Help mindat.org|Log In|Register|
Home PageMindat NewsThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusManagement TeamContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatSponsor a PageSponsored PagesTop Available PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on MindatThe Mindat Store
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryRandom MineralSearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
StatisticsThe ElementsMember ListBooks & MagazinesMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryHow to Link to MindatDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day Gallery
bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner

photo of the day

Posted by Rolf Brandt  
avatar
Rolf Brandt December 06, 2011 07:21PM
Maybe it has been posted before, but I would like to know with what camera/objective the "photo of the day" pictures were taken. It would also be informative if focus-stacking was used. The pictures are always quite good and one can learn from that. Regards Rolf
avatar
Harjo Neutkens December 06, 2011 09:19PM
Rolf, for some of the photos you can see what gear they used here: http://www.mindat.org/mesg-13-206991.html
If you want to know what a photographer used for a specific photo you can send him a PM.

Cheers,

Harjo
avatar
Rolf Brandt December 06, 2011 09:56PM
Hallo Harjo, bedankt. most are stacked. i thought i can't make proper photo's anymore. rolf
avatar
Volker Betz December 06, 2011 11:16PM
Hello Rolf,

I have recenty invested some time and investigated and compared aperture closure against stacking at maximumn resolution of the lens. The result is quite clear: Below the 10 cm field of view range in digital photography stacking outperforms always single shot with smaller aperture. And as it can be automated I now do it regulary. So my phototype is now often full view with layer composition. My only used f-stop is 8. This gives (typical) the best resolution. The camera is not important as long it has the right firmware and software to communicate with software tools, it´s the lens, the light and the eye of a photographer patient enough to train for skills. To turn photography in good photography is not one big multiplier, many small increments make sucess.

Volker
avatar
Rolf Brandt December 07, 2011 07:27PM
Thanks Volker, i must go into stacking. regards Rolf
avatar
Harjo Neutkens December 07, 2011 10:07PM
http://www.hadleyweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Freeware stacking software, works like a charm winking smiley

Cheers,

Harjo
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 12, 2011 09:06AM
Volker Betz

The camera is not important....

its important yes, take a crop on a photo take with a canon 1000D and a 5D mark II and look the difference, lens its the first on the importance, but if a good lens work on a not good camera, even useless take photos.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 16, 2011 09:49PM
In fact, for me camera is not very important. Most of camera are enough to take good photo with my technic. I use a bridge and it's enough for me. In france, standard is reflex with luminar.... It's not the only possibility.... I try all kind of lens and in fact, expensive lens are not usefull...

Bridge or compact, close-up and microscopic objective are able to done the same result and maybe better when technic is good. Look my photo and others with reflex.... Do you see a difference ?

With 1000 euros you have all for take all photo... until 0.6 mm of FOV....

And POTD dont' mean quality.... Sorry but a lot of are not the best....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2011 09:51PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 16, 2011 10:42PM
The difference I seen, I am professionist photographer and its years I work on photography. 1000 euro only? for all my set, lenses, camera etc.. I have pay over 15.000,00 euro. And difference its well visible from a normaly bridge to a full frame camera.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Jolyon & Katya Ralph December 16, 2011 11:08PM
A good photographer with a cheap camera will take better photos than a poor photographer with an expensive camera.

Volker is right, the camera is not the most important thing.

Of course, when you become good, you can spend more money to get a better camera and produce better results.

Jolyon
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 06:10AM
ok, you take a photo taken with a canon 20D and another taken with canon 5D mark II and look if you not seen the difference. Just only in the crop you seen the difference

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 08:29AM
Matteo,

i have offer a thing : Exchange some microminerals to take same photo of these. All reflex have refused this proposal....Afraid ?

The reason is simple, reflex is not important pour micromineral photo. The difference come with the quality of lenses....

If you want i can make photo of all specimen than you want to compare my system at 1000 euros (with camera) and your system. For this time money don't give avantage. Quality is done by photograph, eyes and intelligence....

Also, same methods give same results. Often, photo are too dark in mindat... Dark cover defaults but don't give good photo. For me minerals are living not dead. Colour, light is important. So Matteo for that you are in the best without problem for others we are not on the same wave lenght.

