Alice in Telecentricity Land (plus Post Update)

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.

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

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

• Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update)
• Telecentric lens rig revisited
• Telecentric combo at 0.8x to 1.69x, by Rik Littlefield – root of a long thread on photomacrography.net

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Telecentric lens rig revisited

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.

iPad/tablet tripod mount

Did you know I suffer from “decision paralysis?” I do. It doesn’t matter whether a product is expensive or inexpensive, I agonize over the decision to pick the one that’s best for me. This time, I made the decision relatively quickly with little angst.

I knew I needed to get some sort of tripod mount for my iPad mini 6. For a while, I was using a small photography clamp to hold my iPad. It was precarious at best and an expensive accident waiting to happen.

A quick Google search turned up a YouTube video that caught my attention.

The build quality looked good and the price point seemed fair, so I ordered one.

After a month or two of usage, I can say this versatile tripod mount works as advertised. I think the parts that actually support the iPad are a little narrow for my comfort, but they do work — just be careful to center your tablet on the mount and be sure it’s clamped down tightly.

The tripod mount came bundled with several “extras.” Most of them are borderline useless, but one item turned out to be a pleasant surprise.

The small wireless remote control is great for starting/stopping time-lapse videos. You can use the built-in timer featured in the Apple “Camera” app to shoot still photos and start video recording, but you still have to touch the iPad to stop recording video. That can result in “camera shake” that you need to edit out of the video, but hey, I don’t need one more thing to do when the “little remote that could” can be used for clean stops.

Is this the “best iPad mount” as the YouTube video title says? I don’t know. But it’s “good” and sometimes all you need to know is when good is good enough. Please comment if you know of a better product than this one.

Related Resources

• THIS is the iPad/Tablet Tripod Mount YOU NEED! by BenoniTech (2:55)
• Aluminum iPad Pro Tripod Mount Adapter Holder With Cold Shoe Ball Head and Bluetooth Shutter for iPad Pro 12.9 11 10.5, iPad Air Mini, Surface Galaxy Tab, Video Recording 3.5 to 13.5″ iPhone Tablet $29.99 (as of this writing)

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Experimenting with a telecentric lens rig (plus Post Update)

I’ve been experimenting with a telecentric lens rig. My rig is cloned from a similar one created by Rik Littlefield, using gear I already own.

I’m guessing you’re thinking “What is a telecentric lens?” The honest answer is “I don’t know.” I’m not sure I’ll ever understand what telecentric lenses are and how they work. I’m hoping practical experience will result in better understanding of the theoretical.

So why have I written a blog post about a topic I don’t really understand? Good question! The simple answer is because I have learned enough, mostly from Rik Littlefield, to know there are practical advantages to using a telecentric lens for macro photography.

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.

My Rube Goldberg telecentric lens rig

Rik Littlefield’s telecentric lens rig features the same gear as mine (described in the next paragraph) minus the Canon-to-Fujifilm lens adapter because he uses a Canon EOS Rebel T1i DSLR camera body with his rig.

My Rube Goldberg telecentric lens rig is cobbled together using a Raynox DCR-250 close-up filter attached to my Canon EF 100mm macro lens using the plastic clip-on adapter supplied by Raynox. The lens assembly is mounted on my Fujifilm X-T3 APS-C digital camera using a Fringer EF-FX Pro II adapter.

Rik 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.

Testing 1, 2, 3.

The following closely-cropped composite image shows the result of my first test of the telecentric lens rig.

I shot 57 images of a toy plastic lizard using my NiSi NM-200 manual focus rail. I used an aperture of f/8 and a step-size of 100 microns, as recommended by Rik Littlefield.

Helcion Focus Method B was used to focus stack the “as is” JPGs from my camera. The resulting TIF file was cropped using Apple “Preview” — that’s about as quick and dirty as cropping gets!

Post Update

The first time I heard about telecentric lenses is when Allan Walls teased the topic during one of his YouTube live-streams. During a subsequent live-stream, Allan demonstrated how to make a lens telecentric using a rig similar to one that Rik Littlefield created.

