Crustaceans
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Crustaceans
Amphipod, 4x * 1.6, Polarised
Marine copepod, 40x * 1.6, Polarised
Head of an isopod, 40x * 1.25, Polarised + Lambda plate, 40 image stack using Helicon Focus C.
- arturoag75
- Posts: 1600
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:05 am
- Location: italy
- Contact:
Waldo, you've lately posted quite a few lovely images that I've much enjoyed. But your "Marine copepod, 40x * 1.6, Polarised" photograph is one that I keep returning to, and find especially wonderful. Bravo!
I do wonder what you mean by "* 1.6"--does this indicate the relay lens you used? And by "Polarised"--do you mean that you placed a polarizing filter on your light, placed an analyzer (aka "polarizer") behind your objective, both of the above (cross-polarization) or something else?
Cheers,
--Chris
I do wonder what you mean by "* 1.6"--does this indicate the relay lens you used? And by "Polarised"--do you mean that you placed a polarizing filter on your light, placed an analyzer (aka "polarizer") behind your objective, both of the above (cross-polarization) or something else?
Cheers,
--Chris
Thank you for your kind words.Chris S. wrote:Waldo, you've lately posted quite a few lovely images that I've much enjoyed. But your "Marine copepod, 40x * 1.6, Polarised" photograph is one that I keep returning to, and find especially wonderful. Bravo!
I have a magnification changer on my microscope, so this means I had it set to 1.6 times magnification, hence the image on the film plane (sorry, CCD plane) are not that from the 40x/0.95 objective alone, but has been magnified 1.6 times. I find that with low power objectives one get usable additional resolution by using the magnification changer. At 40x the advantage goes away - there is not much more resolution to be had on the 18MP sensor by enlarging the image circle, at least not visually for me. So in this case it was mostly used for framing. Call me old school but I'd rather get the framing as I want it optically, rather than reverting to cropping in post.Chris S. wrote:I do wonder what you mean by "* 1.6"--does this indicate the relay lens you used?
By polarised I mean that there is a polariser below the condenser, and an analyser above the objectives (the same configuration used for DIC). The analyser and polariser is at 90 degrees to each other, therefore the background light is extinct (black) and I get maximum polarisation. I basically just slide out the objective and condenser Nomarski prisms.Chris S. wrote:And by "Polarised"--do you mean that you placed a polarizing filter on your light, placed an analyzer (aka "polarizer") behind your objective, both of the above (cross-polarization) or something else?
Thanks for the additional explanation, Waldo. It's very clear, now.
Can't blame you for preferring to crop in camera, even if the added magnification is empty--I'd no doubt make the same decision. A wise friend of mine says that it you waste beer, you go to hell; I believe this is also true of pixels.
--Chris
Can't blame you for preferring to crop in camera, even if the added magnification is empty--I'd no doubt make the same decision. A wise friend of mine says that it you waste beer, you go to hell; I believe this is also true of pixels.
--Chris
- Charles Krebs
- Posts: 5865
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Issaquah, WA USA
- Contact:
Waldo,
Very nice images!
The patterns that are revealed using polarized light with these creatures are quite graphic and interesting. Did some a while ago....
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=3182
... but always wanted to explore them more. These images have rekindled my interest.
Very nice images!
The patterns that are revealed using polarized light with these creatures are quite graphic and interesting. Did some a while ago....
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... php?t=3182
... but always wanted to explore them more. These images have rekindled my interest.