And today the POTD have been selected by friends for friends. Yes it's a good photo (for this time) but on an other forum, this photo has already been selected haha ! I can said when french photo is selected or not.... Do you want a list ?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 09:04AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 10:00AM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo,
>
> i have offer a thing : Exchange some microminerals
> to take same photo of these. All reflex have
> refused this proposal....Afraid ?

I not have problems, I have photographed minerals photographed from other photographers and you can see the difference. And just for say some of your photos are many out of focus or without contrast, others is ok, this is strange why or all photos come out of focus or all photos are right. I understand the out of focus on a crystal of under 1 mm, but not on area of 3-4 mm

>
> The reason is simple, reflex is not important pour
> micromineral photo. The difference come with the
> quality of lenses....
>

well, my all lenses its zeiss luminar, nikkor, photar-leitz the best in the market

> If you want i can make photo of all specimen than
> you want to compare my system at 1000 euros (with
> camera) and your system. For this time money don't
> give avantage. Quality is done by photograph, eyes
> and intelligence....

yes, otherwise I would not work for 5 magazines of mineralogy

>
> Also, same methods give same results. Often,
> photo are too dark in mindat... Dark cover
> defaults but don't give good photo. For me
> minerals are living not dead. Colour, light is
> important. So Matteo for that you are in the best
> without problem for others we are not on the same
> wave lenght.
>
> And today the POTD have been selected by friends
> for friends. Yes it's a good photo (for this time)
> but on an other forum, this photo has already been
> selected haha ! I can said when french photo is
> selected or not.... Do you want a list ?

yes is nice, but not many cured, its well visible have used a multifocus system

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 10:18AM
hi Matteo,

i don't work for magazine... They don't paid in France.... I prefer work for others people who want photo for book etc. And magazine are not quality enough for than i paid for that.

Sometimes i work fastly and it's not important to make the best photo.... An other problem on mindat is the resize. I work with a native size of 1150 pixel (for photo) and the compression give low result.... But i can increase the level sometimes too ! I don't optimise for mindat.

For seen the real photo it's possible to click on but not all times.

Ok matteo, for me magazine (i don't buy magazine....) are not important. If you want compare it's possible. You can send what you want just for seen the difference between a professionnal like you and an amator like me. I promise to do the best with than i can.

But when i see your photo on mindat, i can make photo at the same level (or better ? haha). I know that. But perhaps it's false, give me a lesson :). But friendly...

In fact this small world is full of sharks.... But for me don't recognise my work is a problem. In these case, i can increase quality... It's just for pleasure to compare with reflex. Because reflex are for professionnal (no ?) and others can't done so well. Matteo you speak like a professor and i 'm not a student. Just make photo with my small material (yes for 1000 euro you can take like me). Sometimes you said very interessant thing but please try to be friendly. We are not in the world of lux.

Camera = 300 euros
Micrometric system = 100 euros
Plate = 50 euros
Tube and ring = 100 euros
Close-up = 120 euros
two Objectives = 200 euros
Lens tube = 130 euros.

With this minial system fov is between infini and 0.6 mm for field of view.

Perhaps i can made an effort for mitutoyo .... I m' not sure than nikon is less good.

No money is not important....



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 10:37AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 10:37AM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hi Matteo,
>
>
> Sometimes i work fastly and it's not important to
> make the best photo.... An other problem on mindat
> is the resize. I work with a native size of 1150
> pixel (for photo) and the compression give low
> result.... But i can increase the level sometimes
> too ! I don't optimise for mindat.

calculate my photos on mindat its many resized, normaly on mindat I put photos 800x534 but now I have start to put photos of 1000x667 but normaly the photos for magazine, books etc.. go for 3543x2362 but I not put on mindat for copyright questions, but they not lost quality, is this the nice of the full frame, you cut but no lost, start to cut with a normaly reflex or crop, and you seen how many nice pixel squares you seen, for not speack of the grain in the photo. And I work with JPG, not RAW.

>
> For seen the real photo it's possible to click on
> but not all times.
>
> Ok matteo, for me magazine (i don't buy
> magazine....) are not important. If you want
> compare it's possible. You can send what you want
> just for seen the difference between a
> professionnal like you and an amator like me. I
> promise to do the best with than i can.
>
> But when i see your photo on mindat, i can make
> photo at the same level (or better ? haha). I know
> that. But perhpas it's false, give me a lesson :).

depend from how much you take photos, me its 20 years, and only from 4 years I take photo of minerals. I did a lot of bets on photo theme, with others who think that a simple compact work as a full frame, but they have always lost the bet.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 10:46AM
Okay matteo no crop just resize and full size for seen. My photo on mindat have no crop. The size is 4000x3000 pixel. When i sell for A4 page (300 DPI, in tiff) , it's necessary. You can choose what you want with the size too. I can make between infini and 0.6 mm.

I wan't lose the bet against you, but for the moment.... I don't know.

I have not à lot of specimen exept anatase. But you are more rich than me.

Friendly

Fred



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 10:48AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 11:02AM
Yes bridge are not the best but to compare i must see the difference.

here a photo of 0.7 mm of field of with a crop of 1000 pixel (0.2 mm of FOV)

http://ploum2006.free.fr/albumforummineraux/album388.jpghttp://ploum2006.free.fr/albumforummineraux/album389.jpg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 11:13AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 12:20PM
my tests its here

http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,21,123096,page=7

sorry its in italian but is possible translate with google.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 12:24PM
argh the test on pyroclore not open

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 12:28PM
Matteo image "not found" FOv is not indicate.

Good example for me if you want i can take this in photo :)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 12:40PM
I not take the FOV I take the measure direct on crystals, and in the text its write the measure. Photos not work why the idiots of imageupper have cancel

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 12:43PM
try with your website. I have my own herbergment.
avatar
Paul Brandes December 17, 2011 03:56PM
Now now, children; let's not get a case of photograpic envy here, but rather stick to the original question of how some of these wonderful POTD are taken and what settings/techniques are being used....
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 17, 2011 04:14PM
Guys, this discussion is pointless. These are just opinions and it reminds me of the brand wars in the various photo forums.

As we can see from the many excellent photographs here, the camera (as long as it meets the minimum technical requirements) really is secondary. The pixel level quality only comes into account when you want to print very large or crop excessively. However, there is one thing where I would always prefer a good DSLR (full frame) to an APSC sensor or even smaller (e.g. m4/3) and that is dynamic range. I can retrieve so much highlight detail from my D3 files, something that was not possible when I still had my D200 - and with smaller sensors it is even worse.

One thing I wonder, though, is that nobody mentioned the importance of good lighting. The best camera is uncapable of producing a decent photo if the subject is badly lit. IMHO, the lighting and the optics, and a stable setup are way more important than the camera. And, of course, to know your equipment.

Matteo Chinellato Wrote:

> well, my all lenses its zeiss luminar, nikkor,
> photar-leitz the best in the market

Sorry, if I disagree here. Luminars and Photars are 30 year old technology. I have been working with both brands myself for more than 20 years. I mean, they are still outstanding optics but modern microscope objectives (e.g. Mitutoyo or Nikon, also other lesser known brands) beat them by a fair margin as far as detail rendition is concerned.

Cheers

Harry
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 17, 2011 04:28PM
Back to topic:

Some posters already mention the equipment used in the descriptions of the images. The question is how detailed should this information be?

Is camera and lens/microscope sufficient? Or should it also describe the lighting method, the stacking software, incl. algorithm used, the stack size? An exaggerated version would even mention the camera settings in detail or point out the applied postprocessing techniques and the software used.

I am not sure if I would take the time to list all this.

@Jolyon: Is it possible to add a feature to the galleries to enable a user to read out the exif data?

Harry



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 04:29PM by Harald Schillhammer.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 04:34PM
@Jolyon: Is it possible to add a feature to the galleries to enable a user to read out the exif data?

exif data not appear if the lens its not directly connected to the camera, or appear incorrect

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 17, 2011 04:40PM
Harald Schillhammer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> Sorry, if I disagree here. Luminars and Photars
> are 30 year old technology. I have been working
> with both brands myself for more than 20 years. I
> mean, they are still outstanding optics but modern
> microscope objectives (e.g. Mitutoyo or Nikon,
> also other lesser known brands) beat them by a
> fair margin as far as detail rendition is
> concerned.

30 years good technology, not for nothing many photographers use old lens on digital cameras seen their high quality. For me the many good lens its the Olympus Zuiko.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 17, 2011 04:54PM
Matteo Chinellato Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @Jolyon: Is it possible to add a feature to the
> galleries to enable a user to read out the exif
> data?
>
> exif data not appear if the lens its not directly
> connected to the camera, or appear incorrect

I stand corrected. In case of the images presented here it would not make much sense.

Harry
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 17, 2011 04:58PM
Matteo Chinellato Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> 30 years good technology, not for nothing many
> photographers use old lens on digital cameras seen
> their high quality. For me the many good lens its
> the Olympus Zuiko.

Of course they are superb (as I wrote) - I just disagreed with your statement "best in the market".

Zuiko lenses are indeed excellent. The trick is to find out which lens is best for which purpose ...

Cheers

Harry
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 07:47PM
For POTD zuiko is the best.... It's statistic... After luminar..... And sorry i can't said more, POTD is to high for me. grinning smiley

For me i take less expensive.... but for 1000 euros or less some are able to make POTD.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2011 07:49PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Paul Brandes December 17, 2011 08:19PM
Harald Schillhammer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Back to topic:
>
> Some posters already mention the equipment used in
> the descriptions of the images. The question is
> how detailed should this information be?
>
> Is camera and lens/microscope sufficient? Or
> should it also describe the lighting method, the
> stacking software, incl. algorithm used, the stack
> size? An exaggerated version would even mention
> the camera settings in detail or point out the
> applied postprocessing techniques and the software
> used.
>
> I am not sure if I would take the time to list all
> this.
>

I certainly wouldn't take the time to list all that in the photo caption either. To me, it would just detract from the beauty of the photo which I'm sure nobody wants. Rather, I would suggest that if folks want more technical details about the photo and how it was taken, just PM or email the poster.
avatar
Rolf Brandt December 17, 2011 08:40PM
Hi everybody,
Quite a discussion.
In general the presented photo's are of a very good quality.
I am just an amateur and a lot of you are profs. That is ok with me.
I was just interested to know whether a pic was stacked, to compare them
with an unstacked picture.
Keep the good work up.
Regards Rolf
avatar
Account Closed December 17, 2011 09:06PM
Ok Rolf but what size ? Choos of field of view and i give you an example....
avatar
Uwe Kolitsch December 17, 2011 09:50PM
"And today the POTD have been selected by friends for friends."

Frédéric: when any Mindat manager chooses a certain photo for POTD, he doesn't look at who the photographer is. The photo is the important thing, not the person.
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 06:42AM
It's not the reality... But it's not important... Things are clear for me. It's easy to compare photo choosen and others.... In fact POTD don't mean the best just a selection of photo and sometimes photos of friends.... The resut is a selection of lower quality sometimes.

Uwe it's your case but all the case....

On 100 % of POTD :

- 50% are bad : dark, vague, bad light, no field of view, pixellisation.....
- 25 % are good but better exist
- 25 % are very good but choice are the same photographers, often.

For resolve the problem, make a votation system but limited. When a personn see a photo she can vote one time.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2011 06:55AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Andrew Tuma December 18, 2011 07:38AM
Gents,

I think there is some misunderstanding of what the POTD represents, I do not ever remember where the POTD was the best photo of any mineral. POTD is simply what one of the MINDAT managers thinks should be highlighted for that day. I have no idea why someone has picked any of my photos, I actually think some others are much better - however whoever picked them must have liked them - why....not my problem.

I agree that some of the photography provided by a small few is of the highest standard but please tell me why POTD should be limited to only those who can produce this level of photograph. This is just another case of elitism - something that most of us think is distasteful.

I am just as happy to see a photo provided by someone who has a camera that likely cost little more than the camera strap used by a few of the most elite contributors; by doing this we encourage people to keep improving their interest in mineral photography.

Frédéric - I think you see a problem when none exists, I certainly have no issues if 50% are too dark, (most of mine suffer from this) and 25% are not as good as others on the list.

So lets just leave things as they are, this way we will always have little surprises..

Andrew Tuma
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 08:17AM
Andrew,

what you think is exactly what i think.... There is no problem. Just things must be clear. POTD are not the best of photo just a selection of photo to show a kind of diversity. And same the word diversity is not exact. It's just a selection of managers....

POTD is not a representation of the best photo, just a representation of selection what managers think.

The discussion was about the POTD and materials. Problem is than POTD isn't a standard of quality....

Problem is than some use POTD like an award and it's a chocolate award....

