Took a sample from Puget Sound yesterday. It was exactly a year ago that I found the neat looking crab larvae and they were present again.
I also came across a few ostracod (I think!). (Wim corrected my initial ID guess, this is a barnacle cyprid) I believe they came aboard on a piece of floating alga that I collected. What was particularly interesting were the front legs. At first glance it seemed as if they should belong to a different creature. They appear very strong and well developed, with what appears to me to be mechanisms for hanging on to the "seaweed".
Barnacle cyprid. Crab Larva.
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Barnacle cyprid. Crab Larva.
Last edited by Charles Krebs on Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Incredible contrast and perspective in the first two images Charles. What magnification and objective are these taken with?
Linden
Linden
Linden Gledhill http://www.flickr.com/photos/13084997@N03/
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
- Wim van Egmond
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:28 am
- Location: Berkel en Rodenrijs, the Netherlands
- Contact:
Excellent images. The second organism is the cyprid stage of a Barnacle. Cyprid because it resembles cypris, an Ostracod, so it is not strange you thought it was an ostracod. It is the final stage of the larval development. It doesn't feed but uses the modified antennae to seek a spot for attachment. They are very special organs because you can imagine that when you have to stay fixed for th rest of your life you have to find the best spot possible. Since it is a non feeding stage it has a limited time. You can find interesting studies of this larva on the web.
Wim
Wim
-
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:56 pm
- Location: España
- Cactusdave
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:40 pm
- Location: Bromley, Kent, UK
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Wim,
Thanks for the correction! Ostracod didn't sit quite right with me, but looking over marine ostracods there was a huge variety out there so it didn't seem that strange. Those powerful attaching front "legs" now make much more sense!
Dave,
The images are stacks. The second one, for example is 39 images. For me, darkfield images (especially with relatively fast 10/0,40) take a lot more care and time when stacking. Probably any depth "effect" comes from the fact that there was no attempt to get the entire subject in focus.
Thanks for the correction! Ostracod didn't sit quite right with me, but looking over marine ostracods there was a huge variety out there so it didn't seem that strange. Those powerful attaching front "legs" now make much more sense!
Dave,
These are darkfield. The turret in my condenser has 4 interchangeable locations (and a brightfield position). I have DIC prisms in three, but in the 4th, I have placed a black darkfield "stop". (To see how I determine the best size for these "stops" check this post: http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=10839 ) The actual stop disk used was covered with that Protostar light "trap" material (The less reflective the stop, the better for darkfield). When properly exposed for a "white" subject like this, the background typically measures about 3,3,3 (RGB) in Photoshop. (Exposure is important... many darkfield shots you see are over-exposed). But (full disclosure! ) darkfield backgrounds often need "clean-up". If the the water is very clean this may consist of cloning out or "spotting" a relatively small number of bright spots. Water that is full of tiny pieces of debris require more extensive measures. First I'll measure the black level of the background. Then put a blank layer under a duplicate picture layer in Photoshop, and "fill" it with that measured black value (you can also add a little "noise" to this layer to better match the noise levels of the black areas of the picture). Then I can either "erase" or use a mask on the top picture layer to have the black layer show through.Can I ask how the first three were illuminated to get such detail and 3D effect against such a velvety dark background?
The images are stacks. The second one, for example is 39 images. For me, darkfield images (especially with relatively fast 10/0,40) take a lot more care and time when stacking. Probably any depth "effect" comes from the fact that there was no attempt to get the entire subject in focus.
- Wim van Egmond
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:28 am
- Location: Berkel en Rodenrijs, the Netherlands
- Contact:
- Cactusdave
- Posts: 1631
- Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:40 pm
- Location: Bromley, Kent, UK
Thanks for that very full and informative reply Charles. There are a couple of very useful tips there that I hadn't really thought enough about. Certainly 'flocking' your darkfield stop with Protostar is a new one on me. Great idea I sort of knew about the under-exposure tip, but your use of the layer technique to get the background right is also new to me. (Memo to self: must really try to properly learn about Layers in Photoshop! )
As these are live animals I presume, how did you mage to get to them to sit still for a 39 image studio shoot? Are they naturally sedentary or did you anaesthetize them in some way? Also was the actual light source flash or a lamp?
As these are live animals I presume, how did you mage to get to them to sit still for a 39 image studio shoot? Are they naturally sedentary or did you anaesthetize them in some way? Also was the actual light source flash or a lamp?
Leitz Ortholux 1, Zeiss standard, Nikon Diaphot inverted, Canon photographic gear
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Dave,
These subjects have rigid (and fragile) bodies. I used the "four dabs of Vaseline in the corners of the cover slip" method. Then I carefully "tap" down the cover slip until the live subject becomes stuck in position. The appendages still move between frames, so while the main body looks pretty good in the stack, the limbs are a disaster. This is where the "retouching" in Zerene is very helpful, pulling in only the frame(s) you want for the legs and such. For example, while main body of #2 image above was comprised of 39 images, I used only the single most "attractive" frame for the out of focus rearward part of the subject.
Electronic flash used for all.
These subjects have rigid (and fragile) bodies. I used the "four dabs of Vaseline in the corners of the cover slip" method. Then I carefully "tap" down the cover slip until the live subject becomes stuck in position. The appendages still move between frames, so while the main body looks pretty good in the stack, the limbs are a disaster. This is where the "retouching" in Zerene is very helpful, pulling in only the frame(s) you want for the legs and such. For example, while main body of #2 image above was comprised of 39 images, I used only the single most "attractive" frame for the out of focus rearward part of the subject.
Electronic flash used for all.