|
|
Welcome!
High definition photo
Posted by Frédéric Hède
|
High definition photo January 29, 2012 12:13PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
For people who do not see the pictures in the French part, I show you some examples of high-definition images. The first is a small picture of the order of 50 Mpix and the next in the order of 75 Mpix. The images are highly compressed ... but the size is right.
image 01
image 02
and 2 small images of these links
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2012 04:25PM by Frédéric Hède.
image 01
image 02
and 2 small images of these links
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2012 04:25PM by Frédéric Hède.
|
|
Re: High definition photo January 29, 2012 02:00PM |
|
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 2,369 |
|
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 02:52AM |
|
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 446 |
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 03:23AM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 06:54AM |
|
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 142 |
Hm, I thought I replied to this yesterday but something must have gone wrong.
Anyway, my question has been answered already (because Gene asked the same).
Very nice results.
However, I have an additional question: do you move the camera setup or the subject? The best method would be to move the camera but with the lens staying in position - then stitching is a piece of cake. The only problem is that you have to use a lens with a large enough image circle.
I have always wanted to try that but I would need another kind of bellows for that, one with a shift option.
I guess you use an xy-stage to move either the entire set-up or the subject, right?
Cheers
Harry
Anyway, my question has been answered already (because Gene asked the same).
Very nice results.
However, I have an additional question: do you move the camera setup or the subject? The best method would be to move the camera but with the lens staying in position - then stitching is a piece of cake. The only problem is that you have to use a lens with a large enough image circle.
I have always wanted to try that but I would need another kind of bellows for that, one with a shift option.
I guess you use an xy-stage to move either the entire set-up or the subject, right?
Cheers
Harry
|
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 03:30PM |
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 840 |
Frédéric is doing panoramic merge of sets of focus stacked images, with deep stacks in the Z-direction, and not just focus stacking, with incredible results. I have tried similar with less deep stacks, but I am limited by the resolution of my camera body, as in my not as sharp as I would like example here - [www.mindat.org]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:28PM by Debbie Woolf.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:28PM by Debbie Woolf.
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 04:24PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
Hello Harry,
In my case it is the mineral that moves. For now they are testing because I have to also work depending on the capabilities of the software (Photomerge)
I use an XYZ stage with a stroke of 40 mm in all directions. The first objective is a Nikon CFI 4X achromatic. The base image has a field of view 3.5 mm. I'll try to see with others objectives. Image with this objective is 15 mm. My work is done with a bridge not a reflex.
This method is easily appliable for subjects up to 2 mm field to keep a sufficient resolution.
But this method is also applicable to larger issues and I will try quickly in this case.
Fred
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:29PM by Debbie Woolf.
In my case it is the mineral that moves. For now they are testing because I have to also work depending on the capabilities of the software (Photomerge)
I use an XYZ stage with a stroke of 40 mm in all directions. The first objective is a Nikon CFI 4X achromatic. The base image has a field of view 3.5 mm. I'll try to see with others objectives. Image with this objective is 15 mm. My work is done with a bridge not a reflex.
This method is easily appliable for subjects up to 2 mm field to keep a sufficient resolution.
But this method is also applicable to larger issues and I will try quickly in this case.
Fred
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:29PM by Debbie Woolf.
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 08:40PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
A small try with a DCR 250, not expensive but interessant close-up.... not a very big image. First with this objective.
image with dcr 250
I think than now, all people can built great image with inexpensive material.
And the size for internet
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:30PM by Debbie Woolf.
image with dcr 250
I think than now, all people can built great image with inexpensive material.
And the size for internet
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:30PM by Debbie Woolf.
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 11:32PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
|
|
Re: High definition photo January 30, 2012 11:55PM |
|
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 446 |
Gentlemen,
I believe that the defining difference between Matteo's images and Frederic's images is in the total pixel size of the final images. Of course there is no need to make 75MP images to show on a 2MP computer monitor, but those who wish to print large photos for display, or other purposes, are condemned to use huge files. Another case for super resolution images is that even on a computer monitor, you can display a non-micro image and then have the capability of zooming in to see micro details that would not be visible in the wider field of view.
For example, a 15000X5000 pixels (75MP) would make a high quality print of 50" x 17" (127cm x 42cm), A single 18MP image, from a APS-C sensor, would be approximately 5184 x 3456 pixels and would yield a high quality print of 17.2" x 11.5" (43.7cm X 29.3cm). If displayed on a monitor, there would be a difference in available zoom factor of ~3 between these file sizes. So, depending on the final result desired, bigger can be better.