Fred



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2011 08:24AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Andrew Tuma December 18, 2011 09:54AM
Well done Frédéric you have made me smile tonight;

I guess we cant help what people want to do - so if some wish to use the POTD as a competition - not my problem - as long as they are happy.

The best part - Your comment has reminded me that I have some very nice Chocolate in the fridge - now that's an excellent outcome.

Cheers - Andrew.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 08:23PM
not good

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 08:37PM
well here the group of yellow pyroclore of 0.26 mm into a cavity, files are not worked, in the first is normaly format, in the second its a cut and a crop of the group, not worked the same

http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622_2.jpg

http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622_1.jpg

the end work is here http://www.mindat.org/photo-342329.html

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 08:56PM
Matteo the size is big, resolution is low. Have you a photo to compare with the last like béraunite. I prepare a photo with 0.35 mm of fov and 0.05 mm for cristal.

Thanks.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 09:00PM
0.05 mm I do not waste time even seen a photo with similar sizes that would be horrible, and its SEM material

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:05PM
Matteo i prepare this photo and she is not horrible.... If you can't, i understand. The Beraunite is not horrible, she is limited by diffraction and in fact she is very good for the size...

Tonight i give this photo with 0.35 mm of fov and not horrible... I make compilation.
avatar
Dominik Schläfli December 18, 2011 09:06PM
Matteo,
Between which points do you measure the 0.26 mm ? Is it the largest distance across the group, or the length of the edge of one of the crystals ?
FOV is less ambiguous.
best regards,
Dominik
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:13PM
The question is interessant Dominik !

I prefer FOV...
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 09:15PM
Dominik Schläfli Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo,
> Between which points do you measure the 0.26 mm ?
> Is it the largest distance across the group, or
> the length of the edge of one of the crystals ?
> FOV is less ambiguous.
> best regards,
> Dominik


normaly I use electronic caliper with lens, for others I use the ocular micrometer of the microscope. I take the measure from a corner to corner for the group, type here, or of the single crystal when possible

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 09:36PM
another question on different cameras, here a wulfenite of Rowley Mine of 7.14 mm. The first is take in the 12/12/2008 with Canon 40D the second take today 18/12/2011 with Canon 5D mark II, same file size worked the definition its many different

http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/1/X13242441431349345_1.jpg http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/1/X13242441431349345_2.jpg

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:37PM
First photo one other with a statistic method come after. In fact i search something...

I like this photo like a MEB...

http://www.alpinismeetmineraux.fr/mineralogie/macro/macro3/supermacro283.jpg
avatar
Dominik Schläfli December 18, 2011 09:38PM
OK, then the field of view of your first photo is about 1.4 mm, and 0.5 mm for the second.
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:41PM
I take same quality and perhaps better with simple close-up Matteo....

friendly

Fred



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2011 09:42PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:43PM
Yes exactly 1.4 mm for Matteo and my photo is very far of this size i can made photo for compare but for the moment i study for 0.35 mm of FOV.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 09:47PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes exactly 1.4 mm for Matteo and my photo is very
> far of this size i can made photo for compare but
> for the moment i study for 0.35 mm of FOV.

ok, but it will be unusable for publications, in my case for similar measure the reviews use SEM photos

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 18, 2011 09:50PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I take same quality and perhaps better with simple
> close-up Matteo....
>
> friendly
>
> Fred


depend how many is possible for you cut the photo, with full frame I cut how many times I want with no lost of resolution, if I cut the photo take with 40D I lost the resolution immediatly

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:51PM
But here we can seen color (incredible yellow), and she is translucid too.... Not the same thing.... I prefer that....

And here it's just for fun, in 1.4 mm of FOV i can give much more than you i think... Send me if you want :)

Friendly

Fred
avatar
Account Closed December 18, 2011 09:55PM
For me it's simple, i don't cut.... Why ? I can built a photo between infini and 0.31 mm of fov....

an another photo come after, first try with statistic method....


=> No significative difference.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2011 10:35PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 19, 2011 05:46AM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo i prepare this photo and she is not
> horrible.... If you can't, i understand. The
> Beraunite is not horrible, she is limited by
> diffraction and in fact she is very good for the
> size...


