Lighting for macro photography of fern gametophytes

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

Hi,

I have some definite progress to report today. I got two uv filters and my husband and son smashed the glass out of them, and we fitted them between the tube lens and the objective adapter. The objective now screws right in without scratching the glass.

I repeated the stage micrometer photos and the results are much better. Here they are:


This is the stage micrometer perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens:

Image

This is a cropped photo of it at 45 degrees to the optical axis of the lens:

Image

This is a cropped photo of it at 90 degrees to the optical axis of the lens:


Image

That's really very much better isn't it? Before there wasn't any part of the scale in sharp focus, but now it looks really focused and it's clear that I'm getting about 5 micrometers of depth of field so I need to do slices maybe 2 micrometres apart or 1 to be sure.

Does that seem good?

Pitufo
Posts: 260
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 4:32 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Pitufo »

Thanks for your pm Jennifer.

Myxomycetes are quite sturdy when mature, so I do not have the problems you are encountering most of the time. However, immature plasmodia are very sensitive to light and dessication and I have managed to photograph them using the same setup.

Image
Image

For sensitive specimens I would store them in a cool garage on wet moss or paper towel until needed - only bring them into a centrally heated house when necessary. Working quickly is an advantage I think.

I always use a simple circular diffuser made from a single sheet of A4 folded lengthways and stapled (shown opened in the picture above). This give a large circle around the sample and protects it from heat to some extent.

I started using Jansjos but prefer one Trond flat panel either side - I prefer the colour and diffuse light. These are OK up to around 2x on an MP-E 65.

For higher magnifications I use a single flash aimed at the outside of the paper and synced to the camera flash (in a darkened room - I set up using Tronds first). I think this is currently my preferred method.

Camera is a Canon 70D in silent mode. All settings are manual. I almost always have the MP-E 65mm set at f2.8 and change exposure by adjusting flash power (between 1/4 and 1/32 usually with shutter often around 1/30 sec or faster) or by adjusting shutter speed in case of continuous lighting (between 1/4 and 1/30 sec normally).

Focus is adjusted using the E100 microscope base and all stacks are done manually by eye. You soon get a feel for how much to turn the focus control for a given magnification (i.e. 2x would be approx one rotation between shots). I view on live view and watch each photo as it arrives to the computer to check focus position. I wouldn't worry to much about calculating your depth of field - you can see as the photos appear if you have what you need.

In my experience the MP-E is much easier to use than an objective on a tube lens. Sometimes I get better results at a lower magnification and cropping the part of interest.

Starting with an easy inanimate subject at lower magnification and gradually increasing difficulty would be my approach. I'm not sure automated focus is necessary.

I hope this helps.

John

P.S. I couldn't bring myself to decapitate an E100 so bought a steel plate from ebay, drilled a couple of holes in it and just screwed it in where the slide holder was. This has the advantage of still being able to use the XY stage controls for fine adjustment. The heavy box of microscope slides is critical in keeping the steel plate flat. Specimen rotation is acheived by sitting the petri dish/slides on a glass plate.

P.P.S. Here are some images of a developing plasmodium from an earlier post which survived photography - see page 3 http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... s&start=30

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

Hi John,

Thanks, that's really helpful to know.

I have also been finding that moving the focus knob by hand works better. I think something is wrong inside my focus block and it seems to go in big jumps and then nothing for ages. I'm wondering if I ought to take it apart and have a look inside. The small focus knob seem to do almost nothing, but if I leave to get on with things automatically, I do then get a good stack. The whole business seems a bit like black magic sometimes.


Thanks for your thoughts on lighting. That is very helpful. Your shots are amazingly sharp. They're really very impressive.

Thanks!

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

Just realised that the depth of field is 2 microns and the step size I was using the rail was actually 1/10th micron, so there was almost no movement between slices. I am going to move up to 10x the length of step I have been using and see if the fern gets less crisped while it's waiting.

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

This is better isn't it? The base of the plant was photographed last and was just beginning to lose turgor. The slices were taken on 100 ISO, f/4 and 8 second exposures. No extra light added. 37 slices which really were 1 micron apart this time.

Image

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

This is a slightly bonkers stack, done just turning the course focus knob by hand and judging distance by eye.

Image

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

My husband points out that the microscope block is meant to operate in a vertical orientation and doesn't work at all well horizontally because it has a bunch of freedom of movement even when the knob is not turned. It's only when gravity is pushing it consistently in one direction that is has the fine granularity of movement.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 23603
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

Yes, this is why rigs that use horizontal focus blocks usually have some sort of spring or elastic to serve the same function that gravity does when vertical.

--Rik

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

Ah - I didn't know that. We'll have to think about that. Thanks.

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

This one definitely seems better to me.

I did a tiny fern on 1/15th second exposure, 100ISO, f/4, infinity focus, with the rail nudged to make sure it did not have play in the wrong direction. I had a polystyrene cup over the subject and black velvet in the back of the cup. There are 8 IKEA LED lights directly above the cup.

The fern did not shrivel because I was working on 17 micron steps rather than the 1 micron steps that I was using before. Depth of field seems to be about 20 microns.

This is the cropped photo. My husband points out that every single cell carries a reflection of the camera a lens and the cup rim, but I think I'm going to make my peace with that.

Image

This is the setup:

Image

Image

This seems pretty good to be going on with, would you think?

I have to have something printed and ready to exhibit ready alongside the setup by the 21st October so I'm inclined to get printing with this and see what insurmountable problem appears in that step of things, while there's still time to fix it.
:D

JohnyM
Posts: 463
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:02 am

Post by JohnyM »

Turn the cup around, and mount it to mitu lens, so that it doesnt reflect INTO the lens.

Drill a hole in the bottom, and slide it onto the lens.

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

I'll get right onto that after doing a little bit of celebration. Thanks! Good idea.

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

The prints look like a puddle on a dark night. I think the remaining two weeks will be me trying to print it out. :-)

Lou Jost
Posts: 5987
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Also, if heat is an issue, you could find a thinner cup so you could move the lights farther from the subject, and perhaps not use all eight.....What aperture are you now using on your tube lens? And is it focused at infinity?

jsp
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:21 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Post by jsp »

Hi,

Yes I probably could if I can get a thinner cup. It was quite hard to get a polystyrene cup. I had to order it from ebay. I'll look into it. It's not so madly urgent now as I have one good photo for the exhibition in two weeks, if I can only get it to print.

I took the photo with the tube lens on f/4 and infinity focus.

Thanks!

<and relax>

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic