Life size and larger orchid photographs
 

Attached a few macro images from specimens in my terrarium. All shots with Canon 5DmkII and illuminated with Canon MX24 twin head flash with puff diffusers. Various adjustments with flash exposure compensation and power balance between the two flash heads plus azimuth and incident angle of flash heads. Images captured in RAW neutral, some steepening of curves (and color adjustments) in Lab color space, select unsharp mask in L-channel to avoid color artifacts, saved in RGB.

- Bulbophyllum acutebractetum. Photographed through the front glass of terrarium with Zeiss 100 mm MakroplanarZE and Kenko extension ring.
- Cadetia taylori. Canon MPE 65 mm at about 3:1 on full size CMOS. Notice that you can count the cells on the petals.
- Dockrillia cuccumeria. Zeiss 100 mm Makroplanar ZE.
- Pleurothallis brighamii. MPE 65 mm, about 3-4:1.
- Specklinia caespitosa. MPE 65 mm about 4:1.

Sophronitelia violacea is about to open, so that will be sweet!

One more. Restrepia muscifera about life size.

Beautiful! :D That's a great camera, I have a Canon powershot, I love it, but can't get very good macro's...

Fantastic pictures, amazing detail on those little guys!
Joann

Thanks Tim and Zoi2. Camera is one thing, lens the other, and much more important one. Both lenses are manual focus lenses, with very tight tolerances. Notice, for instance, the complete absence of color artifacts, even when using extension rings on the Zeiss: no chromatic aberration, no lateral color, and that on a 20 MP chip. And, yes, the compact cameras are breaking down at lifesize and greater. For those not familiar with the flowers, the Cadetia, Pleurothallis/Specklinia are about 7 mm or 1/4 inch. This is where SLR shines.

Also notice that I don't use all soft lighting, but that I prefer some soft (but not blocking) shadows. It gives the flower some depth and 3D appearance. This is particularly important in species that many will not be familiar with. If you see a Phalenopsis or Cypripedium, everybody knows what it is supposed to look like, so you fill the depth information in. But that the little horns on the Cadetia are curving forward, that has to be shown with lighting and angle. Even out of focus areas help in giving the 3D impression. The images were shot at pretty small f/stops (11-16) to give as much depth of field as possible, so I accepted a bit of loss of resolution due to diffraction, as the images are not blown up that much.

I use twin macro flash heads. Although they are physically small, given the relative size of the light source to the subject, they are acting like a "large light source"; see the B&H insight discussion just posted, or also Hunter & Fuqua in Light: Science and Magic. I don't like ring flashes, as they just flatten the subject too much.

Nice macros! I especially like the Cadetia

Thanks! Yep, the Cadetia is gorgeous. The full-size image on my 30" monitor is even better! More buds are on the plant, so there will be additional opportunities. I think there the shadows bring out some of the fine hairs on the labellum. Note at the front, the hairs are against a shaded area and very clean, to the rear, it is against a more illuminated area and not as easy to pick out. Another reason not to use all-diffuse lighting.

I'm about to get a new printer. The old Epson R1800 is getting cranky. Looking into 2880, 3880, and 4880. This will be a nice test file to put down on paper.