Efficiency of this Macro lighting setup?

[AllEx]

Hallo to everyone,
Recently I`ve constructed this :



" softbox " witch inside it is all covered with black color (to avoid any reflections). I intent to use my SB800 in full power ( in my D800, and with an 200 mm MF Ai as a tube lens, on my Nikon 10X or My Nikon 4X objective)
The question is :
Will that give me enough power on my flash to shoot approximately 200-300 stacks?

[Manfred M]

Welcome to CiC Alexander.

The only way you are going to be able to answer that question is to test your setup to see how many flashes you can get. There are simply too many variables in play for anyone to answer that question; battery type, battery age, duty cycle, etc will all come into play. I believe that the SB-800 has an external power port and you can fit it with an external battery pack. I've done this for my SB-900 and that easily doubles the number of flashes I can get on a single charge. Using the rechargeable Maha PowerEx NiMH (2700 mAH) batteries (not the 2400 mAH Maha Imedion or the Panasonic Eneloop (2000 mAH) or Eneloop Pro (2550 mAH)) will give you more flashes as well. All of these batteries will give you more flashes than the standard disposable alkaline types, but the PowerEx will give you the most flashes (assuming these are a new set).

The other question I would have is why have you gone for a dark "softbox"? That will mean an increased power consumption versus the more standard design of silver interior (suitably baffled) to give a diffuse light. You will still need the same amount of light to make a proper exposure, but will have to increase the power output to compensate for the light the black will absorb. I would have thought soft, diffuse light would be more useful for whatever you are trying to photograph.

[AllEx]

Thank you Manfred for your tips, for the record I `ve preferred the black set up because the lighter ones gives me, with it`s reflections that bad flare on my images :



This image is very badly indeed illuminated, but with the black set up, besides it`s requirements of light, I believe it will give me the proper result.

[Shadowman]

That's a very dynamic end result, has an electric feel to it.

[mknittle]

OooooooH noooooo they are mutating into cybugs.

pretty cool image Alexander I think I see what you are shooting for with the black lining. Good luck with your experiment.

[Manfred M]

Thank you Manfred for your tips, for the record I `ve preferred the black set up because the lighter ones gives me, with it`s reflections that bad flare on my images :


This image is very badly indeed illuminated, but with the black set up, besides it`s requirements of light, I believe it will give me the proper result.

I'm not a macro photographer (I've only ever shot macro two or three times in my life; enough to know it is not a field of photography I have any interest in pursuing. I do use black "negative light" reflectors from time to time in my own work, so understand why you would want to go that way. I would have thought a ring flash setup that prevents light from hitting the front element of your lens would have been a suitable approach for this type of work.

[AllEx]

I'm not a macro photographer (I've only ever shot macro two or three times in my life; enough to know it is not a field of photography I have any interest in pursuing. I do use black "negative light" reflectors from time to time in my own work, so understand why you would want to go that way. I would have thought a ring flash setup that prevents light from hitting the front element of your lens would have been a suitable approach for this type of work.

First of all I want to thank John and Mark for their good words.
Dear Manfred I`ve tried a ring flash but it did not turned to give sufficient light. In another site (photomicrography.net) told me that I should use a flash. The reason I`m writing hear is if somebody used that kind of chargers. Your opinion on your fist apply, the one with the test, finds me strongly in favour of.
As for the light hitting the front element of my lens I have a solution (that somebody from that other site opposed me).

[DanK]

I do a lot of macro photography, so I will add a few suggestions.

First, I assume the bug is dead. No live bug will sit still that long. This gives you more choices.

Most macro photographers I know do not use ring flashes. They are good if you simply want to maximize detail, but they don't generally produce pleasing images. They give a very flat light, and they are hard to diffuse.

I doubt very much whether your problem with reflections is because of the color or reflectivity of the interior of your light box. I would bet that it is a result of insufficient diffusion of the light coming out of the box. At close distances, my experience is that one needs a great deal of diffusion. I shoot bugs at lower magnifications than your image--usually about 1:1 to about 1.5:1--but even at those greater distances, I use multiple layers of diffusion for my flash. Also, if your apparatus holds the light far from the subject, it will generate more of an appearance of a spot light.

For live bugs at a magnification of 1.5:1, I usually use this for lighting:



The diffuser body is made of two soda cans, so they are a dull alluminum finish inside. I use the built-in diffuser on the flash and two layers of paper for diffusion at the front of the diffuser. That gives images like this:



You can see that there is still some reflection from shiny areas, but not too much. For bugs with less shiny carapaces, it works better:



For things that don't move, I use continuous halogen lighting. The fixtures (google "hair light") are like the soda cans: the inside is dull aluminum. I tape diffusing paper over the front. I also often add more diffuse light by aiming one light into a reflecting umbrella. I don't have any bugs done that way, but just for illustration, here is a flower:



If you stick with flash and the bug is dead, I don't know why you would need 400 shots on a charge. You could always just put in new batteries partway through the shoot. However, I really doubt you would need 400 images unless you are going to a very high level of magnification.