Telecentric Lenses – Macro Talk Too – from Allan Walls Photography, June 29, 2023 (1:12:10)

Allan’s YouTube live-streams are one hour in duration, but there’s usually a lot of chit-chat during a typical live-stream that might not interest readers of my blog.

In this case, I recommend that you watch the segment from 11:22 to 30:21. A lot of what I have learned about telecentric lenses from Rik Littlefield and Allan Walls is covered during that part of the video. (If you continue watching the video beyond the 30:21 mark, then you will hear my name mentioned twice.)

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Customizable buttons

Customizable buttons is one of the better features of modern mirrorless digital cameras. There was a time when camera buttons weren’t customizable and you had to live with the way a camera was designed — take it or leave it. Now it’s possible to customize most (if not all) of the camera buttons so they work the way you prefer.

For example, I love me some “back-button focus.” Fujifilm got it right when they designed the X-T1 and X-T3 — the button is exactly where it should be, highlighted by a red circle in the following annotated images.

Fujifilm X-T1. AF-L button is used for “back-button focus.”

Fujifilm X-T3. AF-L button is used for “back-button focus.”

But Fujifilm lost their way on the X-T5. By default, the button assigned to back-button focus (AFON) is too far from my right hand that’s holding the camera grip. Instead, the button assigned to the Quick Menu is located where back-button focus had been for years.

Fujifilm X-T5. Swap functions of AFON and Q buttons.

Hey, no problem — just customize the buttons to perform different functions, in this case, change one to the other and vice versa.

There are several good YouTube videos that demonstrate how to customize the buttons on your Fujifilm X-Series camera, such as the one listed under Related Resources. Here’s an overview of the steps to follow.

Power-on the camera. Press and hold the “DISP/BACK” button until a graphic appears on screen that shows all the camera buttons and their default function. Use the D-pad to navigate to a button you would like to customize; press the right D-pad button to select a function button and choose a new function from a long list of options. It’s that easy!

Related Resources

• Fuji Guys – FUJIFILM X-T4 – Customizing FN Buttons, by the Fuji Guys Channel (1:20).
• Function Controls – Fujifilm X-T5 Owner’s Manual. See the section entitled “Roles That Can Be Assigned to the Function Buttons” for a complete list of options.
• Fuji Back Button Focus, by Ashraf Jandali (4:06). This video provides a clear demonstration of how to use back-button focus on the Fujifilm X-T1. The same technique works with the Fujifilm X-T3 and X-T5.

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Did you know … ? (plus Post Update)

Did you know that flash power ratios are relative, not absolute? I didn’t, that is until I bought a Godox MF12 macro flash and was testing it in combination with a Godox TT685C Speedlite.

Are flash power ratios absolute or relative? In other words, is 1/16 power the same strength across all devices? When I set my MF12 and TT685C for 1/16 power, the MF12 doesn’t look as bright as the TT685C. Thanks for answering my question! Source Credit: Godox User Group on Facebook.

Sincere thanks to all the members of the group who kindly answered my question! One answer stood out from the others.

Walter Sanford – The TT685 is closer to 65 W, and the MF12 is roughly 12 W. The TT685 at 1/8 + 3 should be close to the MF12 at 1/1. But that can still be off, as the difference in reflector shape can change the output. Source Credit: Samuel Gibson.

The guide number of the TT685C is 197′ (power ratio 1/128 – 1/1); the guide number for the MF12 is 16′ (power ratio 1/128 – 1/1). Clearly the TT685C is the more powerful flash.

Post Update

The Godox MF12 Macro Flash is underpowered, doesn’t support high-speed sync, and doesn’t feature removable batteries. Perhaps now it’s clear why I said “I won’t buy more MF12s.”

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Godox MF12 Macro Flash (plus Post Update)

Do you remember when I announced I bought a Godox MF12 Macro Flash? That’s because I didn’t. I just bought one and started using it.