The trend towards super resolution images is becoming popular in various scientific disciplines. One amateur astronomer has created an image of the sky that is 5000 MP in size and is a composite of over 37000 images! It allows one to see the whole sky and then zoom in to see very fine detail. [skysurvey.org]
This is the way that science goes.... Stop long enough to see what you have done and be left in the dust. So, I admire those who push the limits. That said, I believe that both Frederic, Matteo and others are on the cutting edge. I can only aspire to refining my capabilities to these levels.
Gene
I believe that the defining difference between Matteo's images and Frederic's images is in the total pixel size of the final images. Of course there is no need to make 75MP images to show on a 2MP computer monitor, but those who wish to print large photos for display, or other purposes, are condemned to use huge files. Another case for super resolution images is that even on a computer monitor, you can display a non-micro image and then have the capability of zooming in to see micro details that would not be visible in the wider field of view.
For example, a 15000X5000 pixels (75MP) would make a high quality print of 50" x 17" (127cm x 42cm), A single 18MP image, from a APS-C sensor, would be approximately 5184 x 3456 pixels and would yield a high quality print of 17.2" x 11.5" (43.7cm X 29.3cm). If displayed on a monitor, there would be a difference in available zoom factor of ~3 between these file sizes. So, depending on the final result desired, bigger can be better.
The trend towards super resolution images is becoming popular in various scientific disciplines. One amateur astronomer has created an image of the sky that is 5000 MP in size and is a composite of over 37000 images! It allows one to see the whole sky and then zoom in to see very fine detail. [skysurvey.org]
This is the way that science goes.... Stop long enough to see what you have done and be left in the dust. So, I admire those who push the limits. That said, I believe that both Frederic, Matteo and others are on the cutting edge. I can only aspire to refining my capabilities to these levels.
Gene
|
Re: High definition photo January 31, 2012 02:30AM |
Registered: 6 years ago Posts: 99 |
|
Re: High definition photo January 31, 2012 07:28PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
Hello !
Here an other example (unperfect, for the moment i see the best method). 4 image for this construction... Just DCR 250 and xyz stage
image zoomable
And small image
Here an other example (unperfect, for the moment i see the best method). 4 image for this construction... Just DCR 250 and xyz stage
image zoomable
And small image
|
Re: High definition photo January 31, 2012 10:26PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
|
|
Re: High definition photo February 01, 2012 10:18AM |
|
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 358 |
|
Re: High definition photo February 01, 2012 08:40PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
|
|
Re: High definition photo February 01, 2012 09:00PM |
|
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 2,369 |
|
|
Re: High definition photo February 02, 2012 08:36AM |
|
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 358 |
Back to topic: Frederic, if you have some spare time then goto a forum where you see experts from whom Harald was talking
[www.photomacrography.net]
If you search for "stitching" you will find some great ideas like [www.photomacrography.net]
I wish you good luck with your phantastic work. Unfortunately my time is too limited to do the same.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:42PM by Debbie Woolf.
[www.photomacrography.net]
If you search for "stitching" you will find some great ideas like [www.photomacrography.net]
I wish you good luck with your phantastic work. Unfortunately my time is too limited to do the same.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2012 11:42PM by Debbie Woolf.
|
|
Re: High definition photo February 02, 2012 11:54PM |
|
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 1,273 |
|
Re: High definition photo February 03, 2012 07:32AM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
|
Re: High definition photo February 05, 2012 08:27PM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 102 |
New photo for zooming..... Size is 64 Mpix. Built with 9 stacked-photo. Zoom x12, DCR 250.
Big here
Big image with zooming
small here
Big here
Big image with zooming
small here
Copyright © Jolyon Ralph and Ida Chau 1993-2013. Site Map.
Locality, mineral & photograph data are the copyright of the individuals who submitted them. Site hosted & developed by Jolyon Ralph.
Mindat.org is an online information resource dedicated to providing free mineralogical information to all. Mindat relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Mindat does not offer minerals for sale. If you would like to add information to improve the quality of our database, then click here
to register.
Current server date and time: 22nd May 2013 23:53:36
Current server date and time: 22nd May 2013 23:53:36
Mindat Lightbox
Options| Fade toolbar when not in focus | Fix toolbar to bottom of page | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Hide Social Media Links | |||
| Slideshow frame delay | seconds | ||




















