Dead Bug Photography - 2nd Image added

[NikonUser]

I have just converted an Omega B-600 Enlarger into a copy stand that allows me to mount my camera and bellows in a vertical orientation. I find that this orientation has several advantages over using my set-up horizontally. Perhaps the most useful for me is that laterally flattened specimens such as some flies do not have to be pinned but can be laid flat on a piece of glass that is raised from the background.
For side view of an insect using a pin for support (DaveW's "stick shot")
SEE HERE ON PAGE 2
With camera/bellows horizontal, this is how insects have to be mounted

Below is a 5mm Long-legged Fly (Fam: Dolichopodidae) lying on a glass plate, camera and bellows vertical; no pin! The Nikon MFU
IN THIS IMAGE was used in a vertical position, i.e., stood on its left end so that the moveable 'piece' was horizontal. The glass plate and fly rested there.

Blotchy eye is because this fly was collected on 22viii08, kept frozen, thawed and photographed 2xi08. Insert: full frame HF stack.
Nikon El-Nikkor 50/2.8 @ f5.6, 140mm bellows. Single flash. 16 frames @ 0.1mm HF 4.1.

[rjlittlefield]

Looks good, NU.

I notice that the inset image is much more drab than the enlargement. It looks like the enlargement has had some levels adjustment resulting in higher contrast and brighter colors.

I think you're interested in these photos for scientific purposes, and I'm curious --- what are your thoughts regarding color accuracy for such applications?

--Rik

[NikonUser]

Colours may be a little bright. I tend to underexpose the original frames otherwise the highlights get blown out, also the original frames are RAW with no sharpening and always come out a lot flatter than the actual specimen. The final image has had a levels correction, colour balance to bring the gray background back to neutral, some curve adjustment, some USM. Remember also that this fly has been dead for over 2 months and colours tend to fade even when frozen. I try to reproduce the fly as it appeared in the wild in sunlight. These are colouful metallic flies, take at look at this one (not the same species):
HERE

Botton line: I believe the final image is more represenative of this species when seen in bright sunlight (whatever it is; it's very abundant in my garden) than the inset image.

[NikonUser]

Perhaps I did go a little overboard with image enhancement especially as this is meant to be a technique discussion rather than a Diptera ID essay.
This following image is straight out of HF 4.1 with no manipulation except,
in Photoshop CS2:
1]Rotation: flip canvas horizontal (I like my bugs to look as if they are going forward, not looking back to see where they have been; only applies to cultures that read left to right)
2] Resize (resample) from 4,288 px wide .tif, 16 bits/channel, in Adobe RGB, to 800px; PSD gives options, I chose Bicubic Sharper
3]Edit>Convert to Profile>sRGB, Relative Colometric, Black Point Compensation checked
4] Save for Web, at 100% quality. Image went to an 8 bits/channel .jpg.
5]Saved on a flash drive and moved from 1 computer to my e-mail/internet computer.

No other treatment.

[Harold Gough]

The darker image is more comfortable to view.

Harold

[NikonUser]

I agree, Harold. I actually prefer it to that 1st image and it is certainly a lot quicker and easier to post than having to 'play around' with all those adjustment layers. I think I may have a new workflow.