Leica Secrets , Phase Contrast Microscopy Technology , use of it

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

It all started with researching transparent cells with microscope.
All light microscopes were unsuccessful to reveal the details inside of a cell when light does not absorb by cell structure.
And at 1930s someone invented Phase Microscopy.
Technology was using normal light and diffracted light altogether to reveal the all details inside of a cell.
Well there was also polarizer technology but I dont know its newer or older.
And Leica was the number one microscope manufacturer in the world.
And Oscar Barnack was a microscope lens designer when he developed the first leica lens.
I think all Leica success is the ability to capture organic human tissue details in low light.
I believe this is the most fundemental thing to be used by all portrait photographers to street photographers and forgotten in time.
I looked to my Leica pictures and other Nikon pictures and Nikon is cleaner , more sterile , less noise.
May be Leica was using the same technique to blend noise on sharp picture and blends and interferometry to give more organic look.
Now the big question , how we can create a similar phase plate and use with a camera ?

Thank you ,

Mustafa Umut Sarac

Istanbul

 

[rphenning]

nikon started out making microscopes too, dude. I think I maybe missed your point. In response to your last question: No.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

A satellite camera, which would take advantage of the high resolution, wide field of view, multi-spectral imaging and ability to image weak sources in the presence of a strong source. A specialty multi-wavelength (from visible to IR) satellite camera with perhaps a giga-pixel capability would be a good first application because it could afford the use of a precision micro-structured phase plate and a powerful computer for image processing.

 

[Trask]

Mustafa, I haven't the background to address these questions, but I've got to tell you that I always enjoy your posts.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Trask ,

Thank you ,

There are two papers , one is a patent for interested.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=mJ8eAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.newyorkphotonics.org/newsletter/library/extended%20depth%20of%20field%20with%20the%20logarithmic%20asphere.pdf

Umut

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

http://www.google.com/patents?id=1pXHAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&source=gbs_overview_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

This is another phase plate like technology described above. Its somehow decoded by computer.
Canon have been made a tele lens with this technology and it decreased the size of the 300 mm lens , a half.
But Canon used another way and used two lens facing to each other with lessen the noise. But photographers were not happy with angular bokeh.

This lens technology opens a new dimension to build lens with cnc. Simple cnc can make a multi stepped
asphere with it and two lenses correct each other and make a perfect match.

May be Canon lens image is also computer processable also.

I think subject divergence but for me , its ok.

May be Leica engineering uses same noise rich , detail rich effect. May be the answer lie in the old higher dispersion , higher refractive index glasses.

Than Leica started to use lower refraction index , lower dispersion glasses at late and their defenders start to turn mad like me.

Umut

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_interference_contrast_microscopy

I think I am closer to my Leicas and phase contrast photography concept a little bit more.

Differantial Interference Contrast Microscopy uses one polarizer , two lens glued together at entrance and two glued lens element together at lens exit.

This is so similar tens of Leica lens designs.

Careful engineering can create a lots of details at photography with this technology.

Umut

 

[ic-racer]

I recall using the phase-contrast technique for viewing live organisms (that can't be stained) that are basically 'clear.' With 'fixed' slides the hematoxylin and eosin stains give the needed contrast to make out the details in the specimen with the standard light source.

 

[Hikari]

First, you should be giving Abbe credit, not Barnack. Abbe came up with the basic theory used by modern microscopes.

Phase contrast and DIC (Differential Interference Contrast) are microscope techniques. They work because at high magnification, you can take advantage of the phase properties of light--this is not going to help photographers. In the case of DIC, the light striking the sample needs to pass through a polarizer and a prism. This creates and shears two rays. The rays are recombined with a second prism and polarizer (known as an analyzer). The difference in optical path difference of these two rays created by the sample causes increase in detail contrast as well as creating color.

Phase contrast (and DIC) can be used with stained samples. The point of any of these techniques is that details in transparent specimens can be seen without the need for staining, but a stained sample will work. And staining can be use to identify certain cells within a sample.

 

[Q.G.]

As Hikari said, it is not something that would benefit photographers, except those doing photomicroscopy.
And it's not something "forgotten in time". Quite the contrary.

A DIC configuration is not "similar to tens of Leica lens designs".
Have you ever come across a lens design in which the subject is between two optical groups, one to modify the illumination, the other to form an image?

You keep coming up with such nonsensical things, Umut.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Its better keep up with a idea and be happy than keep up with a critic and smile QG

 

[Steve Smith]

Mustafa, I haven't the background to address these questions, but I've got to tell you that I always enjoy your posts.

Yes. We need more people with such a thirst for knowledge and the energy to look for the answers.


Steve.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Thank you Steve . You are so nice and agree with supporting all ideas and its people here.

 

[Q.G.]

Its better keep up with a idea and be happy than keep up with a critic and smile QG

I have nothing against being dreamy, Mustafa. Look at things from all sides, and see the possibilities. Great!
It's just infinitely more satisfying to dream about things that could actually be, than lose yourself in flights of Harry Potter like fancy.
If you don't embrace things the way they are, substitute their obvious, but inconvenient realities with what-if-a-circle-wasn't-round type of thinking instead, the only certain outcome of it all will be failure.
Where's the fun in that, particularly considering that all that creative thinking could actually lead to something new and worthwhile if only you keep it 'grounded'?
An idea vs a fantasy, Mustafa.

 

[Steve Smith]

Someone at work once described me as unusual and told me that I should take that as a compliment (which I did) and added that normal people only ever produce normal solutions to problems.

If you want to discover/invent/design something new/clever/interesting you have to go through a lot of ideas which will not work.

For inspiration get a copy of Edwin Land's autobiography Insisting on the Impossble.


Steve.

 

[Q.G.]

If you want to discover/invent/design something new/clever/interesting you have to go through a lot of ideas which will not work.

Sure.
But it doesn't help when you set out on that journey changing or extending exisiting, working ideas so that they will indeed not work.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I think you kept grounded like a boat and at the same place for years.

 

[Q.G.]

You do?

But tell us, Mustafa, out of all your posts presenting your fantasies, how many have resulted in something?


Don't get me wrong: i still enjoy reading your posts.