Macro flash setup test photo

[Isonychia 0]

 

I got my Nikon R1C1 macro flash kit the other day, but had some family responsibilities that prevented me from playing with it until today.

 

Here's a shot from the first few test exposures. It's a Cupsuptic wet fly shot with a Nikon D2H camera, a Micro-Nikkor 60mm AF lens, and the R1C1 system with flash heads set above and below the fly firing at a 1.5-to-1 lighting ratio. Both flash heads had diffusers on them. The camera was set to aperture-priority mode at f/22. A dark ceramic tile backdrop was set 12 inches behind the fly. No attempt was made to light the backdrop.

 

Because of the weight of the flash head unit, Nikon recommends manual focus only with its 60mm lens. With the 105 and 200 lenses, autofocus is possible.

 

All in all, it's an easy system to use despite the almost-indecipherable manual that seems to come with every piece of new Nikon equipment.

 

John

[Graham 0]

Hi John,

 

I like it, a lot. The lighting looks crisp and bright and not overly warm like the halogen I've been using and the black background makes the colors really pop nicely.

 

Being able to rotate each flash into position and set varying light ratios sounds like fun to play with!!! and your results are sweet.

[Sturgeon_Catcher 0]

Very nice John.

 

a question for you. In your massive book - in settings do you have the option to select the number of focusing points? My little camera has a setting where there are 3 focusing points. I would wager yours does as well.

 

also I notice that the hook is in perfect focus. I suggest that your camera selected this point to focus on.

 

When I do the manual photos with 35mm I employ a focusing rail and float the entire image to set a happy medium. I understand that you cannot do this with your digital.

 

a suggestion. Set the camera into focusing on multiple points - employ a 2 second delay for the shutter release - then provide something as dense as the hook at the tail feather position for the camera to focus on - hit the shutter then move the dense object.

 

The reason I say this is that the tail and the tip of the wing are just a little fuzzy.

 

Depth of field is a hard concept to understand and to see in a macro shot.

If you look closely at this inset you will see that not all of the feather for the hackle is in focus. This is an extreme i agree - but the depth of field in this photo is less than 3/8". Yet, the fly occupies a depth of almost 5/8". The reason the entire fly appears good is because of the time. The shot was 4 seconds of exposure. This factor in conjunction with the f32 lense setting allows the film to gather a great deal thus expanding the depth of field.

 

Therefore back to the book - can you set a time in your digital camera. If not - then make sure that the speed is the slowest possible with the multiple flashes. Normally this would be a speed of 60.

 

Please understand that I am not attempting to compare my photo to yours. Also, I am not trying to be critical of your photo. I suggest that you would like to have the best photo possible. Regardless of what equipment you employ.

 

My suggestion is only an effort to assist you in getting the best possible.

 

Sorry if you think I am being critical.

later

Fred

[Joe Hard 0]

Gotta like new toys.

[kargen 0]

If you can, force your camera to focus just in front of the hook. From the point of focus you have a range that will be in focus. That range is 1/3 in front of the focal point and 2/3 behind the focal point. Auto focus is tough for macro. I always use manual focus any chance I get.

[Isonychia 0]

Sorry if you think I am being critical.

 

Not at all, Fred! I posted the shot so I could learn from others more skilled and knowledgeable than I, and so that others who read the threads might learn as well.

 

And Kargen, thanks for the tip about the offset focus. I'll give both of these techniques a try. Thanks!

 

John

 

[Sturgeon_Catcher 0]

It has been a mystery for years how it is possible for me to upset someone merely by speaking to them. First meeting first few words and this person is permanently upset with me. Therefore, always careful on first meetings.

 

I tried several methods of presenting flies to be photographed. Books, anything I could to find a cool way to present flies.

some examples: tiny cork, large cork, vice, other vice, seashell, geode, stick, etc. I think the coolest was in the Paraloop book with the shells.

I tried half a dozen shells. Rubber cement - how did he hide that glue???? All of these pictures were with the 35mm and lengthy set ups again.

 

That was a bit of a sidetrack but bear with me. Put the thread that I posted and then put Kargen's together.

All of the shots but one have a common problem associated with macro shots of flies. By macro shot I am suggesting filling the entire frame with the fly. Camera positioning in the digital of less than 6" from object or thereabouts.

detail sufficient to count soft hackle barbules.

 

It is depth of field and focal point. The wire clamp from radio shack mounted on a dowel set in my vice base answers all of the dilemma of again depth of field - my definition for purposes of this thread: that area presented in focus on the final photo.

 

The problem lies in the digital focus. The vice will definitely be of value = camera will definitely pick up the vice jaws - being nearer it will set beginning focus at least 1/4" from fly. The digital image is an average of several dimensions often chosen by value. Think of your image as a map. This map is defined by points lines and areas. If an area exceeds a control number then that area becomes a value. The camera then sets a focal point somewhere close to that point.