Maybe you noticed I created a new Category called “Godox MF12.” It’s more likely you didn’t. Please know that I use Categories and Tags in order to make it easier for readers to search for and find specific information.

Testing 1, 2, 3 …

I’m already heavily invested in the Godox flash ecosystem, so when a “usually trusted source” gave high ratings to his new Godox MF12s I decided to buy one for testing. Full disclosure: I hesitated to pull the trigger when I realized the MF12 costs almost as much as full-size flashes such as the TT685 series. That just doesn’t seem fair/right to me!

I think the intended use for Godox MF12s is to mount one or more flash units on a system of rings that fit on lenses with different filter thread sizes. I know a lot of photographers who own MF12s but as far as I know no one actually uses them mounted on a lens, and no one uses them for macro photography in the field.

Instead, the macro photographers I know use their Godox MF12s as small, lightweight flashes perfect for macro photography in the studio. They say several MF12s, set for low power, add up to nice soft light that’s both bright and relatively free of specular highlights. When used that way, the MF12s seem to work well.

Photo courtesy B&H Photo.

I think it’s fair to ask “Do the MF12s work better than larger, more powerful flash units used at lower power ratios with lots of diffusion?” The objective answer is, “No, not really.” During limited testing using flash equipment I own already, my results are comparable to theirs.

No high-speed sync.

But wait, there’s more. Recently I discovered the MF12 doesn’t support high-speed sync (HSS). That’s on me — I just assumed any modern external flash unit would support HSS, especially since most (if not all) Godox flashes do. But the MF12 doesn’t and that’s a deal-breaker for me. Post Update: I think it’s worth noting that macro flashes available from Canon and Nikon do support HSS, although they cost much more than the Godox MF12.

Slower shutter speeds aren’t a problem in the studio when my camera is mounted on a tripod, but when I’m in the field I prefer to use shutter speeds faster than the default sync speed of my cameras. For this reason alone, I won’t buy more MF12s.

There is one “pro.”

Notice the button labeled with an icon that looks like an asterisk. That button toggles a modeling light on/off. Better, some flash triggers such as my new-ish Godox XProF II can remotely power on/off the modeling light plus set the relative power of the modeling light (from 1 to 10).

Photo courtesy B&H Photo.

ALL external flash units should include a modeling light. The MF12 does but in my opinion that’s insufficient for me to recommend the product.

Post Update

In an effort to get right to the point about what I dislike most about the Godox MF12 Macro Flash, I didn’t gripe about its built-in Lithium ion battery. I think it would be better if the MF12 featured a removable battery of some type.

As designed, the internal battery can be recharged by connecting the flash unit (via USB cable) to either an AC power source or portable power brick such as the Anker PowerCore+ 26800 PD 45W.

In my opinion, the fact that you can’t simply swap in a fresh battery makes this flash less suitable for use in the field.

How does the flash perform when its battery is fully charged?

The powerful built-in lithium battery supports approximately 500 full-power flashes with a 0.01 to 1.7 second recycling time. Source Credit: B&H Photo.

I would say 500 flashes might be overly optimistic, based upon my experience using the Godox MF12 for focus bracketing. I don’t have lab testing equipment so I can’t confirm the flash recycling time, but I can say it’s fast enough to fire continuously in burst mode when using lower power ratios.

Related Resource: Godox: #MF12 Macro Flash Operational Tutorial, by GODOX Global (3:25).

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Sometimes you get what you pay for.

I love me some Manfrotto clamps and articulating arms. But — and it’s a big but — two points diminish my enthusiasm for Manfrotto gear.

First and foremost, in my strong opinion many (if not all) Manfrotto products are way overpriced.

Second, Manfrotto seems to be obsessed with slathering many of their products with excessive amounts of grease and lubricants. Almost every Manfrotto product I have purchased required a thorough cleaning before I felt comfortable using it with my cameras and lenses.

