Re: [ECOLOG-L] Comparison of canopy hemispherical photo systems
Hello Kerry, I have used a free package called, CIMES ( http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286 - Alemu Gonsamo http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#a http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#aff1, b http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#aff2, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#cor1, gonsa...@geog.utoronto.ca, - Jean-Michel N. Walter http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#c http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#aff3, - Petri Pellikka http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#a http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168169911002286#aff1 ). I have only used this command line program for about a week last fall, but will be using it much more over the next couple months. Hence, I can give you some more information soon and only have a limited amount of time to type this email. I investigated two other free software packages that were used in quantifying the canopy from peer-reviewed journal articles and felt that CIMES was a better package for several reasons (including: each canopy photo needs a slope and aspect included [without that it would be very difficult, because when taking the photo your camera needs to be level and top of camera directed to the North)]. My setup is as follows and fairly inexpensive if you can find the lens used and in good condition : Nikon CoolPix 8700 (used for about $80-120) probably discontinued but some new cameras are available for ~ $450ish. Nikon UR-E12 converter ~$12 Nikon (Fisheye Converter) FC-E9 0.2x --possibly ~$200 used, though difficult to find. New maybe ~$650+ , there is also another model that would work, the FC-E8. You need to use an image editing software first before bringing them into CIMES, I was using 'ImageJ' and it seemed to work pretty good. Overall, it is a bit cumbersome, likely because it is a free software (and/or because I'm a bit dull in the head). There are a couple getting started type PDFs available online as well, they seemed to help but still moderately difficult (if you have more experience with command line programs it might not be difficult). I have never used Winscanopy of Hemiview to know if its worth the extra $$. Hope that helped, Adam Kehoe On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Tonya Lander tonya.lan...@plants.ox.ac.uk wrote: Dear Kerry, Have you considered using the very low tech but quite effective 'canopy scope' method? - Brown et al., 2000 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112715001693#b0020 - N. Brown, S. Jennings, P. Wheeler, J. Nabe-Nielsen - An improved method for the rapid assessment of forest understorey light environments - J. Appl. Ecol., 37 (2000), pp. 1044–1053 https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00573.x Best wishes, Tonya __ Dr Tonya Lander Department of Plant Sciences University of Oxford http://www.plants.ox.ac.uk/plants/staff/TonyaLander.aspx -- *From:* Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] on behalf of Kerry Woods [kwo...@bennington.edu ] *Sent:* 24 August 2015 18:09 *To:* ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU *Subject:* [ECOLOG-L] Comparison of canopy hemispherical photo systems Anyone with experience/insight on the relative merits of currently available systems for analysis of forest canopy using hemispherical photos (hemiview, winscanopy, etc.)? For use by undergrads, so ease of use is important. -- Kerry D. Woods Bennington College, Natural Sciences Dir. of Research, Huron Mt. Wildlife Found. www.hmwf.org faculty.bennington.edu/~kwoods kwo...@bennington.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Equipment recommendations for hemispherical photography and recording light intensity
Hello, Does anyone know if the Olympus stylus tough 2 with fisheye lens captures the full 360 degrees need for analysis or does it cut part of the photo off? Also do you think it can be set up and levelled on a tripod easily to take canopy photos? I'm leaning towards purchasing the standard, but with the increase megapixels for other types of photography being more versatile, though the main reason I would consider the Olympus is because it has built in GPS. This field season my crew (including me) will be taking very many canopy photos at very many locations in the dry-coniferous forests of westcentral Idaho. Having GPS coords to go along with the photos could be a big help (for the sake of organization as well as redundancy to make sure we have the correct location). The fisheye lens for the Olympus is a little cheaper than the one that goes with the Coolpix 4500could that be of lower quality and make the Olympus combination not as good? Thanks, Adam Kehoe Montana State University ( USFS RMRS) On 11/12/13, Elizabeth Wandrag elizabethwand...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks to everyone for the suggestions and explanations. It sounds like the Coolpix 4500 is still a good camera for hemispherical photography for a number of reasons: the camera body is hinged to point up at the canopy, the 180° fisheye lens does not cut off the edges of the image, and although the pixels may be low compared to newer cameras, it is more than sufficient for the image analysis software. The Coolpix is also inexpensive. While there are combinations of newer cameras and lenses that could be used, the advantage (more pixels) does not seem to be worth the increase in cost (over 10x more expensive). This is exactly what we needed to know--thanks! For those of you that asked, the details of the project we are working on can be found here: www.ecologyofbirdloss.org Below are the responses we receieved: *the Coolpix 4500 is frequently used because both it and the 180° fisheye lens that fits it are cheap and easily replaced. higher-quality DSLR cameras will take larger images, but a circular 180° lens is often tremendously expensive. (most fisheyes are only 180° diagonal-to-diagonal, meaning they produce a cropped rectangular image, not a complete circular hemisphere) THAT SAID: the majority of image analysis software doesn't particularly care about image size or resolution, and the Coolpix 4500 is more than sufficient. if you want to get Fancy, it would make more sense to go for a dedicated light metering system such as the Li-Cor, rather than spend money on an overly-elaborate DSLR. *I recently bought an Olympus Stylus Tough 2 which is water proof to 45 and has a f2 lens. It accepts accessory lenses with its adapter including a fisheye lens that is waterproof to 45 feet. GPS is also built in. I love the camera and fisheye lens combination. Seems like you could make it work. *The lens you choose is more important than the camera. However, you should consider how the aspect ratio of the sensor (e.g., cameras capture less of the image viewed by the lens) will impact the resulting image. Camera brand is a personal preference. Camera equipment is expensive to purchase upfront; buy what you can afford. Another possibility worth looking into would be a light meter. *Couple of years ago, I we took more than 1000 canopy photographs using the same camera that you mentioned and the photographs came out really well. I don't think camera is important, but try to use good fisheye lens. *Many of the newer cameras, although marketed as hemispherical lens, fail to capture the full 360 degrees needed for analysis of these photos. Although dated, the Coolpix does a good job with this. If you go with a newer model, be sure to verify you are getting the image you need before you invest in the camera system. I have a 'new' fisheye lens for our 'newer' SLR digital camera that is just collecting dust - as it cuts the top and bottom sections of the image off. I have used HOBO loggers to collect light intensity data within forest gaps. A few years back, I programmed the loggers to record at specified time intervals left them in place for circa a week. I did not have enough to cover all my gap locations, so I never actually ended up using the data for analysis - but I'm confident that I could have and that these data would be highly correlated with the results of hemispherical photos.
