SpudFiles

I just stopped and laughed when I realized my order contained both push to connect fittings and a three-way valve.

Ohh come on I didn't make you buy it. That was your choice


BUY 3 way valves!! BUY 3 way valves!! BUY 3 way valves!! BUY 3 way valves!! BUY 3 way valves!!

You're right. Everybody has a personal choice.

BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!! BUILD hybrids and combustions!!

I think this is the best photo(s) I've ever taken.

A focus stack of a small moth (possibly Glyphodes onychinalis) at 40x magnification under my microscope. Made up from 25 individual photos.

mark.f wrote:You're right. Everybody has a personal choice.

Yup... for some reason I chose to build hybrids and combustions.



Free will is an illusion! There is no such thing as choice! FEAR CHINA!!!!

MrCospoce wrote:I think this is the best photo(s) I've ever taken.

I don't have much to compare it to but I would agree, can't tell it's made up of multiple images either.

After years of frustration because the springbars in my Casio WaveCeptor are waaaay too weak (i literally brake like 5 in one month) I finally ordered some heavy duty spring bars meant for diving watches With 2.5mm shaft diameter, they are 1mm thicker than the originals. They are actually so big that i have hone the hole in the strap with 2.5mm drillbit to make them fit

MrCrowley wrote:I think this is the best photo(s) I've ever taken.

A focus stack of a small moth (possibly Glyphodes onychinalis) at 40x magnification under my microscope. Made up from 25 individual photos.

Beautiful photo. Great work. Did you use Photoshop?

I think this is the best photo(s) I've ever taken.

A focus stack of a small moth (possibly Glyphodes onychinalis) at 40x magnification under my microscope. Made up from 25 individual photos.

Great picture

What type of camera do you use for this?

You might want to play with the settings to make the colors more clear and lively.
You can also do this using photoshop;

grumpyoldman wrote:Beautiful photo. Great work. Did you use Photoshop?

Thanks! I used Photoshop CS6.

I only used three functions to get the final image and they are on most previous versions of photoshop too (down to CS3 I think): load images in to stack, auto-align layers, and auto-blend layers.

Labtecpower wrote: Great picture

What type of camera do you use for this?

You might want to play with the settings to make the colors more clear and lively.
You can also do this using photoshop;

Cheers

I used my brothers Canon 600D. I shot in RAW so I could make changes to the photos like you did but I didn't change many of the colour settings at first because I wanted to see what it was like 'naturally'. After seeing how good this one turned out (my other focus stacks aren't nearly as good) and looking for ways to improve it more, I realised I had stupidly deleted the RAW files by accident so now I only have the individual .jpgs that I saved from them

I used my brothers Canon 600D. I shot in RAW so I could make changes to the photos like you did but I didn't change many of the colour settings at first because I wanted to see what it was like 'naturally'. After seeing how good this one turned out (my other focus stacks aren't nearly as good) and looking for ways to improve it more, I realised I had stupidly deleted the RAW files by accident so now I only have the individual .jpgs that I saved from them

Looks like an awesome camera

You might find some details are more visible when the picture is slightly darker.

also, is there a HDR option on that camera?

I've got a 7 year old Panasonic lumix fz-7, I might want to upgrade to a better one in a while

Labtecpower wrote:You might find some details are more visible when the picture is slightly darker.

Yeah I actually turned off the sub-stage LED light, used a desklight LED to shine down on the stage from above/side-on, and put a cloth over the condenser to prevent reflections from the desklight so the specimen a bit more contrast around the edges. Theoretically, the same setup should give me a poor man's dark field microscope if I can find some specimens in my backyard that are measured in micrometres instead of millimetres like the moth.

also, is there a HDR option on that camera?

Good idea! Apparently, it is possible with the 600D so maybe I'll give that a go today. I wonder if I could do a combination of HDR and focus stacking... that would make for a lot of photos and I'm not sure if my computer could handle it since a focus stack of 25 RAW images uses 100% of my laptop's RAM


Unrelated:
[youtube][/youtube]

Yeah I actually turned off the sub-stage LED light, used a desklight LED to shine down on the stage from above/side-on, and put a cloth over the condenser to prevent reflections from the desklight so the specimen a bit more contrast around the edges. Theoretically, the same setup should give me a poor man's dark field microscope if I can find some specimens in my backyard that are measured in micrometres instead of millimetres like the moth.

You achieved some nice uniform lighting there!
I would have chosen a non-reflecting black background for the picture, I think it makes the edge details more clear

Too much PUI to understand the dark field microscope right now

maybe you should take a look under the edges of your lawn, they tend to have some interesting mites living beneath them.

Good idea! Apparently, it is possible with the 600D so maybe I'll give that a go today. I wonder if I could do a combination of HDR and focus stacking... that would make for a lot of photos and I'm not sure if my computer could handle it since a focus stack of 25 RAW images uses 100% of my laptop's RAM

I believe most of these camera's have an automatic HDR function, so that all the photos are combined directly after they have been made.
That might give picture-to-picture differences in lighting however, so you may need to take a further look into that matter

I love the stuff you can find on the Internet when you are bored.
http://heterodoxy.cc/meowdocs/pseudo/pseudosynth.pdf

Jack, can you try this in the lab and let us know if it actually works ?

Most of the chemicals mentioned are not in stock, and doubtless ordering them without justification would raise a red flag somewhere... Pity, because the process seems quite basic, but if not at breaking bad levels of despair. Yet

It must be early in the day in Epoxyland.
Did you not notice the citation to Miskatonic University ?

It is a well written paper though I could not see anyone seriously sourcing meth in order to produce some nasal decongestant.

Lol. Yes it is early in the day, I've already Yusuf this goddamn iPad as a coffee coaster twice.