Stir crazy lockdown macro.
- Thread starter Valvebounce
- Start date
Yeah, you've got it nailed. 
I've put a lot of effort into getting the lighting set up so I don't have to do too much color-fiddling in Gimp--but that's a totally different topic! Generally I can just focus, shoot, crop, do a circle-select, and get rid of the background. [I know that's more than you need to do for your purposes--I'm writing for the benefit of anyone reading this who might decide they want to do this on a large scale.]
Side note to others: I've found applying artificial sharpening tends to make things worse; when I see pics online I'll notice many of them have the "speckles" from over-sharpening. Of course, starting with an excellent lens/sensor makes it easy to avoid.
I've put a lot of effort into getting the lighting set up so I don't have to do too much color-fiddling in Gimp--but that's a totally different topic! Generally I can just focus, shoot, crop, do a circle-select, and get rid of the background. [I know that's more than you need to do for your purposes--I'm writing for the benefit of anyone reading this who might decide they want to do this on a large scale.]
Side note to others: I've found applying artificial sharpening tends to make things worse; when I see pics online I'll notice many of them have the "speckles" from over-sharpening. Of course, starting with an excellent lens/sensor makes it easy to avoid.
Upvote
0
And just to push my luck, I decided to try a 1:1 magnification. (Though I was close before.) I was beginning to wonder whether I should just avoid that magnification. Apparently not. For this I used the ring light away from the lens, so as a side light. Who knows? Maybe it was the flat lighting that kept the earlier tests from looking sharp.
And 100% crop:
Maybe tomorrow, I'll try the rings on the lens again.
And 100% crop:
Maybe tomorrow, I'll try the rings on the lens again.
Upvote
0
I decided to try the tubes before going to bed. This is at f/11, and just about 2:1 with 3 tubes. It's a little softer, but still usable. With more care, maybe I could focus more accurately and shoot at f/8 or maybe even f/5.6 for less diffraction. This is effectively a bit smaller than f/33.
Upvote
0
Somehow my other reply got lost.
I could see both of your "full dime" pictures being published (if someone wanted pictures of a common dime); the top 100% crop is certainly usable too. Sometimes collectors want to zero in on a particular feature (like an overdate or a mint mark, especially if the mint mark turns out to have been added on by some fraudster. (There are cases where a mint mark can hugely increase the value of a coin; e.g., any 1909 S cent [there were three different kinds] versus a 1909 cent of the same type is a huge difference, also an 1914 D cent versus a 1914 cent or a 1916 S versus 1916 dime.) With increasing sensor resolution, magnification is becoming less and less necessary (though sometimes it really is needed).
When your full image is three feet across on a computer monitor at 100%, you've got the coin under pretty good magnification from the start.
I could see both of your "full dime" pictures being published (if someone wanted pictures of a common dime); the top 100% crop is certainly usable too. Sometimes collectors want to zero in on a particular feature (like an overdate or a mint mark, especially if the mint mark turns out to have been added on by some fraudster. (There are cases where a mint mark can hugely increase the value of a coin; e.g., any 1909 S cent [there were three different kinds] versus a 1909 cent of the same type is a huge difference, also an 1914 D cent versus a 1914 cent or a 1916 S versus 1916 dime.) With increasing sensor resolution, magnification is becoming less and less necessary (though sometimes it really is needed).
When your full image is three feet across on a computer monitor at 100%, you've got the coin under pretty good magnification from the start.
Upvote
0
Good topic choice Graham,
Here's a link to a couple of spring flower shots I've posted in the Flowers and other Flora thread this afternoon, https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/flowers-and-other-flora.22225/post-831966 - done to avoid duplication. Not quite the magnification others have posted, but technically 'macro' nonetheless.
Here's a link to a couple of spring flower shots I've posted in the Flowers and other Flora thread this afternoon, https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/flowers-and-other-flora.22225/post-831966 - done to avoid duplication. Not quite the magnification others have posted, but technically 'macro' nonetheless.
Upvote
0
Hi StoicalEtcher.
Yes, very nice shots, I already gave a thumbs up on them.
Cheers, Graham.
Yes, very nice shots, I already gave a thumbs up on them.
Cheers, Graham.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Hi Kodakrome.
Nice photo, ugly looking subject, the green ones I see are much less foreboding.
Cheers, Graham.
Nice photo, ugly looking subject, the green ones I see are much less foreboding.
Cheers, Graham.
Upvote
0
Hi Graham,
Yeah I know...that's the problem with bugs. Most of them are ugly.
Upvote
0