SmallRig

On the strength of a rave recommendation from a trusted source (henceforth known as a “usually trusted source”) I bought some clamps and articulating arms made by a company called “SmallRig.”

The price is definitely right and their products work as advertised. I would call SmallRig clamps and articulating arms “less greasy” than comparable Manfrotto gear, but some clean-up is still required before use.

Initially I was pleased with the build quality of the SmallRig clamps and articulating arms. Over time I noticed some of the gear I bought has started to fall apart.

For example, notice the rubber pad on the inside of the jaws of one of my SmallRig Super Clamps has peeled away from the metal.

Close-up of SmallRig Super Clamp.

And the rubber gasket on one end of a small articulating arm has peeled away from the metal. I noticed the problem when a blob of what appeared to be rubber cement got on my fingers when I was setting up external flash units for a photo shoot.

Close-up of SmallRig 5.5″ articulating arm.

What are the take-aways?

Do the products still work? Yes, I guess they do although I must admit my confidence in the brand is gone.

Anyone who knows me well knows I am very gentle with my photography gear so it cannot be said these products are failing due to abuse. Not to belabor the point, but if I should decide to sell any of my equipment then you should buy it STAT because every used item would be fairly rated as “pristine.”

As a service to my fellow photography enthusiasts I am issuing a “Do Not Buy” advisory for SmallRig clamps and articulating arms.

Related Resources

• Manfrotto
• SmallRig Super Clamp w/ 1/4″ and 3/8″ thread 735
• SmallRig 5.5″ Articulating Arm

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

Henry Moore Sundial Sculpture

The Henry Moore Sundial Sculpture is located at Sundial Plaza alongside the Adler Planetarium & Astronomy Museum in Chicago, Illinois USA. (41° 52.006′ N latitude, 87° 36.426′ W longitude.)

Bowstring Equatorial Sundial

This type of sundial is a variety of the classic equatorial sundial, often referred to as a “bowstring equatorial sundial” because it looks somewhat similar to the “bow” in “bow & arrow.”

Remember, an equatorial sundial is a reduced model of the Earth. (More about that in a follow-up blog post.) A bowstring equatorial sundial is a “reduced equatorial sundial” — think of it as a kind of skeleton equatorial sundial.

The large red circle shown in the following annotated photo represents the Earth.

The dial plate (representing the equatorial plane) has been reduced to a semi-circular band that represents approximately one-half of the Earth’s Equator, This part of the sundial is referred to as the “equatorial band.” The equatorial band serves as the “time scale.”

Parts of a “bowstring equatorial sundial.”

The gnomon (or style) is a thin rod (the “bowstring”) representing the Earth’s axis of rotation.

The vertically-oriented “bow” represents a single meridian (line of longitude) and is referred to as the “meridian band.” The bowstring is connected to the bow at the equivalent of the Earth’s North and South Poles.

The bow is attached to a pedestal or “foot” (ped- is Latin for foot).

Time scale or time band, showing time of day.

The hour lines for the bowstring equatorial sundial are laid out on the inner surface of the equatorial band. Every hour is 1/24 of a day, or exactly 15 degrees wide. The shadow of the gnomon (or style), cast among the hour lines on the equatorial band, shows the time. The meridian band (“bow”) bisects the equatorial band (“time scale”); the 12 o’clock noon hour line is located on the time scale where the two bands intersect (since solar noon occurs when the Sun crosses the observer’s meridian). Facing north, morning times are located on the left side of the equatorial band; afternoon times are on the right.

In contrast to the classic equatorial sundial, the primary advantage of the bowstring equatorial sundial is that the style shadow is cast upon a single time scale all year long (regardless of whether the Sun is north or south of the Celestial Equator). Unlike the classic equatorial sundial, the bowstring equatorial sundial should work on the day of the equinoxes (although the author has not witnessed this firsthand).

