Archive for August, 2023

walter sanford’s supplemental photoblog (plus Post Update)

August 23, 2023

I have maxed out the Media memory for “walter sanford’s photoblog” under my current plan with WordPress. The next tier offered by WordPress is prohibitively expensive, so it seems like I have no option other than to create a new “free” blog and extend what I created already in my current blog.

The new blog is just a placeholder for now. Watch for updates as the new blog develops, and remember to bookmark the site. walter sanford’s supplemental photoblog

Post Update

Congratulations, WordPress — you have successfully created the worst user interface for blogging in the history of blogging!

Here are just a few of many questions I have about the new and “improved” interface.

  1. Where is the administrator’s panel?
  2. Do I have the option to choose a free template?
  3. Is there an option to change from the counterintuitive Block Editor to the Classic Editor? (It’s worth noting the Classic Editor looks and behaves like a word processor — an interface people already know and understand how to use. In contrast, I have NO IDEA what commonly used application looks and feels like the Block Editor.)
  4. How do I add and manage media, such as photographs?

Can you tell I’m EXTREMELY FRUSTRATED with WordPress at the moment? I am! I have ideas for new blog posts but can’t figure out how to create them without reading a bunch of help files or watching “how to” videos. Kinda sucks the fun right out of blogging!

How did you lose your way WordPress? Simpler is almost always better than unnecessarily complicated, but you’ve chosen the latter. Why? Please come back. I want the old WordPress experience — it was FAR BETTER!

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

COVID (plus Post Update)

August 13, 2023

COVID. It’s still a thing. Yep, that’s the voice of experience talking. More later after I’m feeling better.

Post Update

COVID really flattened me for the first few days after its onset! I was feeling better by approximately Day 5. I’m slowly regaining my stamina, but I feel exhausted after relatively little exertion. Anyway, I promised “more later” and that’s the latest update.

Alice in Telecentricity Land (plus Post Update)

August 4, 2023

In a recent blog post, I wrote …

The best advantage of a truly telecentric lens is there should be little or no “focus breathing” as the camera moves closer to/farther from the subject. Essentially that means the apparent size of the subject should remain the same. That should enable better focus stacking because the outline of the subject is constant. Source Credit: Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update).

Using my clone of Rik Littlefield’s 0.8x magnification telecentric lens rig, there was little or no “focus breathing” in the test focus bracket that I created from 63 JPGs, as shown in the following slideshow.

First, a brief explanation of what is shown in the slideshow. The first frame is Photo No. 1 of 63 from the focus bracket, edited to make it black and white. The last frame in the slideshow is Photo No. 63 of 63, shown in full color.

I loaded the two photos as a stack in Photoshop. Next I changed the opacity of the last image in the slideshow to 0%, meaning the first image, now black and white, is shown completely. Then I flattened the layers and saved the output. I repeated the process, changing the opacity of the last image to 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%. At an opacity of 100% the last image is shown completely and the first image cannot be seen.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Look closely at the slideshow and you might notice the subject shifts slightly to the right (from first to last slide), but nothing like the “focus breathing” that typically occurs when a non-telecentric lens is used to do focus bracketing. This means the photo composition that I saw in the first photograph is essentially the same in the last photo.

The following photo gallery features full-size versions of the same images used to create the slideshow, in order of increasing opacity.

Let’s pause to review. We know the subject should appear to be larger when the camera moves closer to the subject. But in this case, the subject appears to be the same size in both the first and last shots of the focus bracket. Why? Well, this is the point where I might be beyond the limit of my expertise but based upon my understanding of telecentricity I’d say it’s because most of the light rays that pass through the lens rig are parallel.

Things are getting curiouser and curiouser

If my [educated?] guess is true, then parallel lines in a subject should remain parallel from foreground to background.

Let’s start with a thought experiment. Think about a pair of parallel railroad tracks. Many, if not most people have noticed that railroad tracks appear to converge toward a vanishing point in the distance. The same thing happens when you photograph parallel lines. Or does it? Not when a truly telecentric lens is used to shoot the photograph! Let’s look at an example.

I didn’t have time to shoot and post process an entire focus bracket of a small plastic ruler, so I shot two quick and dirty photos near the end points of the ruler. The first photo shows the foreground; the last photo shows the background.