Fred, I think diffraction is the minor problem in this photo. I can see focus banding, i.e., the stepping increments are too large - not enough overlap. What is the numerical aperture of your 20X objective? Usually, 20X objectives have a DOF of a little more than 2 microns, that means you would need stepping increments of less than 2 microns. Also, the quality of that lens looks a bit soft to me.
Cheers

Harry



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 05:48AM by Harald Schillhammer.
avatar
Harald Schillhammer December 19, 2011 06:00AM
Matteo Chinellato Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> well here the group of yellow pyroclore of 0.26 mm
> into a cavity, files are not worked, in the first
> is normaly format, in the second its a cut and a
> crop of the group, not worked the same
>
> http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622
> _2.jpg
>
> http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622
> _1.jpg
>
> the end work is here
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-342329.html


Matteo, these photos clearly show the limitations of Luminars and Photars. For this subject size, you would probably take a 12.5 Photar at full bellows extension. Even when used with completely open aperture, the effective aperture is way beyond the diffraction limit. In addition, the working distance is so small that lighting becomes a problem. For this subject size I would choose a 40X objective and if you take a ELWD version you still have substantially more working distance than with a Photar. However, at this magnification one has to be extremely careful to avoid even the slightest vibration. As a Canon user, you have at least the advantage of the silent mode which mitigates the problems caused by mirror slap and shutter curtain. But even a car passing outside the house might have negative influence on the quality :). I think with microscope objectives you may achieve acceptable print quality down to a FOV of about 0.1 mm, given you have an absolutely vibration-free set-up. Anything smaller than that I guess SEM is the only serious option.
Cheers

Harry
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 06:25AM
Harald Schillhammer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo Chinellato Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > well here the group of yellow pyroclore of 0.26
> mm
> > into a cavity, files are not worked, in the
> first
> > is normaly format, in the second its a cut and
> a
> > crop of the group, not worked the same
> >
> >
> http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622
>
> > _2.jpg
> >
> >
> http://s02.imageupper.com/1_t/4/W13242405101346622
>
> > _1.jpg
> >
> > the end work is here
> > http://www.mindat.org/photo-342329.html
>
>
> Matteo, these photos clearly show the limitations
> of Luminars and Photars. For this subject size,
> you would probably take a 12.5 Photar at full
> bellows extension. Even when used with completely
> open aperture, the effective aperture is way
> beyond the diffraction limit. In addition, the
> working distance is so small that lighting becomes
> a problem. For this subject size I would choose a
> 40X objective and if you take a ELWD version you
> still have substantially more working distance
> than with a Photar. However, at this magnification
> one has to be extremely careful to avoid even the
> slightest vibration. As a Canon user, you have at
> least the advantage of the silent mode which
> mitigates the problems caused by mirror slap and
> shutter curtain. But even a car passing outside
> the house might have negative influence on the
> quality :). I think with microscope objectives you
> may achieve acceptable print quality down to a FOV
> of about 0.1 mm, given you have an absolutely
> vibration-free set-up. Anything smaller than that
> I guess SEM is the only serious option.
> Cheers


I use everytime the live view of the camera, the problem is moving the bellow with hands, when I have extra money I buy the computed micrometer slide just for not tuch the bellow. But similar photos its for me, and other photographers, only for SEM

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 06:46AM
Hello,

hum the increment is normally good i can make more if i want, i can try better. In fact my system have no limitation as classic system and the maximal precision is 0.1 µm or less....

Ok i try more.... But i think tan the limitation is just diffraction.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 06:49AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 10:22AM
Here a photo with 320 photos....

(when server wil be ok)


And i'm intersting by links with photo were we can seen fov between 0.6 mm - 0.3 mm not MEB also....

Because i read a lot of things but i see nothing... Yes it's unperfect but in these size i see nobody.

http://www.alpinismeetmineraux.fr/mineralogie/macro/macro3/supermacro285.jpg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 10:31AM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 10:34AM
320 photos?? I take max 20 photos in my specimens, and normaly its 10 photos in multiphocus

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 03:17PM
Matteo sorry but you are not so professional....

In these size it's an obligation to take a lot of photo... Depth of view is very limited for theses field of view by numerical aperture. With a 20X she is near 1.5 to 2µm....

It's important to understand this point....

There is no normaly here.... Just an obligation. With à 4X it's near 15 µm.....

Perhaps could you learn more if you listen more ?

