HP5+/D3200 Exposure Under the Microscope

[VaryaV]

Seeking Advice or Suggestions.

Last night I ran 3 rolls of D3200 under the microscope and when I processed the film - there was nothing on the film. I had it set at 1/4th of a second. To get more dramatic lighting I had 2 scope lamps directed at the petri dish otherwise the room was pitch black. The lens pieces gave me a brilliant subject in focus and gorgeous. The dramatic lighting added a lot of depth and mystery to the dish. I could not see a thing through the camera lens because of the tube.

Four years ago (it had been that long) I shot 2 rolls of HP5+ at 1/4th under the scope with the room lights on. I got decent images but the lighting was a bit flat by my standards. (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

The problem is that the tube/adapter mount is long and dark and it's impossible to see anything through the camera so I have to pretty much guess. But I obviously blew it last night with my settings.

I want to use D3200 with the overhead lights off. Is this even possible to get enough light down the tube? ... and any suggestions on what I should set my speed to? I have a bunch of exp D3200 (12/10) to mess with.

I would welcome any suggestions.

 

[VaryaV]

Results are in. If anyone is interested take a look-see. I burned through 6/7 rolls of film before I got an acceptable image. Went with the HP5+ at f4, rated and developed at box speed. Had to put 3 scope lamps on the image because lighting it underneath the stage, bouncing it off the mirror, ruined the beautiful darks.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

many more to follow

 

[VaryaV]

I failed to mention why there was no image on the first 4 rolls I shot. when you bring the microscope into focus you have to turn the lever off for the eye pieces for the camera to read the image. at that point you are not able to see the image through the scope or make any focusing adjustments. This knob is only on scopes that have a camera attachment so getting research on it was difficult. I had forgotten about this mechanism from the last time I shot through it. You also get an entirely different image between the camera lens and the eye pieces so you need to compose for that...

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Varyav ,

Better to switch digital photography. You see what you get instantly. I think you would not have enough time to play with buying film , waiting film , not to able to decide your setup is correct , development etc.
As you know Leitz have excellent microscopes for 400 dollars and you can attach a digital camera also.
As you know for example histology depends correct colors and all digital setup is good for that.I want to buy a geology crystal microscope from Leitz and I wouldnt never go for film.

You will get better posts from microscope forums if there are still film users.

Umut

 

[VaryaV]

My father left me these microscopes when he passed away. He was a science professor for a major university and shot slides with film for more then 40 years, and he was very reknown in his field. He also taught electronmicroscopy. All the work he did was purely scientific for research and scientific papers. My background is in fine art and I am trying to do something with b&w under the scope that is different then what I see in Biology textbooks. I have no interest in shooting digital but I appreciate your comments and hope you have as much pleasure in your explorations as I have.

I had done a series several years before that was very successful but much time had passed and I had forgotten the subtle nuances of the scope.

CHEERS!

 

[hpulley]

With my Mamiya RB67 Pro S I like to use Fuji FP-3000B in an NPC Land Polaroid back for proof shots of Delta 3200. I'd rather shoot a few shots of Fuji Instant Film for lighting proofs rather than wasting a whole roll of D3200. Admittedly a 10 pack of FP-3000B is almost $10 while a roll of D3200 in 120 is only $4.25 but still I'd rather spend $1-2 on a test shot or two rather than waste half an hour developing a roll of blanks. You can check focus and composition too in the same way. Reciprocity isn't too bad, +1 EC needed for 10s exposure.

 

[tkamiya]

The type of scope you are using is called "Trinocular" scope. Usually, but not always, these scopes have a lever that can direct no light, some light, or all light to the camera port. I guess your scope doesn't have the partial setting?

Also, you *could* light the subject not only from below the stage but from side as well and this technique is called "oblique" lighting. Doesn't really work with high magnifications but I think you are using 10x to 40x or so? You might want to try that too. You get some shadows and can create sort of a 3D effect.

I used to play around with that for a while back - although my scope wasn't trinocular.

 

[VaryaV]

Thanks for the comments guys, much appreciated.

I wish the scope had a 'partial' setting on the lever but it doesn't. I will have to post a pic of my setup you all might get a kick out of it.