[mknittle]

I do a lot of macro photography, so I will add a few suggestions.

First, I assume the bug is dead. No live bug will sit still that long. This gives you more choices.

Most macro photographers I know do not use ring flashes. They are good if you simply want to maximize detail, but they don't generally produce pleasing images. They give a very flat light, and they are hard to diffuse.

I doubt very much whether your problem with reflections is because of the color or reflectivity of the interior of your light box. I would bet that it is a result of insufficient diffusion of the light coming out of the box. At close distances, my experience is that one needs a great deal of diffusion. I shoot bugs at lower magnifications than your image--usually about 1:1 to about 1.5:1--but even at those greater distances, I use multiple layers of diffusion for my flash. Also, if your apparatus holds the light far from the subject, it will generate more of an appearance of a spot light.

For live bugs at a magnification of 1.5:1, I usually use this for lighting:



The diffuser body is made of two soda cans, so they are a dull alluminum finish inside. I use the built-in diffuser on the flash and two layers of paper for diffusion at the front of the diffuser. That gives images like this:



You can see that there is still some reflection from shiny areas, but not too much. For bugs with less shiny carapaces, it works better:



For things that don't move, I use continuous halogen lighting. The fixtures (google "hair light") are like the soda cans: the inside is dull aluminum. I tape diffusing paper over the front. I also often add more diffuse light by aiming one light into a reflecting umbrella. I don't have any bugs done that way, but just for illustration, here is a flower:



If you stick with flash and the bug is dead, I don't know why you would need 400 shots on a charge. You could always just put in new batteries partway through the shoot. However, I really doubt you would need 400 images unless you are going to a very high level of magnification.

I like that.

[Manfred M]

First of all I want to thank John and Mark for their good words.
Dear Manfred I`ve tried a ring flash but it did not turned to give sufficient light. In another site (photomicrography.net) told me that I should use a flash. The reason I`m writing hear is if somebody used that kind of chargers. Your opinion on your fist apply, the one with the test, finds me strongly in favour of.
As for the light hitting the front element of my lens I have a solution (that somebody from that other site opposed me).

I don't know what advice you received from the other site, but shielding your lens from light hitting the front element is something worth experimenting with.

Just as an aside, here is a shot of the SB-900 with the external power supply. I bought a cheap Chinese knockoff on eBay and it works fine in speeding up recycle time and number of shots you can take. The only issue with the SB-900 is that it is prone to overheating quite quickly, especially on full power (which is why it was replaced by the SB-910). I believe the SB-800 has the same kind of port for an external power supply. Having 12 batteries (4 internal and 8 external) should give you lots of flashes for stacking.

[AllEx]

Thank you Dan for your suggestions, adding more diffusion in my setup is a grate idea and I`ll sourly try it, due to my current mobility it is impossible to embrace your methods because on a bed I cannot do a field work. Your photos are very beautiful and well taken. The 400 stacks I assume that I`ll need when I'll shoot with an objective 20X that I hope that I`ll get.
Manfred the capital controls does not allow me access on ebay purchase, the charger I saw before is the most inexpensive one I manage to find inside Greece.
Protecting the objective with a cylindrical peace of carton (shaped around the objective) slightly bigger than it, but inside the working distance of the objective, gives you the safety, avoiding the interference of the surrounding (or ambient) light. Thanks for your suggestion, my SB800 has the connectivity with external power as the SB900 or SB910. I just believe that it will not overheat because of the adjustments I`ll make in the shooting sequence (you see in that magnifications you have to let time for the vibrations to stop) thus each shut will have a sufficient time gap from the next. Besides the StackShot that I have gives you the option to stop the procedure and restart it from the place you stopped.
(All the above in a vibration free environment)

[Manfred M]

The external battery pack in the image cost me ~ $Cdn 40, including shipping (without any batteries). Adding 8 PowerEx batteries to the battery pack cost me about the same money as the battery pack., so from a cost standpoint, it is relatively inexpensive. The Nikon SD-8 is extremely expensive ~ $Cdn 300 for essentially the same thing.

[AllEx]

I know that this think is extremely expensive for my needs, I have not bought it yet, I`m steel searching for a solution inside my country.

[Rebellion]

very useful information as I will try to see the result...

Thank's

[AllEx]

very useful information as I will try to see the result...

Thank's

It tern to be very dark, I`m searching for a solution. You`ll hear from me soon.

[AllEx]

Finally I removed one of the two layers of defusion, placed my subject near the illuminating surface and manage to take photos with ISO 100 and 1/8 of my flash power.
I am thinking to paint the inner carton skeleton with white mat paint to increase the illuminating efficiency, l will leave the black outside fabric to avoid the reflections.


Alex.