[wspohn]

Use of a light tent is pretty much obligatory to avoid highlights, glare etc. when photographing jewellery, watches, pens......

Inexpensive light tents can be fabricated by those handy with such things and purchased relatively inexpensively by those who aren't.

Whichever way you go, the other necessary element is lighting.

You can buy twin lights with daylight balance bulbs and adjustable bases for between $100 and $200, (or up - sky is the limit). I wanted to post to offer a less expensive alternative for some.

Those still using film or inexpensive digital cameras may now turn away - this won't work for you.

Anyone with adjustable white balance either on their camera or in the software they use to process images can take advantage of this.

In the automotive field we always used to use regular heavy filament incandescent bulbs, until they developed quartz halogen lights for the same purpose. At first they were expensive - more than $100 each. Now you can go to your local shop and pick up an adjustable work light with tempered glass front for around $15 or less.



Remove the protective wire grid or you will get some odd shadow lines in your photos and be aware that they do put out a lot of heat, so maybe plug them both into a switchable power bar and set up your shot before turning them on. They work quite well unadjusted for video use and you can experiment with distance away from the light tent, bouncing them off a wall, ceiling etc. Once you get it optimised, just leave it set up or measure it so you can quickly set it up the same way again.

You'll have to play about a little to see how to set them up - distance, rake etc. You will also need to see if you can set up a custom white balance for use with the lights, or a preset in your software to convert the images to a suitable colour temperature, but once you do that you are set to go without ever needing to mess around with that again.

And you just saved $75 - $150 you can now spend on pens.....

[SMG]

How right you are about light tents. I am now on my second one, the first was a bit too small for my tastes, so it went to a friend.

I actually used two of the lights that you mentioned and had problems with the white balance for a while. I was using both my Canon S2IS and my Nikon D50. I got fed up of having to recalibrate the white balance all the time, so I went to Home Depot and got a couple clip lights.

The clip lights were about $12CDN each, the shades were $14CDN each and a set of bulbs was $8CDN. I spent a little more, but the difference in the quality of the light and the reduction in heat output from those old worklights is astounding.

Check out some recent shots, and my lighting setup.






Cheers,
SG

[journo]

SG, I love your light tent and the very nice shots. I was wondering which lens you use on the D50?
Cheers,
John

[SMG]

For the shots of the nibs I used a Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 DL Macro Super at about 1:2.5 Macro and for the Morrison's I think I used my Nikon 55-200 4-5.6 ED DX at 55mm.

The lighting was super soft on the Sheaffer nib, but I just wished that I had used a little more depth of field to have the whole nib in focus.

Thanks
SG

[Ruaidhri]

Thanks folks - I'm just sitting here quietly learning

[SMG]

BTW take some of the money that you save on the lights and buy a grey card as well:)
Invaluable for setting white balance.

Cheers,
SG

[journo]

SG, many thanks for the information. I haven't tried any macro photography, but I am hoping my Nikkor 12-24mm zoom with its 1-ft minimum focus distance will do the job - in conjunction with a light tent like yours ?

[Ruaidhri]

Quick background:

My Father - now almost 89 - was in Advanced Air Reconnaisance all through WWII. He later worked for the Irish Times and Irish Independent newspapers - in the days when Journalsim was a well respected profession (no offence please !). Won awards etc.
When he retired he gave me his gear - a much used Nikon F (no numbers !), light meter lenses etc.
So- I can take a decent photograph



Now:

I have very little experience with digital cameras - theory yes but little practice especially with macro work. I have a small Olympus C960 1.3mp, and access to my son's Nikon D70


Questions:

Are you folk in favour of macro fittings for your lenses - or do you take shots at very high res & then zoom in afterwards ?
Does anyone favour daylight bulbs ?


If nobody objects I'll be firing more questions as they occur to me

[wimg]

journo, on Aug 28 2006, 07:51 AM, said:

SG, many thanks for the information. I haven't tried any macro photography, but I am hoping my Nikkor 12-24mm zoom with its 1-ft minimum focus distance will do the job - in conjunction with a light tent like yours ?

Hi journo,

Generally, a wide angle lens or zoom is not the ideal lens for macrophotography, due to the small magnifications it achieves, and the distortions caused by the very wide angle of view. 1 ft with a 12-24 zoom is probably not close enough for close-up shots. It might just be enough for a total view of the pen.

