French coin with concrete dye
Uploaded: May 20, 2007
Rich Collins July 15, 2007
John, OK first off No Fair using LF body. Kidding, but I really like the background. Concrete dye, could you elaborate please? Also was this a single flash? Doesn't appear to be a Softbox. Thanks#691851
John H. Siskin July 16, 2007
Hi Rich,One of the difficulties in shooting this group of images was finding high quality coins. For U.S. coins it is relatively easy to get what are called proof coins, these are finished to a higher quality than the normal coinage. For European coins I had to search coin shops over much of Los Angeles to find the best coins I could get.
This was shot with a Toyo C 4X5 camera and a Zeiss 63mm Luminar, a lens specially created for micro work. I believe I used one light source and reflectors for fill. Of course on something this small the reflectors were only a couple of inches in size. The light source was probably a Tungsten balanced bulb, such as an ECA. These have some advantages with very small products: they work like large light sources since they are bigger than the product. In addition the continuous light makes it possible to focus at an effective aperture of about f180. Between the bellows extension and the need for at least a couple of millimeters of depth of field things are awfully dark this close to a small product.
I have an article about shooting with a microscope here at BetterPhoto. You can check it out at http://www.betterphoto.com/article.php?id=185.
Thanks! John Siskin
#4513884
Rich Collins July 16, 2007
Wow, you are very informed at what you do. I can see why you were added as an Instructor. This type of photography is more micro that I am interested in at present. But I have been practicing at shooting small items jsut for practice. I am using a Canon EF100 f/2.8 Macro & I am playing with Canon Extensions tubes & a Canon 1.4x TC. I am getting very clear images with great resolution. My only soft point is lighting & resulting shadows, I am currently using a Canon 550ex & a Canon 580ex along with a large set of florescents through differing diffusing panels, all home crafted. I am much closer now than I was 3 weeks ago & with a jewelry shoot coming up I want to be spot on in every detail.I can't compete with your Toyo C 4x5, but my Canon 5D seems to do a great job. Wish I could land a Mamiya AFDII with Kodak digital back. One day.
Appreciate the reply. #4515971
John H. Siskin July 17, 2007
Hi Rich,Rich Collins July 17, 2007
I'll look into those bulbs for sure, ECA, Tungsten white balance. Understood. And I'll focus on the Extension tubes. Surely you didn't mean: In addition the continuous light makes it possible to focus at an effective aperture of about f180.You meant f/18, yes? At that smaller aperture your DOF would be much increased. Thus the need for the lights & a tripod. It takes a lot of tinkering to get the play of light & shadow just right.
Thanks John
#4519925
John H. Siskin July 17, 2007
Hi Rich,Rich Collins July 18, 2007
22" sounds like quite an extension or bellows. I was handling my 70-200 f/2.8 yesterday, & I noticed that while I was holding it with my left hand at the viewing end, & looking through at the camera body end, & the more I backed it away from my eye, the larger my fingers looked. Then I put on a Canon 77mm 500D Closeup Lens & the magnification increased. At one point I was probably somewhere around 20" or so. And my fingers looked larger than life. Is there a way to accomplish this without using a bellows? I don't know of any equipment offered by any manufacturer adapting to a Canon line of lens. I suppose one could pick up a non-working lens, using the body end & attaching to some hollow tube at the camera opening, & doing the same at the other end to attach to the back end of the 70-200, or my 100 f/2,8 macro lens, thereby achieving a hand-crafted extension. Then there must be a way of calculating the F stop by inches of extension.At any time if this discussion becomes too time-consuming for you, let me know. Perhaps you might know of a forum where this type of discussion is normal. Otherwise I am gaining insight from our discussion & am enjoying this. #4521538
John H. Siskin July 18, 2007
Hi Rich,If you want to take pictures where the capture is larger than life on the sensor it is not so difficult, but keep in mind that larger than life on the sensor means much larger than life on the print. If you shoot twice life size onto a full frame sensor and then make an 8X10 print you have blown up an area that was already 2X, eight more time for a total of 16X. The lens you want for this is a short lens, like a 28mm and you probably want a fixed focal length lens, rather than a zoom. If you put this lens on a long extension tube you will focus quite close on an object. Lighting can be quite tricky, if you are on a tripod or copy stand you can use continuous light like the bulbs I mentioned. If you are trying to hand hold you will need a strobe, or strobes that light from the side. You can zone focus, which means move back and forth until you are in the area you want is in focus, then hit the shutter.
