Moose,
Your points are downright... illuminating. The use of microscope stages hadn't
occured to me. And, yes, my way of learning/having fun is to fuss way too much
for a while before things start distilling themselves into something more
manageable. Many thanks for your insights - you've pretty much broken this
thing down into the areas worth exploring in more detail... - Phil
On 22:58, Moose wrote:
>Philippe Le Zuikomane wrote:
>
>>That's definitely an interesting point at that magnification level.
>>I was
>thinking the stitched files would be monsters, and wondering about
>how to split them back into files that a rather wide format printer
>could handle so its output could be glued cleanly edge to edge.
>Let's assume one has 'scanned' a playing card.
>>
>Tom has done a lot of that - before he bought the really wide
>carriage printer. He said it worked very well.
>
>>As I said before, this is potentially goofy but the fun part would
>>be the sheer
>surface area of print showing minute detail. Add a little diffuse
>backlighting and a neat frame and you have a conversation piece if
>it doesn't look like cr**p.
>>
>>Now of course, what about, say, attempting higher ratios with very
>>small
>objects (up to x12)?
>>
>Now you are getting into the area where precision microscope stages
>can be used. They move subjects on their stage with great linear
>precision for various techie purposes. I've personally never been
>much interested in anything past about 1:1. Suddenly the equipment
>and techniques start to resemble micrography equipment more than
>photo stuff, and it all becomes, from my perspective, too fussy and
>too much like work, not much like fun. I like the results others
>get, juts haven't wanted to go there myself.
>
>>Would the angles involved with the highest magnification macros
>>lenses
>introduce serious perspective distortions so that stiching the
>pictures together would not yield something close to a linear
>projection of the whole surface being mapped?
>>
>I suspect that can be dealt with, more shots and more fussing.
>
>>Where do you draw the line if you are trying to print a composite
>>to obtain a
>humongous likeness of a postage stamp with no obvious distortion,
>>
>Each person daws their own line, I believe.
>
>>assuming you have no DOF or lighting issues?
>>
>At those magnifications, you always have those issues. Even with
>specialized equipment like the Oly photomicro gear, DOF is always
>limited and lighting more complex.
>
>Moose
>
>
>============================================== List usage info:
>http://www.zuikoholic.com List nannies:
>olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|