Fred



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 03:24PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Dominik Schläfli December 19, 2011 05:05PM
Frédéric,
you said in an earlier post that you didnt have the limitations of a classical system: were you referring to photography without stacking, or are you using more advanced processing than simple stacking ( e.g. deconvolution ?)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 05:39PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo sorry but you are not so professional....
>
> In these size it's an obligation to take a lot of
> photo... Depth of view is very limited for theses
> field of view by numerical aperture. With a 20X
> she is near 1.5 to 2µm....
>
> It's important to understand this point....
>
> There is no normaly here.... Just an obligation.
> With à 4X it's near 15 µm.....
>
> Perhaps could you learn more if you listen more ?
>
> Fred


320 photos for have a similar result, sorry but for me its only time wasted. With only 10 photos I have the same results if not better, all my gallery photos is take with max of 20 photos in multifocus, not over. Just for say the pyroclore example its take with only 7 photos and I not have halos, blurred image etc....

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 05:41PM
ah, and I am not the unique to say this, other photographers of reviews etc... not take tons of photos for the multifocus

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 06:17PM
Matteo you are a true professional.... But in fact you don't listen me and you are not able to make similar photo. I you don't want learning it's not my problem. Pyrochlore is a low resolution photo, sorry but i think than all good photographer here think that...

If you want i can make a true photo to compare but you can't send me this specimen...

For make a 0.35 mm FOV photo 10 or 30 photo it's just ridiculous....
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 06:24PM
Hello Dominik,

Deconvolution is not for me for the moment (but It's an interessant thing....). I must try a freeware for see. Do you have try these freeware ?

But in fact it's for lowest FOV under 1 mm....


Isaid that because i use an atypic system that all. My plate is very simple because i don't need a great precision.... But i can done 0.1 µm for stacking... i'm not limited for the number of image....

For matteo it's not usefull :).
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 06:24PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Matteo you are a true professional.... But in fact
> you don't listen me and you are not able to make
> similar photo. I you don't want learning it's not
> my problem. Pyrochlore is a low resolution photo,
> sorry but i think than all good photographer here
> think that...
>
> If you want i can make a true photo to compare but
> you can't send me this specimen...
>
> For make a 0.35 mm FOV photo 10 or 30 photo it's
> just ridiculous....


hahahaha...ok ok stay with your idea, I am not professional but strange, Lapis use my photos, Mineralien Welt use my photos, Mineralogical Record use my photos, Gems & Gemmology use my photos and and also used for courses of G.I.A., Rivista Mineralogica Italian just in the last number I had just 3 articles with all my pictures and of specimens under the 1 mm of crystal....strange all this magazines want my photos if I am not professional, and not for speack of the many private collectors or museums or university pay on contract for have photos take by me.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 06:27PM by Matteo Chinellato.
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 06:38PM
Matteo it's not my probleme if they want pay for your photo, it's a great thing for you. But take a 1 mm crystal it's very easy... If they think than you are the best, good for you. But for me, this example of clinochlore show just your limitation in small minerals.

For me magazines are not important, when i look in these magasines, their photo are not enough good for than i paid for that....

I make new photo... i give example of definition if you want in the same size = 1.4 mm okay ? All here could compare... I 'll prefer take your clinochlore and all could be seen the difference.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 06:43PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Dario Cericola December 19, 2011 06:54PM
Again and again the same discussion which comes out from time to time....

I am wondering Chinellato are you trying to teach us or is this a show of egomania?

I guess all mindat knows you have 15000 euro equipment (good for you, I don't and don't want), if that is worth or not is not by business, but this is not a good reason (in my opinion) to always criticize someone else work. Do you think your comments are helpful? they only lead to irritation and do not bring anything good to you, to the other participants and readers. Is that so difficult to have an adult discussion, with a fruitful exchange of ideas and opinions??

btw Chinellato one more comment, doesn't your signature say "equipment is only the beginning, the photographer plays the major role"? and than you say you need 15000 euro equipment, it's not a good commercial for you skills.

just to conclude, I do photo because I enjoy it and whenever I can I'm glad to share my experience, to learn from someone else, or to help beginners.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dario Cericola
My Mindat page http://www.mindat.org/user-7365.html#0
Periodic Table of Minerals http://www.mindat.org/blog.php/1612/Periodic+Table+of+Minerals
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 06:59PM
Here an imperfect photo, just finished, no treatment.... Just stacked. FOV is 1.4 mm

