----- Forwarded message from Eric Delson -----
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:36:46 -0400
From: Eric Delson
Reply-To: Eric Delson
Subject: Re: choosing a digital camera for collecting landmark data
To: [email protected]
Following up on the points already made, you might look at
http://rhoi.berkeley.edu/RHOI_photo/RHOI_Photography_Protocol.html
which has some good ideas about specimen photography methods
Orientation of the scale in the image is important if you will use
that to size the specimen; level it close to the area you plan to
digitize and check the depth of field as discussed below, but keep it
far enough from the specimen that it does not throw a shadow or block
anything. You can also use the built-in self-timer to shoot the
picture, thus allowing the camera to stabilize on the support, if you
don't have a cable release (which seem not to exist any more).
Eric Delson <[email protected]>
At 03:54 AM 10/29/2012 Monday, you wrote:
>----- Forwarded message from Rich Strauss -----
>
> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:45:30 -0400
> From: Rich Strauss
> Reply-To: Rich Strauss
> Subject: Re: choosing a digital camera for collecting landmark data
> To: [email protected]
>
> In addition to the desirable camera characters listed by others, I
> think that it's important always to check carefully for lens
> distortion by taking a photo of high-quality graph paper and
> checking for straight lines (numerically by digitizing grid
> points). I've used several different kinds of cameras and lenses,
> and have found that distortion near the edges of the field can be
> quite significant. I also found an Olympus macro lens to have
> unacceptable distortion in one small area just to the left of the
> center of the field.
>
>Rich Strauss
>
>At 02:57 PM 10/25/2012, you wrote:
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Alexandre Silva de Paula -----
>
>Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 18:29:01 -0400
>From: Alexandre Silva de Paula
>Reply-To: Alexandre Silva de Paula
>Subject: Re: [Spam] Re: choosing a digital camera for collecting landmark data
>To: [email protected]
>
>Dear Sive,
>
>I think you will find one appropriate microscope on page
>http://www.dinolite.com/ I have one AM4013ZT4 Dino-Lite Pro with one
>Suporte DinoLite MS-35B Stand Rack. They work fine. You will find an
>appropriate microscope.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Alexandre.
>
>On Oct 24, 2012, at 6:57 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>----- Forwarded message from "Novack-Gottshall, Philip M." -----
>
>Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:24:15 -0400
>From: "Novack-Gottshall, Philip M."
>Reply-To: "Novack-Gottshall, Philip M."
>Subject: Re: choosing a digital camera for collecting landmark data
>To: "[email protected]"
>
>Dear Sive,
>
>I work with fossil invertebrates, which tend to be a bit easier to
>photograph and digitize because they're typically somewhat flattened
>and two-dimensional. But hopefully this will be useful for your specimens.
>
>In my experience, any decent camera does fine. I've listed the
>various equipment I've used on my
>website: http://www1.ben.edu/faculty/pnovack-gottshall/PaleoDIMPL.html
>
>Overall, the most important factors are to (1) use a scale bar, (2)
>understand your camera settings (especially the aperture-priority
>setting), and (3) use a camera/copy stand to keep your camera steady.
>
>Use of a scale bar is always critical; without it, you're very
>limited in the kinds of analyses you can do (although some
>shape-based morphometrics are OK). But given it is so easy to
>include one in every photograph, there's no reason not to. Just make
>sure that the scale bar is positioned close to you specimen (i.e.,
>not along the border of your field of view, where you can get
>aberations) and in the same vertical plane as your specimen (to
>prevent parallax-focus issues). You also want to make sure the scale
>bar is in focus.
>
>I often use a macro lens to get get large images of small specimens.
>In these lenses, the focal depth is dramatically reduced. (This is
>true for regular lenses, too.) The key in both is to use the
>aperture-priority setting (sometimes with different names in
>different camera models.) The aperture setting (sometimes called an
>f-stop of f-number) allows you to change the focal depth of your
>images. (Large f-numbers, such as f/16 use a very small aperture but
>allow a "deep" field of view; small f-numbers, such as f/2 have
>larger apertures and shallow fields of view.) This is important so
>that parts of your specimen close to you are as much in focus as
>parts away from you. The downside of a large f-number is that it
>takes more time for your camera to compensate for the reduced light
>passing through the aperture, which means the shot takes longer. If
>you are holding the camera by hand, it's essentially impossible to
>get a well focused image because of the camera shake. So a
>camera/photo stand is critical. (Another downside is that some
>lenses produce less focused images at extreme f-numbers, so you'll
>need to play with your camera and set-up to find the optimal
>settings to get sharp images with "deep" fields of view.)
>
>Finally, although a photostand is large and cumbersome (and not
>something you'd expect to travel with), it is very helpful for
>trying different settings, playing with different lighting scenarios
>(another important factor that can be critical in making a "flat"
>image of a non-flat specimen look non-flat), and especially for
>getting sharp focus (whether using large f-numbers of not.)
>(Lighting is also important when playing with f-numbers because a
>brightly lit specimen can be blanched by too-much lighting, even if
>relatively dim, if the aperture is open for a few seconds.) Most
>museums have photostands available if you ask. They're a critical
>tool if you are serious about photographing specimens.
>
>(As an aside, most copystands use incandescent lighting, which can
>get incredibly hot when turned on for a batch of specimens! The only
>copystand I've seen that uses non-incandescents is a rather pricey
>model by Bencher that uses flourescent, but is well worth the price,
>in my opinion. Although it's not a traveling model by any stretch.)
>
>Finally, depending on the f-numbers you use, you might consider
>using a remote switch (or a computer program that speaks to the
>camera), which can allow you to "click" the camera to take the
>picture from a distance, further reducing the camera shake on the
>camera which is the enemy of a sharp focus.
>
>Best wishes,
>Phil
>
>On 10/23/2012 12:27 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>----- Forwarded message from Sive Finlay -----
>
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:17:26 -0400
>From: Sive Finlay
>Reply-To: Sive Finlay
>Subject: choosing a digital camera for collecting landmark data
>To: [email protected]
>
>Dear all,
>
>I'm starting a new PhD project studying convergent evolution in
>Malagasy tenrecs (Tenrecidae). I want to compare morphological
>similarities among the skulls and limbs of tenrecs and convergent
>species (moles, shrews, hedgehogs etc.)
>I'd be very grateful for advice on which cameras and/or lighting set
>up would be suitable for photographing museum specimens for later
>analysis using landmark data.
>I'll be travelling to different museums so ideally I would like
>equipment which is easily portable and can be re-assembled to create
>consistent photographing conditions.
>
>Any tips or advice on which equipment might be suitable would be
>much appreciated.
>
>Thanks
>
>Sive Finlay
>[email protected]
>
>--
>Sive Finlay
>IRC EMBARK Initiative Postgraduate Scholar
>
>Macroecology and Macroevolution Research Group
>Zoology building
>School of Natural Sciences
>Trinity College Dublin
>
> [email protected]
> http://www.tcd.ie/Zoology/research/ncooper/people.php
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
----- End forwarded message -----
