Sunset moth scales (yes, I know...)

[pwnell]

Thought I was original and took some photos of a sunset moth only to see I have already been outdone by 2 years on this popular subject! Nevertheless, for me it is still a first so here goes.

For anyone wondering why Helicon Focus and not Zerene Stacker (except for the last photo) - I found Helicon Focus' Method B to be superior on these specific samples. The last photo Zerene did a much better job.

Sunset moth wing scales 10x, Helicon Focus Method B

20120819-DSLR_IMG_0454-Edit.jpg by pwnell, on Flickr

Sunset moth swallowtail section, 10x, Helicon Focus Method B+C

20120819-DSLR_IMG_0604-Edit.jpg by pwnell, on Flickr

Sunset moth swallowtail section, 4x, Helicon Focus Method B+C

20120819-DSLR_IMG_0873-Edit.jpg by pwnell, on Flickr

Sunset moth wing scales, 10x, Helicon Focus Method B+C

20120819-DSLR_IMG_1067-Edit.jpg by pwnell, on Flickr

Sunset moth wing scales, 10x * 2, Zerene Stacker Method DMap + PMax

20120819-DSLR_IMG_1347-Edit.jpg by pwnell, on Flickr

[Jacek]

great set

[RogelioMoreno]

Beautifu!

I always enjoy this kind of images.

What objectives and lighting did you use?

Rogelio

[pwnell]

Thanks for the kind words. It was the UPlanSApo 10x/0.4 and 20x/0.75. For lighting I used three Ikea LED lights and a simple paper diffuser.

[Litonotus]

I love such specimens that are everybody's must dos, it is a great challenge to add something new, and when you think it is not possible someone shows it is (:

I love the last two images (:

[lauriek]

Beautiful! I could look at this moth for weeks. Heck I think I have looked at it for weeks and I could definitely spend many more weeks looking at it!

Very nicely shot!

[WebbCMH]

Hi and thank you for posting such a great set of comparable images and could you answer a couple of questions for me.

1) I was wondering what your equipment set up was to get this set - especially with regards to the 4x shot of the swallowtail section?
2) Do you (or anyone else reading this) have an opinion as to (in very general terms) what would be the lowest magnification required to satisfactorily reveal the existence of the scales on the wings of lepidoptera?

[pwnell]

Hi and thank you for posting such a great set of comparable images and could you answer a couple of questions for me.

Thanks, you're welcome.

1) I was wondering what your equipment set up was to get this set - especially with regards to the 4x shot of the swallowtail section?

Olympus BX53, UPlanSApo 4x/0.16 objective, transmitted light from three Ikea Janso LED lights, diffused with paper cone, focus stacked from 192 frames using Helicon Focus' methods B and C which was merged in Photoshop.

2) Do you (or anyone else reading this) have an opinion as to (in very general terms) what would be the lowest magnification required to satisfactorily reveal the existence of the scales on the wings of lepidoptera?

Yes I do, as I regularly take photographs of butterflies with my macro gear as well, which consists of a 5D Mark III and 100mm IS Macro and MP-E 65 lenses. There are two basic things you need to resolve individual scales - well, three actually. The first is to ensure your specimen has nice, large scales. Lycaenidae and Hesperiidae tend to have small scales. Some moths, Papilionidae and so on tends to have larger scales. This obviously is a factor.

Secondly, the resolution of the CCD/CMOS sensor in your camera plays a role. If the resolution is too low you will not be able to resolve the detail sufficiently. That being said, I have resolved individual scales on the wings of a Papilionidae using a Fujifilm S602 Zoom, which was a 6MP bridge camera from 2004.

With the 8MP Canon EOS 1D Mark II and a Sigma 180mm Macro lens I managed to resolve almost all scales on a Papilio Demodocus.

With a 21MP Canon 1Ds Mark III and a 100mm non-IS macro lens I resolved all the scales on a Precis octavia sesamus.

[WebbCMH]

There are two basic things you need to resolve individual scales - well, three actually. The first is to ensure your specimen has nice, large scales. Lycaenidae and Hesperiidae tend to have small scales. Some moths, Papilionidae and so on tends to have larger scales. This obviously is a factor.

Thanks - I have little or no knowledge of the scale size for specimens so this is very useful knowledge

Secondly, the resolution of the CCD/CMOS sensor in your camera plays a role. If the resolution is too low you will not be able to resolve the detail sufficiently. That being said, I have resolved individual scales on the wings of a Papilionidae using a Fujifilm S602 Zoom, which was a 6MP bridge camera from 2004.

I am hoping to achieve what I need using focus stacking and a cropped sensor Nikon D5100 DX format 16MP camera - however I can possibly arrange access to a large format sensor D800 FX format 36MP if needs be (as I am possible enlarging the final shot to 1,000mm x 1,400mm for exhibition - needs may well be!).

With the 8MP Canon EOS 1D Mark II and a Sigma 180mm Macro lens I managed to resolve almost all scales on a Papilio Demodocus.

With a 21MP Canon 1Ds Mark III and a 100mm non-IS macro lens I resolved all the scales on a Precis octavia sesamus

.

Are these images published on Flikr or anywhere else I could see them?
Many thanks for such a comprehensive reply.

[pwnell]

I am hoping to achieve what I need using focus stacking and a cropped sensor Nikon D5100 DX format 16MP camera - however I can possibly arrange access to a large format sensor D800 FX format 36MP if needs be (as I am possible enlarging the final shot to 1,000mm x 1,400mm for exhibition - needs may well be!).

A D5100 has a higher pixel density than a 5D Mark III, and it will be more than enough to resolve the scale details. However for 1m x 1.4m prints you might want to consider the D800E, just due to the sheer pixel count. Even that would be pushing it if viewed from up close.

Are these images published on Flikr or anywhere else I could see them?
Many thanks for such a comprehensive reply.

Not really, but I have uploaded them for you. These are both uncropped, and slightly sharpened.

8MP Canon 1D Mark II + Sigma 180mm Macro Lens, APS-H format


21MP Canon 1Ds Mark III + 100mm Non IS Macro, 35mm Format

[WebbCMH]

Thank you very much for posting the images - it has helped a lot and I think I will need to acquire at least a 2:1 ration or 3:1 ratio to get the image composition and detail I am looking for.

The resolution of the sensor will be important as you rightly point out and I will have to make a call on that once I have managed to obtain the basic image composition and quality using the D5100.

I have started a thread on the Beginners Macro Forum http://bit.ly/SwQFIA to glean knowledge of members' experiences with various macro/close up attachments as options to add to my existing 105mm micro-nikkor 2.8VR. I also intend to use Helicon Remote to control the lens for focus stacking and I want to remain in some control of the aperture which means that not all teleconvertors or extension tubes will necessarily be of any help as this lens does not have the option to manually change the aperture.

At the moment options to achieve the additional magnification include but are not restricted to close up attachments such as Marumi Achromat or the popular Raynox 250 or the more expensive LMScope Macro 40 or LMScope Macro 80 options. I would also consider the Nikon Closeup T5 & T6 which fit the lens but here in the UK they seem very hard to find.

Finally perhaps I also need to consider whether reversing a lens (perhaps a 50mm?) onto the front of the 105mm would be a good option and may give me a greater amount of magnification flexibility/range.

Anyway thanks for your time and responses on this it has really helped.