to remove the halo with an opacity layer in photoshop. The stacks always need some retouching.

I have several more stacks but I have to find some time to post them.

I am addicted to stacking but luckily my camera stopped working and has to go to repairs. So now i have some time to do the archiving:) The weather has also turned bad.

I use a small 28mm Leitz photar lens on bellows. The subject size is small. I was too lazy to measure it:) I should put a bit more attention to this.

Wim

rjlittlefield · Post by **rjlittlefield** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:51 pm

Wim, thanks for the info. That's a good trick, to shoot the background without the subject. In addition to killing the halo, it'll also suppress the noise that the stacking tool adds.

About size, what I do is to shoot a fine scale using the same lens & extension as the subject. Then I pull the image into Photoshop and use its measure tool to get the distance between scale tics. A quick calculation, then I resize the image (without resampling) so that Photoshop's measurements read directly either in mm or microns, as appropriate. Apply that size to the stacked image (again, no resampling), add a layer, select a region some convenient unit long by watching the Info display, and fill it to make a scale bar. Takes about as long to describe as to do, now that I've got the method down pat. The challenge is remembering to take that scale shot before moving the optics.

I'm looking forward to your other stacks. I agree on both counts -- it is addictive, and you can discover all kinds of weird features!

--Rik

Wim van Egmond · Post by **Wim van Egmond** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:17 am

Rik,

When I have my camera back after repairs and when it still works (and possibly also when it is spring again) I will make sure I use your tip to measure the subjects. But I am a bit lazy.

What would be fun is to photograph my set up. In contrary to my rather clean images my work table is like a scrap heap dump. I am terribly messy.

Wim