Generally you´re better of with a normal lens, or even better, a short tele, and the best results may be obtained with a macro lens of some sort, which generally is a short telelens.

If you can´t focus close enough with the lens(es) in your possession, you might consider a close-up lens, which essentially is a magnifying glass which screws in like a filter at the front end of the lens. A close-up lens is a relatively cheap and very effective solution for macro photography.

HTH, warm regards, Wim

[wimg]

Hi Ruaidhrí,

Ruaidhri, on Aug 28 2006, 01:50 PM, said:

Quick background:

My Father - now almost 89 - was in Advanced Air Reconnaisance all through WWII. He later worked for the Irish Times and Irish Independent newspapers - in the days when Journalsim was a well respected profession (no offence please !). Won awards etc.
When he retired he gave me his gear - a much used Nikon F (no numbers !), light meter lenses etc.
So- I can take a decent photograph 

That is always a good starting point..

Quote

Now:

I have very little experience with digital cameras - theory yes but little practice especially with macro work. I have a small Olympus C960 1.3mp, and access to my son's Nikon D70


Questions:

Are you folk in favour of macro fittings for your lenses - or do you take shots at very high res & then zoom in afterwards ?

I use macro fittings, to get the best results. Either macro lenses, or TS-lenses for that matter, extension tubes, teleconverters, and closeup lenses. The latter are very effective and relatively cheap. IOW, I don´t zoom in afterwards. IMO, it is best to try and take a photograph as close as possible to the image you have in mind. It always means less work afterwards, and also means you can always make nice large prints if so required. To me, that holds true for any form of photography, be it film based or digital. And scaling them down for the internet generally is a trivial issue anyway.

I don´t know how close the Oly focuses, but 1.3 MP generally is enough for internet use. The D70, well, that is really a great camera. Just use a close-up lens in combination with a standard zoom, short telezoom, or a standard or short tele lens, and you´re all set to take some great macro photographs.

Of course 1 essential item with macro phtography generally is a tripod, or some other sturdy support for your camera, to avoid camera shake and movement as much as possible. And if you don´t have a cable or remote release, you can use the self timer to avoid camera shake etc. caused by manual operation of the camera.

Quote

Does anyone favour daylight bulbs ?


If nobody objects I'll be firing more questions as they occur to me 

Yes, I used to use daylight bulbs a lot in the past. I still have some. They are handy in that you can actually see the effect on light and shadow straight away when you move them around. However, these days I generally use flash only, with digital anyway, because if you don´t get the exact result you had in mind, you can always try again quite easily. And small slave flash units are very cheap these days, so that is the route I use with digital. I have 4 slave units currently, and together with my main flash that is more than sufficient. The big advantage of flash units is that they don´t get as hot as daylight bulbs do .

If you have more questions, just fire or shoot away .

HTH, warm regards, Wim

[journo]

Ruaidhri, on Aug 28 2006, 11:50 AM, said:

I have very little experience with digital cameras - theory yes but little practice especially with macro work. I have a small Olympus C960 1.3mp, and access to my son's Nikon D70

Hi Ruaidhrí,
We're both in the same boat re macro experience - but, thanks to Wim, SMG and wspohn, we can both learn! That D70 is a very nice camera, by all reports I hear. I switched to digital two years ago and will not go back to film, purely on a cost and convenience basis.
All the best,
John S

[journo]

wimg, on Aug 28 2006, 01:35 PM, said:

Generally you´re better of with a normal lens, or even better, a short tele

Hi, Wim, and thank you for your advice - much appreciated. I have a 28-200 zoom (42-300 now) and a nice f2.8 24 mm (now 36mm) fixed lens. Hopefully, these might do the job ? If not, I'll look at macro adaptor. I gather from what you say, it screws in like a filter ? I do have tripod and remote shutter release.
Once again, thanks for the tips.
All the best,
John S

[wspohn]

I use a Minolta D7i and a Sony R1 (the latter often with a macro lens) for botanical close ups and they both work very well.

The images I keep on the websites are low res, but this will give you some idea.

This post has been edited by wspohn: 29 August 2006 - 01:24 PM

[wspohn]

A friend just sent this to me - how to make a light box for about $10!

It may be of some interest

DIY $10 Macro Photo Studio

and also Follow-up

[Ruaidhri]

Once again - THANKS.

As the workshop is still off limits (back=ouch !), this will give me something to do over the weekend.

Hopefully I'll be able to expose (pun intended) my shots to public ridicule next week

Regards,
R