How-to make decent photographs for forum posts/articles/publications? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 06:44:31 am
content: Hi to all pixel-nuts.Few times people were asking me how to take good hardware photos. So I decided to bodge up quick article about this topic, instead of writing paragraphs of text to each and everyone personally.It took a while to make everything described, butarticle is out now.Some common bad practices are busted, as well as examples of few photos and used setups provided.Try to read IC labels on SDRAM and PCB on photo above, or what is exact voltage displayed on DMM?Same photos after reading article and NOT using flash:Good Keithley 2002 ADC pic as exampleWhat gear you are using? What tricks you think useful for EE-related photography?Show your stuff, let's improve on content we produce in 2016!

author: chicken
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 07:26:23 am
content: If the PCB is reasonably flat, use a flatbed scanner. Works very well for smaller stuff like for example boards out of point & shoot cameras (my guilty teardown pleasure).

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 07:39:01 am
content: Great thread !Yeah, flash is a big no noAlso imo, most bad ones especially close up shots were made because of unsteady camera, as common using cellphone camera as it can not be secured to a steady base like a tripod. Heck, even el cheapo $10 tripod and cheap P&S camera will make huge differences compared to a handheld, high end cellphone camera.Sharing my much simpler setup with a little trick to get crt screen like below as I don't have the special hood/shade for shooting it ->Shooting CRT Based Scope Screen

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 07:55:11 am
content: IMHO it's not just about how the pics are taken, how they are presented is important too.In a thread byc4757phow he's done the imagery is the best that I can remember:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/tek-485-repair-and-restoration-prologue/Image files have been uploaded in the normal way to EEVblog's server leaving the normal thumbnails at the foot of each post.But instead of inserting the images throughout his post by way of the "Insert Image" tool, he's used a "Insert Hyperlink" leaving a link where an image might be. This method offers 3 distinct advantages:1. The page loads FAST. I have slow internet and threads like this are a joy.2. It allows an easy work-around for the forum restrictions of pic size, by using an external pic host and with a corresponding URL great pic detail can be offered when/if needed.3. By using a URL, a click opens a new browser page yielding a FULL page pic of far higher detail than be attached within a post by using the SMF "Insert Image" tool.

author: deadlylover
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 09:25:13 am
content: Trying to get everything in focus on a larger PCB pisses me off, any tips? X(Here's the first notch filter board on my Panasonic 7722 audio analyser, gonna have to upgrade one or two of those ancient opamps, most likely the NE5534, it likes to have a 2nd harmonic peak at the -120 or -130db range when used in active twin-t or bridged t notch filters. Swapping it for something like an OPA1611 should suppress the 2nd harmonic by 7-10db.Not sure how much I can improve the unit though, lots more work to be done on the amplifier stage before the notch....but that's for another thread, or not, folks here don't really like talking about audiofoolery stuffs.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 09:51:08 am
content: BravoVNice, but I'd reduce lamp backlight a notch or two.deadlylover, is that a solder blob between R140 and R143?I think you have decent pic, just a bit non-parallel to camera sensor, causing minor blur on left edge. I covered this in articletautechWhile c4757p's method good for threads with few just few pics, it will become unfriendly if you have 10+ pics, as you will not see easily which photo relate to what text.2. Storing images on external hosts, especially free pic hosts is a huge no-no in my vocabulary. Why? Because after week/month/year these photos will be gonsky! Exception - own server, which is backed up on regular manner3. 90% of pics I post are thumbnail-ed (clickable for hi-res version).I love to pixel hunt.

author: deadlylover
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 10:01:52 am
content: TiN,Yep sure looks like it, I'll investigate the next time I take apart the unit. Bodge city in there from the factory, I love the triple stacked relays on the right. XDI feel like I should get a small spinny table "lazy susan" thing so I can rotate the board easier, as I have the camera pointed horizontally and not vertically (don't have a nice tripod).

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 10:11:06 am
content: Thank you! Honestly, it is very hard to get the light conditions right. I have to take several photos, work related, for documetation, and it is impossible to get the light conditions right. Neon lamps above, shiny soldermask, and the office doesnt spend a cent on camera.Even at home, I had zero sucess making photos.I am considering to build two DIY light box (not the curved amazon type)Anyone tried making photos of electronics with theese kind of lighting?

