Partial Silhouettes - how'd you do that?

I recently got asked how I did this photo:



It was a fairly straight-forward process, really: the guy who was doing the light-writing was holding a strobe, which I triggered remotely (though it would also have worked for him to trigger it) while he was in action. The strobe was aimed at the wall, so it lit up the wall everywhere where he wasn't between the camera and the wall. That part of the wall stayed dark, with respect to the flash -- though there was enough other light on the wall, too, that during the rest of the exposure, as he moved around and eventually out of the frame entirely, the other light accumulated in that shadow, thus giving the mixture of visibility and darkness on that one part of the wall.

It's a technique I discovered from watching {tcb}'s flickr stream. He uses it to great effect in a number of his images, especially (in my opinion) in his Alien Abductions series, e.g. one of my favorites:



Thank you for the inspiration, {tcb}!

Everyone else: Give it a try. Happy shooting!

Checking the function of a Yunon YN500 (or other toy cameras)

It has been a long time since I've posted anything to this blog. I was just asked on flickr about checking the operation of a camera, specifically a Yunon 500, since the asker had just picked one up though, so I think it's time to pick this back up.

The questioner said she'd loaded film into the camera, and wanted to be sure it was working properly. Well, here's my answer:


While your film is loaded, there are two main things I can think of to do, and on some cameras, a third indication:

1. When you press the shutter button, make sure the shutter actually opens -- you can do this by taking a picture while you're looking straight at/through the lens, in good light. If you're watching closely, you should be able to see a little movement. I think. [Goes to find his Yunon 500, and checks...] Yup. There's a little grey circle there that you can see through the lens. When you click the shutter button, you should (if all is well, and you have enough light, and you're paying close attention) see that disappear and then reappear very quickly.
2. When you wind to the next frame (turning the little dial on the back, with this camera -- though this applies to almost any mechanical 35mm camera), the rewind lever (on the left of the camera, when held in front of you, lens pointing away) should spin. Sometimes this won't happen on the first frame or two of the roll, as there can be slack in the film cartridge. But once you've advanced a few frames, it should be that that rewind lever turns every time you advance the film. This is mostly a good way to check that the film is loaded properly, but it can also be an indication of camera function.
3. On some cameras, though I suspect the Yunon 500 is actually not among them (and mine has film loaded at the moment, so I can't actually check), the shutter cocking mechanism actually depends on having the film travel across a sprocket. So if the film isn't moving, or there's something else wrong with the camera, the shutter button won't do anything.

Of course, the real test is to actually get some film back, and see what you got. In my experience, most drug-store mini-labs (or any other lab, really) will do inexpensive "develop only" processing if you request it. And they often have some inexpensive film, as well. If your new camera only cost you $1 at a thrift store, this might sound expensive, but you should be able to put a roll of film through the camera and get it processed for somewhere in the $4-7 dollar range, for both film and processing. So you can just "throw away" a roll, to test the camera, or go out shooting for real, but with the expectation that you *may* not get good results, and at least check it without losing much. You can always ask them to print (or scan) the negatives after the fact -- especially if you ask to get it back uncut, in which case they may still be willing (perhaps best to ask in advance of dropping off the film) to give you the at-development-time prices for things.

Happy shooting!

Macro lenses for Eye photos (close-ups of eyes)

Some years ago, I came across a friend of a friend with very unusual eyes (she has something which I later learned was called sectoral heterochromia), which actually inspired me to enter the world of Macro photography again (something I'd tinkered with some years earlier, and was glad to re-visit). The immediate results of this (thankfully, she obliged when I asked her for permission to photograph her eyes -- thanks again, Jalene!) were some photos showing her unusual iris coloration:



and:



Later, I paid more attention to aesthetics, and came up with images like this:



At any rate, the first of these photos recently garnered the question on flickr of which lens I had used, to which I responded (shown here with corrections):

This (and all my eye macro photos) was shot with a Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens. There's a new L version of the lens out, which I haven't tried.

I've been using the Macro Twin-Lite MT-24EX flash, which mounts nicely directly onto the front of the lens. The MR-12EX MR-14EX Macro Ring-Lite may actually provide better results for eye macros, though (I think the reflection is more likely (though perhaps not guaranteed) to land inside the pupil, thus leaving the Iris visible everywhere). (I got the Twin-Lite for general versatility reasons, even though eye macros were a major motivator.)

This particular shot was done on 35mm film (Fuji Velvia 50, I think), and others were shot digitally (with a 1.6x crop factor, which is visually quite different).

Also note: I haven't tried the 180mm macro lens, though I know some folks like it a lot (if not for this specific subject matter -- I don't know if they've tried it), and it can also be fitted (via an adapter) with the Ring and Twin Lite flashes. If you're doing try-before-you-buy, I'd try that lens, too.

Good luck!

The asker then asked a follow-up about where to find a "good deal" for finding such equipment, and further whether I had an opinion on the MP-E 65mm 1-5x Macro lens. I am now moving my reply to these questions here. This blog has long been in need of a next good question, and I realized this could be it.