Yes they are some noise (czp can done better) but the resolution is better than your pirochlore. We can see details.... Anf for that just an objective 4X and for 23 dollars you find the same quality on ebay...

http://ploum2006.free.fr/albumforummineraux/album392.jpg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 07:02PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 07:17PM
Dario Cericola Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Again and again the same discussion which comes
> out from time to time....
>
> I am wondering Chinellato are you trying to teach
> us or is this a show of egomania?
>
> I guess all mindat knows you have 15000 euro
> equipment (good for you, I don't and don't want),
> if that is worth or not is not by business, but
> this is not a good reason (in my opinion) to
> always criticize someone else work. Do you think
> your comments are helpful? they only lead to
> irritation and do not bring anything good to you,
> to the other participants and readers. Is that so
> difficult to have an adult discussion, with a
> fruitful exchange of ideas and opinions??
>
> btw Chinellato one more comment, doesn't your
> signature say "equipment is only the beginning,
> the photographer plays the major role"? and than
> you say you need 15000 euro equipment, it's not a
> good commercial for you skills.
>
> just to conclude, I do photo because I enjoy it
> and whenever I can I'm glad to share my
> experience, to learn from someone else, or to help
> beginners.


for sure I have teach to you seen you have ask to me some technique opinions time ago on mineralogical photos, I have the emails.

it's not a good commercial for you skills.

depend, for the moment the persons give work to me have another idea, for my professionalism in my work and other.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 07:27PM by Matteo Chinellato.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 07:19PM
Harjo Neutkens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Her are some examples what some can achieve with
> small FOVs
>
> Jean-Marc Johannet
>
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-392002.html FOV 1,5mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-391999.html FOV 1,5mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-385676.html FOV 1mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-325581.html FOV 0,5mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-385679.html FOV 0,7mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-385678.html FOV 1mm
>
> Fred Kruijen
>
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-104216.html FOV 1,5mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-85043.html FOV +/-
> 1mm
>
> Jean Claude Dol
>
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-342544.html FOV 1mm
> http://www.mindat.org/photo-342542.html FOV 1,5mm


THIS are photos, not sure what I have seen here over....not to say all 3 work for professional magazines

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 07:25PM
I don't want a lesson ( i have enough in France with some others "professional" who teach bad technics). I'm pragmatist ! If it's good the technic is good. I made with my ideas.

I'd like compare my technic with others and i need to take a same specimen to see but i don't find someone for make that.... Matteo, Dominik or others i'm waiting you. Just for the pleasure.... I'm not professional, just an amateur....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 07:31PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 07:29PM
If we don't work for magazine we are bad ? Haha.... I can't tell more....

It's unbelievable to read that !

Send me something.... all the size is good for me....
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 07:33PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If we don't work for magazine we are bad ?
> Haha.... I can't tell more....
>
> It's unbelievable to read that !
>
> Send me something.... all the size is good for
> me....


for sure with your photos no. Ah, I am informed on french magazines you have say they not pay, they pay....but for quality photos.
And just for understand the person here, go to here http://www.mindat.org/mesg-6-244147.html normaly a similar person I call " the portrait of modesty " hahahhaha

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
avatar
Account Closed December 19, 2011 07:41PM
Interesting... I prefer photos in book .... For magazine, it's free. They dont' pay but if they don't say the true....

In fact, here we have the demonstration of your capacity to show ypur professionalism.. I' ll posted regulary in great size my bad photo... Just for the pleasure. Free for all.... ;) and with good resolution



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2011 07:48PM by Frédéric Hède.
avatar
Matteo Chinellato December 19, 2011 07:43PM
Frédéric Hède Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting... I prefer photos in book ....
>
> In fact, here we have the demonstration of your
> capacity to show ypur professionalism.. I post
> regulary in great size my bad photo... Just for
> the pleasure. Free for all.... ;)


you go in my gallery here and you have all measures you want, its only at 7000 photos to control. And now I not lost any other time for answer in this post.

Mindat Page

http://www.mindat.org/user-5018.html


Attrezzatura e tecnica sono solo l'inizio. È il fotografo che conta più di tutto. (John Hedgecoe)
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.


bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner
Mineral and/or Locality  
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2016, except where stated. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: December 9, 2016 01:59:07
Go to top of page