Setting the Sundial

Similar to setting the correct time on an analog clock or wristwatch (by moving the hands of the timepiece into proper position), properly orienting an equatorial sundial will move the gnomon (or style) shadow into position so that the time scale displays the correct time of day.

The gnomon should be parallel to the Earth’s axis, inclined at an angle equal to the latitude of the observer.

41° 52.006′ N latitude.

North American Sundial Society member Fritz Stumpges is shown using a “SmartTool” to measure the angle of inclination of the gnomon (“bowstring”).

41.9 degree angle of inclination.

The dial plate/equatorial band should be parallel to the plane of the Earth’s Equator (perpendicular to the gnomon), inclined at an angle equal to the complement of the observer’s latitude — the angle that when added to the angle of the observer’s latitude equals a right angle in measure (90°). This angle is also known as the colatitude.

Colatitude 48.1 degrees.

Place the sundial on a horizontal surface; the top of the gnomon should point toward the Celestial North Pole (i.e., Polaris, the North Star). More simply, the sundial should be set so the 12 noon hour line is aligned with your local meridian.

Related Resources

• Equatorial Sundials
• NASS Sundial Registry No. 223

Tech Tips

When I visited this sundial in 2005, I owned almost no photography gear. I used a one-time use film camera to shoot the photographs featured in this blog post. After I returned home, I had the film processed, digitized, and saved to a photo CD. The photo of the time scale/time band has a resolution of 3091 x 2048 pixels.

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.

“Magic Mylar” Moonlight

In a recent blog post entitled “Magic Mylar” diffusion material (plus Post Update), I shared the results my initial experimentation with a new material for light diffusion. Since then I added more mylar for multiple layers of diffusion and I must say I’m liking the results!

Toy dinosaur.

I used single point focus, positioned over the eye of the dinosaur. See why it’s necessary to use focus bracketing/focus stacking?

By now, some of you might be tired of looking at my toy dinosaur. That’s OK, he has thick skin [Get it?] and can withstand a little good natured griping. But seriously, he’s the perfect model for testing light diffusers due to the highly reflective plastic of which he is made.

“Magic Mylar” — where it all began

A friend and expert in macro photography kindly shared several sheets of diffusion material with which he is getting great results. The material is made of mylar plastic, matte on both sides.

Tunnel of Light II

I created a variation of my friend’s “Tunnel of Light.” Using my set-up, the mylar is almost perfectly round and surprisingly rigid.

Tunnel of Light (front/side view). Don’t mind the background clutter!

A single sheet of mylar is clamped to the white plastic top from a big jug of pretzels. The round top is ~4.5″ in diameter.

The jar top is held in place by a Wemberley The Plamp II. At a price point of $49.00, I don’t recommend buying a Plamp in order to make your “Tunnel of Light” — I just happened to have one on-hand and it does the job. I’m sure you can find a suitable clamp using off-the-shelf materials.

Tunnel of Light (rear/side view).

Three Impact ABS 3.75″ Small Spring Clamps (6-Pack) are used to hold the mylar in place. The orange “pivoting nylon pads for uneven surfaces” snap on/off, and as you might expect, tend to snap off at the worst times! For that reason, I DO NOT recommend these clamps. The price was right [$5.40] but you can’t count on them to perform in a pinch without fail. [See what I did there?]

I’m thinking about replacing the white plastic jar top with a PVC pipe fitting, the advantage being it would support the mylar while allowing a view of interchangeable backgrounds through the tunnel of light.

“Magic Mylar” everywhere …

How I got the shot

The toy dinosaur was placed inside the “Tunnel of Light II.” Two small LED light panels were used to light the scene for both setting exposure and focusing. Two external flash units were added for “pop.” All of the light sources were diffused with “Magic Mylar” plus one or more additional light diffusers such as the Altura flash modifier, shown in the preceding photo.

The goal is to use several light sources, set for low power, that add up to nice soft light that’s both bright and relatively free of specular highlights. Looks like I’m on the right track.

Copyright © 2023 Walter Sanford. All rights reserved.