I could have used Photoshop to edit the images so that the vertical blue lines are aligned, but I didn’t because I decided it’s more important to show another example that illustrates lack of “focus breathing.” Plus I think it’s easy to see at a glance the lines are in fact parallel, not convergent.

Yeah, yeah — I could have and should have done a better job of posing the ruler but like I said, the photos are quick and dirty. Expediency trumps perfectionism.

Post Update

Consistent with the “quick and dirty” theme for this post, I used Apple Preview to edit the preceding photos of a small plastic ruler.

I started with the first photo. I drew a horizontal red line between two vertical blue lines on the ruler. Next, I selected and copied a small area from the bottom of the photo.

Finally, I pasted the selected/copied area from the first photo onto the second photo. As you can see the vertical blues lines are virtually the same distance apart at both ends of the ruler. Therefore my Rube Goldberg lens rig is almost perfectly telecentric.

Related Resources

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Telecentric lens rig revisited

August 1, 2023

The following composite images show the results of my first test using a new telecentric lens rig, cloned from a similar rig designed by Rik Littlefield.

Helicon Focus was used to focus stack 63 “as is” JPGs from my Fujifilm X-T3 mirrorless digital camera (focused on the head only). “As is” is a descriptor that I use often in my photoblog, but that doesn’t mean the images weren’t edited — rather it means the JPGs were edited in camera using one of the Fujifilm film simulations (PROVIA / STANDARD).

63 JPGs | Helicon Focus | Rendering Method B

In my limited experience using Helicon Focus, rendering Method C seems to work better than Method B. (For what it’s worth, rendering Method A never produces good results for me.) In this case, I can’t see a clear difference in the quality of the output. Do you think one version looks better than the other?

63 JPGs | Helicon Focus | Rendering Method C

Look closely at the full-size versions of the preceding composite images and I think you will agree with me that the image quality is excellent!

Tech Tips

In a recent blog post, I wrote …

Rik [Littlefield] developed another telecentric lens rig that results in lower magnification (0.8x versus 1.69x) but better image quality. I need to order some inexpensive parts before I can build and test that rig. Source Credit: Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update).

The last part I needed was delivered a few days ago, and much to my amazement all of the parts fit together! (See parts list, below.)

I used my Apple iPad mini 6 to shoot the following quick-and-dirty photos of the new telecentric lens rig.

Here’s a parts list (shown from left-to-right in the preceding photos).

  • Fujifilm X-T3 (APS-C) mirrorless digital camera [not shown]
  • Fringer EF-FX Pro II
  • [1] Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens
  • [2] 67mm to 52mm step-down ring
  • [3] M52-M42 step-down ring
  • [4] Fotasy M42-M42 helicoid [15-26 mm long (11 mm travel).]
  • [5] M42 tube (7 mm long) [WeMacro 42mm tube set: 7, 14, 28 mm long.]
  • [6] 42mm to 52mm step-up ring
  • [7] 52mm-43mm step-down ring
  • [8] Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter (43mm thread)

Notice the focus ring on my Canon Macro lens is set for infinity [highlighted by a green rectangle]. The distance between the front of the Canon lens and front of the Raynox close-up filter is ~54 mm, based upon guidance from Rik Littlefield.

With the Canon Macro lens set for infinity, the parts in front of the Canon lens work together with the lens to make it telecentric. Adding the Fringer adapter has no effect on the telecentricity of the Canon lens — it’s only used to enable my Canon lens to work with the Fujifilm X-T3 camera.

Safe step size

I used Rik Littlefield’s excellent DOF Calculator plus personal guidance from Rik to determine the safe step size to use for focus bracketing with the new telecentric lens rig.

My input is highlighted by a red rectangle; the calculator output is highlighted in green.

Notice I input a 20% step overlap (0.2) to be sure there was no “focus banding.” The calculator suggested a step size of 0.17589 mm. That’s equivalent to 175.89 µm (micrometers).

Since the smallest increment on my NiSi NM-200 manual focus rail is 10 µm, I divided 175.89 by 10 in order to determine the number of increments to turn the larger adjustment knob on the NM-200. The answer is 17.589 increments. For simplicity and safety, I turned the knob 15 increments between shots.

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.