 

If as I proposed on my photo in regards dimensions and what Kargen said regards 1/3 forward. The focal point on my picture would be off entirely. There would be no fly. Fine focusing is accomplished with the lense set on infinity and focus is accomplished by moving the camera. The focusing rail is turned in 1/8" turns at this point. It is a turn of the dial of 1/32" = miniscule.

 

Additionally, what if you moved the focus from 1/3front to 2/3rds front. That's how I cheated my picture. Instead of focusing on the hook plane - I focused on the middle of the barbules of the parachute hackle nearest the camera.

 

The back of my picture is completely out of focus. Interesting thought "the back of my picture". Depth of field.

 

Do try this presentation method. What is visible of this clamp lies on the same plane as the hook. And - the jaws of my vice are not pretty in a photo.

 

A side note; When you see the measurement of f stop think of it in this way. f is a pie. f32 is the smallest piece of pie because it was cut into 32 pieces. Very difficul to find a lense with f32 let alone an f64. (Do you see the progression? All numbers double in photography) Historically the availability and direction of manufacturer's primary focus has not been smaller but bigger. Thus 1.8 was a cool lense - it opened so large you didn't need a flash a good percentage of the time.

 

My little digital flashes all the time. When I'd simply close down to a smaller size and shoot longer. Smart little digital I have no?

 

Gosh I hope this isn't too confusing. A lot of info there and fired pretty fast. You see that is the problem and why I too was pleased to read Graham's post. Finally, someone to whom I could talk photography. I was excited because I could talk about my self taught knowledge of twenty years to someone who in fact knew the theory and would share. You see - I know the what will happen but not necessarily why. The same as my gardening and graduating from college. I can be terribly boring when it comes to gardening.

 

It's confusing but its not. A lot and I mean a lot of pieces have to come together and they all have names, principles, and procdedures.

 

some examples:

 

35mm

 

 

Digital no light setup - only the little cameras flash.

email photos - very quick

These are some attempts for striper flies. Creatively speaking.....

 

later

Fred

 

[Graham 0]

Hi sturgeon_catcher, AWESOME info, thank you!!!

 

I have wondered how to best focus on a fly in the vise, and usually focused on the hook. Your advice was so exciting I just had to take a couple of quick shots before heading off to work. I just took the pic below and focused in front of the hook instead of on the hook. I didn't take time to setup nice lighting or background, but I'm getting happier with my focusing now, thank you for your help!

 

Graham

 

[Sturgeon_Catcher 0]

Too Good!!!! Too Good!!!! Exactly what I am talking about.

 

Graham look closely at your photo. Do a single magnification in your photo shop. Crop the throat area of your fly at high resolution. There are about 5 blue follicles and directily behind is a follicle facing away from the camera. The tip of that particular follicle is just a little out of focus. That is the back of your photo.

 

If you are in the habit of photographing this dimension of fly move the point of focus back just a hair and try it again. I had hoped to have fixed numerical dimensions of lense to object but was unable to do so. My flies varied in dimension too much. If I did have a fixed dimension as in your case - planned to make a spacer and just insert it between lense and hook. I would then use this initial setup to begin shooting. Would save oodles of time doing basic set up for a repetitive task.

[Graham 0]

I see what you mean. Here's a 100% crop, and it is out of focus. Man, it seems like this will take a lot of practice...

 

[Graham 0]

This is the full frame pic with no croping

 

 

 

[Sturgeon_Catcher 0]

Who can see it in the full- size? No one. That's why your original crop fit so well with the thread. The "back" of your photo is evident.

Though the numbers double...I think there must be a happy medium.

 

Later

Fred

[Graham 0]

Hi Fred, From looking closer at my pic, the rear end of the fly is not as focused as the head area. I need to figure out a good way to keep the hook in the same plane as the lens... Any sugestions? I doubt this will be a problem with smaller flies, but long hooks seem challenging to keep in focus along the entire length.

[Sturgeon_Catcher 0]

The problem lies in the value setting of the focus. Back to the map concept.

 

The fly represents an area and the focus uses that area as a base value. Now it wants to focus on something and chooses the densest or largest object to focus on. Some feathers do not receive a value equal to their weight in the photo.

 

My multilple focus helps. By shifting the camera just a little the focusing points move. I have seen quite a few configurations for these points. Again measuring value.

 

Try shiifting the camera just a little left or right. Graham I assume you have a focusing rail. Try the shifting.

Also try moving back just a little. The smaller optic on the digital may again set values that are not all inclusive.

later

Fred

[munky 0]

Could you not just adjust the aperture to a higher value to create a wider DOF? I usually shoot my flies on a setting of F16.