So, to answer the follow-ups:

Ahh, yes, didn't think to mention that one. I've never actually tried it (though I've been meaning to, at some point), but from what I understand of it, it's certainly an option as well (and will also directly take either of those strobe options).

It sounds like your purposes may be medical in nature?

If so, I presume you have the advantage of a setup for keeping the subject's head still, which will be a huge advantage for you with any of these lenses. The main difference you'll find with the 65mm 1-5x is its ability to go to 5x, and the fact that it's ONLY usable for macro use (the others focus to infinity, the 1-5x just changes magnification, and focus is handled by moving the camera&lens towards or away from the subject -- or at least that's how I understand it). The depth of field at these distances is quite small with any of these lenses, so depending on your setup, the having-to-move-the-camera (in very small increments) may or may not prove difficult (typically a focusing rail is used for studio macro work -- in an ophthalmological setting, I'm imagining (with minimal actual knowledge) that you'd have some sort of swing-arm with the camera mounted on it? Or perhaps it would be something completely different. Either way, you'll want to make sure that whatever rig the camera is mounted on can be adjusted in very small increments towards or away from your subject (patient) to focus the image, and be quite stable when not being moved for that purpose, so as not to fall back out of focus. This is likely true with any of these lenses, but especially so with the 1x-5x, since it is without any other way to focus.

The other difference that I imagine will be relevant to you would be lens-to-subject distance. The longer the focal length of the lens, the longer this distance will be when the image is in focus (which may impact subject comfort -- though perhaps in your situation this is less of an issue, since they're expecting things close to them anyway?). So for the 65mm, you'll presumably have the least distance (I don't know how much, though, and it should be noted that there are other factors in determining this distance, having to do with how exactly the lens is constructed). With the 100mm at 1x magnification, I've found the distance to be approximately 6 inches. With the 180mm, it would be longer (apparently 9.5", according to this review).

There are also a number of other resources out there about this subject. Wikipedia's Macro photography article is probably a good general introduction.


Now, as for where to get a good deal, I must first say that buying from a local retailer -- especially a high-end specialty camera store (e.g. Glazer's in Seattle, where I happen to be) -- can often be worth a somewhat higher price than other options: what you loose in savings for the initial purchase can be more than made up for in service options for repairs (for example, Glazer's will ship things back to Canon for warranty service, I believe at no charge, when you bought the item from them), help from staff, etc. Of course, different stores are different, so your results may vary. It's worth considering, though.

If price is your most important thing, though, I've found that I tend to be able to get the lowest prices from online retailers (which seem to all be in New York, somehow) such as B&H, Adorama, or J&R. You'll want to be wary of retailers you haven't heard of (there are some fly-by-night operations out there, too, sadly). All three of those I've named I've had good experiences with, and I know they've been around for a while, so hopefully your experiences will be good as well. You could also shop from either a search-engine front end like Google Products, or an online retailer like Amazon.com (who also has the L version, of course, not to mention the MT-24EX Macro Twin-Lite and MR-14EX Macro Ring-Lite flashes) that also allows you to buy from other merchants (including, frequently, some or all of the ones I mentioned earlier).


Of course, there's nothing that says you have to go with the Canon. I'm only listing the Canon options, and particularly the 100mm, because that's what I happened to use, and that was the initial question. I know Nikon has macro options as well, not to mention 3rd-party lens manufacturers such as Tamron, or other makes such as Pentax or the like. I have little if any experience with these options, though, so I leave that to the reader.

If you have further questions, please post them either here or on flickr, and I'll be happy to add to this response.

Thanks for asking!

What's that weird flare in my low-light shots?

OK, so the title of this post wasn't actually asked to me in that form. I have, however, run across people asking about it, and not all that long ago, I was trying to figure it out myself. Well, with thanks to my friend (and fellow photographer) John Cornicello for originally pointing me in the right direction, I've figured out that it's filter flare.

The article linked above does a pretty decent job of explaining it, so I won't go into more detail here at the moment. If you have any questions about it, though, do of course feel free to ask!

Ask Lindes

OK, I'm finally doing it. This is a new blog where I will take photography questions from people, and do my best to answer them in useful and meaningful ways. No question is too big or too small, though of course if the question is pertinent to types of photography that you know that I do, there's a better chance that I'll be able to answer it -- not all questions will be answered on the blog, though I'll do my best to respond to every question I get, if only in a private message.

Also, this will be a little different than most blogs in that I fully expect that I may well go back and edit old postings frequently, as I discover new facts, find better ways to express things, or the like.

I was going to do this on my own website, and may someday convert it to that... starting it out here, though.

By sending e-mail to the address listed in the header image for this blog (an anti-spam measure... hopefully it'll help), you agree to give me permission to publish the question here. If you'd like me not to, and/or you'd like to be anonymous, please say so. On the other hand, if you'd like me to link back to some site or page of yours, please also let me know that.

If you're asking about specific images (of mine, or anyone's), please be sure to include a link to the images in question.

OK, I think that covers the basics... I reserve the right to edit this posting as well, though. :-)