For lighting I have 3 scope lamps and a double gooseneck fiber optic that I use for lighting and I do have the subject light from three sides. The nice thing about the lamps is they all have 'dimmer' switches on them so I can really control what I want to see. Of course, if you have seen my work I prefer lots of dark and shadows to create a sense emotion. I wish my dad was still around to answer all my photo questions, he spent all his time in a lab looking through a scope and I don't know how his eyes handled it, for me, even after a couple hours of shooting your eyes come out wonky, but it does change your perspective... a bit

I like playing around with them a lot, I get a sense of freedom and experimentation with them, as the other work I do is a bit tense and confining.

 

[VaryaV]

With my Mamiya RB67 Pro S I like to use Fuji FP-3000B in an NPC Land Polaroid back for proof shots of Delta 3200. I'd rather shoot a few shots of Fuji Instant Film for lighting proofs rather than wasting a whole roll of D3200. Admittedly a 10 pack of FP-3000B is almost $10 while a roll of D3200 in 120 is only $4.25 but still I'd rather spend $1-2 on a test shot or two rather than waste half an hour developing a roll of blanks. You can check focus and composition too in the same way. Reciprocity isn't too bad, +1 EC needed for 10s exposure.

I did have a thought. I have never used Fuji Polaroid, but I did notice ebay has a polaroid adapter that would fit my SX-70, (600 is way to $$ for test shots) but if the Fuji is 10$ it might be worth it. Would it fit the SX-70? as the 600 is all I ever use for it.

I am also currently rigging up a lensboard and adapter for my Graflex to fit the scope, so I could use it for straight contact prints, which would be the ultimate for this work. But it will take another month or so before it's ready.

 

[Athiril]

If you have an iPhone or Android phone, there is an App that will tell you the exif data, so you can make a good exposure for midtones and get the ISO/f-stop/shutter speed. I use my Luna Pro SBC meter.. no flash metering unforunately though

I'd carry my digital camera far less if I had a flash meter.. polaroids are too expensive.

 

[VaryaV]

It wasn't the exposures I was struggling with, it was the on/off camera lever. I pretty much know what my shutter speeds will be as there is no lens on the camera itself. It's the lighting adjustments and focus that would be great to have test shots of. As you know the DOF in micro is pretty 2-dimensional you have to create the illusion of depth with the lighting. The focus is so tiny but you have so many creative options where you want that focus to be and bokeh takes care of the rest. What's great about scope lamps is that the lighting is pin point and adjustable, that takes the place of f-stop in a way. If you guys ever need pin point lighting that is definitely the way to go, and fiber optics too have a really soft look to them and they can get almost into anything.

 

[hpulley]

The Fuji stuff I use won't fit the SX-70 though The Impossible Project film might, perhaps the Fuji Instax stuff, I'm not sure.

 

[tkamiya]

I'm NOT sure if this work with film but in digital microscope photography world, folks are doing what is called image stacking. As you already know, DOF of microscope is very tiny. Even with blood cells (which are about 100th of human hair), you could focus on various points of the cell. To counter act this, there is a technique where you'd focus on top of the subject, snap. Move the focus point, snap. Move some more, snap.... all the way to the bottom of the subject. Then, combine these all images into one.

I wonder if you can do this with film using multiple exposure? Exposure setting and keeping everything steady would be a challenge, though....
Just a thought.....

 

[VaryaV]

I'm NOT sure if this work with film but in digital microscope photography world, folks are doing what is called image stacking. As you already know, DOF of microscope is very tiny. Even with blood cells (which are about 100th of human hair), you could focus on various points of the cell. To counter act this, there is a technique where you'd focus on top of the subject, snap. Move the focus point, snap. Move some more, snap.... all the way to the bottom of the subject. Then, combine these all images into one.

I wonder if you can do this with film using multiple exposure? Exposure setting and keeping everything steady would be a challenge, though....
Just a thought.....

oh, that certainly sounds exciting and worth a try. I would think because your DOF is so minute you could stack images without visual overlap... I'm thinking especially of that juicy bokeh hidden in the crevasses that would be so stunning. Think of the visual potential... thanks so much for the suggestion. Very cool!

 

[pgomena]

If you own a Gossen Luna Pro SBC or other model with a small diffusion cap over the sensor, just put the dome into the tube and take a reading. This actually works.

Peter Gomena