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 10:24:59 am
content: It will work fine, but I found using generic LED flashlights easier and way more portable. Also they dont take space in lab, unlike softboxes, and such.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 10:51:44 am
content: Quote from: TiN on January 07, 2016, 09:51:08 amAgreed but one can manage that by simply adding more posts.Quote+1There's examples of this all through the forumand for that reason I only upload to Dave's server.QuotePlease describe the process/syntax used.Is this possible for pics greater than the 1000Kb EEVblog limit?EditSeems like you link from your own server, well that puts you in another league to the bulk of us that are constrained by Dave's limits and the abilities of SMF forum software.c4757p's method stands out IMO as even a quite small size (Kb) pic is opened as a full sized browser tab and I've seen nothing displaying better quality images when hosting on Dave's server.I understand this thread is about quality imagery but show us a better way for the bulk of our members to display that imagery is just as important too.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 11:39:21 am
content: That's a very fair point.I think serious enthusiasts (which have lots of content/photos) may consider or already have static IP address or machine which is accessible from the web, which makes possibility of using "own" server as well.It's not hard to setup simple webserver to serve pics and files, there are hundreds of guides over the web showing how to do that.Alternative and more common way, is to have webhoster to serve your data. Today getting domain name, web-hosting and few gigs of space is not that expensive, and can be done just for 10-20$/year. It's way less than most of us spend for electronic toys anyway. It does not take long to set everything upStill, if one just posts from time to time, backup pics and don't count on safety of free hostings. In worst case you could just reupload stuff again.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 12:59:19 pm
content: Quote from: TiN on January 07, 2016, 10:24:59 amThey produce light which is from one source. So you will have shadows and reflections. Or are you somehow using them indirect?The space is not an issue. I plan to use them as general lighting, and I do it at home.