Another way to do this optically is to get a 4X microscope lens and a microscope thread to T-Mount adapter. This fits into the appropriate T-Mount for your camera. T-Mount was an early universal lens mount, and still works quite well, except that everything on the lens including the diaphragm is manual. Then you can put this on your extension tube. This is a very reasonably priced option.
Thanks, John Siskin
Ps. There are some color studies on my website at BetterPhoto that are very extreme micro shots.
#4522624
Rich Collins July 18, 2007
While I can get very good photos of objects the size of a wrist watch or a bracelet, in order to really create an image with 2-4x life size, like one sees of some jewelry or those really expensive Chronographs in glamor magazines, full page for only the watch face, I will, as you say. need a wide lens. Can I try with my Canon 50 F/1.4? Or my Canon 17-40 F/4L? Then shoot at say F/11-F/22?Just so you know I have been manually focusing my Canon 100 F/2.8 for the shots lately. So that is my preference as DOF has to be nailed spot on. My practice has not been extensive.
Also the lights I saw in your article appeared to be typical halogen desk lamps. but I believe you said you were using ECA bulbs Tungsten balanced in camera or Raw settings. Do you recall where you bought the actual lamps? I know you mentioned a site for microscope lens, but I want to be sure I get the correct lamps. I did see some of the bulbs were normal incandescent style screw-in ends.
Thanks John #4524113
John H. Siskin July 19, 2007
Hi Rich,Practice is critical with this kind of work. You must also test equipment and test it in new ways. People often approach me as if I have all the answers. Obviously this isn’t true. What I do have is an extensive array of equipment for this work, including a Leitz microscope, bellows, extension tubes, microscope lenses and a half dozen specialize micro lenses for shooting micro. I also have several different ways to light micro products. All this is important, but it is also important that I have a couple of decades experience in doing this kind of work.
I use the desk lamps with the microscope sometimes, but I am not suggesting that you use a microscope for your current project, just a microscope lens. You probably do not want these lights, to shoot a watch. The bulbs I mentioned are available at large photo retailers. I got mine from a store that is not in business any more.
Thanks, John Siskin
#4527049
Rich Collins July 19, 2007
I appreciate all your detailed info John. I think I have enough work with for awhile. There comes a time when all the talk will only get you so far & that time has come. Many thanks, Rich. #4528269Sign up for an interactive online photography course to get critiques on your photos.
Discussions by Category: You can view photo discussions on various themes in the Community > Photo Discussions section of the site.
BetterPhoto Websites: If you see an orange website link directly under the photographer's name, it's totally okay. It's not spam. The reason: BetterPhoto is the one that offers these personal photography websites. We are supporting our clients with those links.
Unavailable EXIF: If there is no other information but 'Unavailable' in the EXIF (meaning no EXIF data exists with the photo), the 'Unavailable' blurb is not displayed. If there is any info, it shows. Many photos have the EXIF stripped out when people modify the image and resave it, before uploading.
The following truth is one of the core philosophies of BetterPhoto:
I hear, I forget.
I see, I remember.
I do, I understand.
You learn by doing. Take your next online photography class.
Copyright for this photo belongs solely to John H. Siskin.
Images may not be copied, downloaded, or used in any way without the expressed, written permission of the photographer.
Log in to follow or message this photographer or report this photo.
I already have an account!