There be monsters

[TLI]

I guessed it right away, since it looks like the mosquito and they are in fact cousins. its just the non-biting half, which is what gave it away

 

[NJMAN]

I love your macro insect shots! Great job again. :thumbup:

NJ

 

[doenoe]

Those are great pics. Wicked detail in them. I prefer the second one too, its more easy on the eyes

 

[tpe]

Wow, thanks guys, i dont think i have ever seen so much interest in one of my own pics, it makes me proud , i must have got something right.

This one is probably a bit under exposed, and not as nice a background but it looks almost cute to me (must get out more) itcame out of the freezer last night after dying on the stairwell window sill. Now i have run out of creatures for the winter . Not sure what there is left to take pictures of this year. Probably have to get the kids some more stick insects or something

Hang it, here is another one, it was a bit dodgy with some kind of intereference between the bristles, so not as sharp in places as it could be

Thanks again.

tim

Jchantelau it is taken with a microscope lens on a sony alpha a700. A reichert 2.5x from a compound microscope, it is quite a rare lens, but still only about 60USD.

 

[TCimages]

Damn Tim. You do some incredible Macro work. Is that wasp stacked?

 

[tpe]

Hi TC, yes i am afraid that it is stacked too, all of them are, i think the wasp was about 36 images. It has that strange halo problem on some of the bristles. It was with a 6.1 mp ccd. the crane fly and the moth were with a 12mp ccd, and the halo/diffraction effect is much less and it took a whole lot less tweaking to get the stack to work propperly. So that was a new discovery. It also turns out that if you up the size of your source images the resulting stack has less problems, so i guess the algorythm is dependent on the number of pixels it has to work with, not just what is on them. It takes a fair old while to process with larger pictures.

tim

 

[TCimages]

Hi TC, yes i am afraid that it is stacked too, all of them are, i think the wasp was about 36 images. It has that strange halo problem on some of the bristles. It was with a 6.1 mp ccd. the crane fly and the moth were with a 12mp ccd, and the halo/diffraction effect is much less and it took a whole lot less tweaking to get the stack to work propperly. So that was a new discovery. It also turns out that if you up the size of your source images the resulting stack has less problems, so i guess the algorythm is dependent on the number of pixels it has to work with, not just what is on them. It takes a fair old while to process with larger pictures.

tim

This takes a tremendous amount of work and patience. I think it's amazing.

 

[Robstar1619]

Incredible...this must have taken you a while to do!
Anyways..i just so like these kind of pics and wish i could manage to do some myself....still have to dream i guess!