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 01:08:25 pm
content: See the video in linked article. I use them to point at object from all around, with camera on tripod with 1-5 second exposure time. Of course there should be no bright lights around to have this work.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 02:44:17 pm
content: I've done some photography for internet and I will offer the following suggestions. You may not be able to control all of these, but any of them you CAN control are worth investigating. It will be up to you to develop a setup that works for your equipment and situation.1.Lens. Is it clean? If not, you will be taking foggy photos from the outset - but before you reach for your favourite glass cleaner, please check the lens cleaning instructions for your camera. If you can't find any then ask. If you are still unsure, then I would suggest you get some good quality camera lens cleaning tissue and follow the directions. If you have a half-decent camera shop near you, they will not only be very likely to carry this, but they will be happy to show you how to use it.2.Camera mounting. Don't hold your camera freehand. Have it fixed to something so that it does not move during the exposure. Camera shake is impossible to remove in post-production. Tripods are good (except Dave's). If you must hold your camera in hand, try to have your hands resting against something solid.3.Lighting. This is the single most important aspect of photography. As has already been demonstrated, on camera flash is a bad idea. In fact any kind of flash can be problematic as you won't know what shadows or reflections you are going to get until after the shot is taken. If you can, have set illumination - from the side or at least off-axis from the camera lens. Diffused light from something like a softbox can work well. If you must use a flash, then do it off-camera unless the subject is a completely matt and non-reflective finish. To get an idea of what reflections a flash might give, get a bright torch and hold it in front of the flash pointing in the same direction as the flash. Move the torch until any reflections are the least problematic and then set the flash in the same position and orientation. Repeat for each flash. Do a test shot to check for flash flare and for overall lighting of the subject. Adjust if necessary. Rinse and repeat.4.Direct viewing. Being able to see what you are about to photograph will aid setting up immensely. If you are using a smartphone, that's pretty much a given - as it is with many digital cameras - UNLESS the camera is placed in such a position where the viewfinder is not readily accessible. In such cases, having an external monitor will make your life easier.5.Reflections. If you are taking photos which include any specular surfaces or even just shiny ones, just be mindful of what reflections you might pick up. You might not provide x-rated material (that featured in some ebay listings a while back) but you might end up with some distracting bright spots that have nothing to do with the subject. Once I had a dark subject with a shiny surface that showed some coloured patches that simply didn't exist on the subject. The patches turned out to be from a coloured sticker that was on the front of my camera body, reflected off the subject. Once I identified that, I was able to locate other bright spots which were from other shiny parts of my camera. My solution involved a couple of old black woolen socks being sacrificed for the cause.6.Focus. If you can, it is best to have the ability to focus manually or to be able to 'lock' the focus to a set point. This way, YOU can make the judgement as to where the best focus point is.7.Depth of field. This is getting into the nitty gritty of photography, but it is simply a term which describes the range of distances where a subjectappearsto be in focus. While only one distance is actuallyin focus, some objects that are a bit closer to the camera as well as some a bit further away from the camera can still look like they are in focus because their 'blurriness' is not enough for our eyes to notice. What is interesting about this is, the smaller the lens aperture, the greater this range (or depth-of-field) becomes. There is a trade-off, however. For the same amount of light to fall onto the sensor, as you reduce the aperture, you will have to increase the exposure time. This gives you increased susceptibility to movement of the camera. With a hand-held camera, this can become a problem very quickly, but if the camera is fixed - as in being mounted on a tripod for example - then this becomes almost a non-issue. If your subject is flat then all this isn't a big issue, but if you have a PCB with a couple of tall caps on it, then you might want to investigate this a bit further. Please note that the depth-of-field is a function of the physical aperture size of your lens. An electronic 'equivalent' will not give you any benefit.8.Resolution. Remember that you can always reduce the resolution of an image in post production, but you can never increase it - so seriously consider the resolution you want for your original image.9.Zoom. There are 3 ways to get a subject to fill the image space.(a) Move the camera and/or the subject.(b) Use Optical zoom(c) Use Digital zoomMoving the camera/subject is a rather obvious option, but it is one which applies toeverycamera. Sometimes this is either awkward or not practical, but there are times when it might be worth the effort.With the camera and subject in set positions, using zoom is a natural choice. But, if you have both optical and digital available, which one should you use? While you can use both, optical zoom should be your first choice because it changes the size of the image as it falls onto the sensor, giving the maximum resolution for the resultant picture. If your camera has the ability, changing lenses is another option - which can provide better quality.[Fixed focal length lenses are designed to provide the best quality at a single focal length whereas (optical) zoom lenses are designed to operate over arangeof focal lengths, which can mean some compromise on image quality. This compromise is not something most people would be concerned about - in fact, I would venture to say that most people wouldn't even notice, especially as today's optics are generally pretty good. (Professional photographers certainly know - and it's one of the reasons they carry a range of lenses with them.)]With digital zoom, some of the pixels from the sensor are discarded and the remaining ones scaled up** to fill the frame, resulting in lower quality. Thus, it is pretty much safe to say that just about any optical zoom will result in a better quality image than a digital zoom.** Digital zoom can be performed in a camera with that abilityortheequivalentcan be done post-production in image processing software. The result is effectively the same, but there can be differences depending on the upscaling algorithm used (there are several).10.Distortion - barrel. When doing close-up photography, you are more prone to barrel distortion. When it comes to subjects where there are long straight lines and/or rectangular shapes, this can be most disconcerting. While some photo editing software has corrective functions, it's always better to minimise this at the time of the shoot. The best answer to this is to have your camera as far away from the subject as possible and use youropticalzoom to fill the frame.11.Distortion - trapezoidal. If your camera is not square on to the subject, you can end up with rectangles that look more like trapezoids. In photographs of buildings (for example) it is called 'perspective'. The best solution is work out the plane of your subject, find the middle point and draw an imaginary line straight out from it at right angles. Place your camera so this imaginary line goes right up the middle of your lens and with the back plane of the camera parallel to the subject. For example, if you are photographing a PCB laying on a table using a smartphone, then hold the smartphone level (ie parallel to the table) with the lens directly over the middle of the PCB.12.Shutter release. Try to have a means where you can release the shutterwithouttouching the camera. The action of pressing (or even touching) the release buttonwillcause some camera movement that may end up affecting your final shot. Use a cable release or other remote means if you have it - or if you have a smartphone like my Galaxy S4, you can set it up to take the shot when you say 'smile!'.13.Colour accuracy. If this is not critical, then skip this subject and be thankful. However, if you want absolutely correct colours presented on the internet, I have only two words for you: FORGET IT! Firstly, the average camera is not going to capture colours with Pantone accuracy. Certainly, there are better cameras and there are colour profiles which can help you with it all, but there is a limiting factor over which you have absolutely NO control: the displays upon which your images will be presented. There are several factors involved here. The first is the display technology - CRT, plasma, LCD, OLED to name a few. The next is the specifics of the technologies - such as the phosphors for CRT and plasma and TN / IPS for LCD panels. Then there are the specific settings - you know - those people who's TV's have every caucasian looking like sunburned Oompa-Loompa's. Add to that the issues of ageing displays and unknown ambient lighting conditions and you must soon resign yourself to the fact that once your image hits the internet, its fate is unknown.There are a couple of things I have found that have allowed me to produce reasonable results without breaking the bank or my spirit. The first is to set yourWhite Balance. This is where your camera is calibrated to understand what a white subject looks like under the current lighting conditions. The process for setting the white balance on your camera may be automatic, manual, from a selection of pre-sets or non existent. If you're not sure about setting the white balance on your camera, then you can photograph something that is white and, using your photo editing software afterwards in post-production, work out what adjustments you need to make for it tobecomewhite on your RGB scale and then make those same adjustments on each photo.The second suggestion I can make is to do any post production image processing on an IPS monitor. I have found it to result in images that seem to present with a more consistent colour rendition across a variety of displays.14.Image editing. Aside from the basics such as cropping and resizing, be very careful about any 'enhancement' processing. It's far, far better to get the original image captured as close to the finished product as possible than to make even the simplest of tweaks. This is most definitely one of those areas where 'less' is 'more'. It speeds up post production significantly and reduces stress.These are just some observations I have made in my efforts. There will, no doubt, be some details that some might not agree with, but the topics are valid and my solutions have been good enough for my current needs.Edit: Spelling.Edit: Added section on ZoomEdit: Added upscaling comment

author: TiN
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 03:02:13 pm
content: Stongly agree on color aspect. It's whole pandora box. Luckily, it doesn't usually matter if our PCB's look a bit more greenish than they are.Also one thing I forgot - taking photograps of monitors. Usually it's nasty, so people, use screenshots. Easiest way - hit Printscreen button and save resulted image from copybuffer into file. Yes, even mspaint works. Use JPEG 70-90% for fullcolor bitmaps and PNG for stuff like graphs, charts, tables, schematics.Also for DSLR it's usually does not matter if lens is clean or not. Don't believe?Check thisthen. On contrary, sensor cleaning is highly important when using apertures f/8 and above.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 03:41:48 pm
content: Quote from: TiN on January 07, 2016, 03:02:13 pmCertainly screenshots are the best way to capture an image thatcanbe captured that way, but if you want to capture a screen that does not offer that feature then you have to consider a few things. The main ones are the ambient lighting conditions and the shutter speed. Rule number one is - don't use a flash. Next is, if you are photographing a CRO trace and it gets washed out by the ambient light, try reducing the ambient light before turning up the brightness of the trace. The shutter speed used should allow for at least one full scan of the target image. In the case of the old Australian analogue TV standard of a 625 line 50Hz interlaced signal, then you would not shoot at a shutter speed any faster than 1/25th of a second. This ensures the whole screen has been completely painted during the period the shutter was open. Translate this into whatever display you wish to photograph.QuoteI did smile at that article - and I understand the point that it is making.The fact that a good quality image was able to be captured in the earlier examples is because there was a significant area of glass that was devoid of contaminants and those areas that were 'contaminated' were highly obstructed. The end result is that much of the light that made it through was mostly unaffected, allowing a sharp image to be formed. All the 'contaminants' did was reduce the amount of light getting through. These earlier examples were much like looking through a flyscreen - when you get close enough, the flyscreen is just a vaguely fuzzy as you look through it to see your subject - reasonably clearly.I should have, perhaps, been a bit more specific about the particular lens contamination I had in mind. It wasn't the discrete granular type from a single dust incident, but more the milky cloudiness built up over time or the whacking great fingerprint on the smartphone lens. These won't produce the same results as the article. Instead of looking through a flyscreen, it will be more like looking through a sheet of baking paper.

author: Cubdriver
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 04:53:00 pm
content: One of the most important things in my opinion is having a stable camera - a tripod is your friend!! I'm using a DSLR, and the tripod lets me use apertures smaller than f/8 which often results in exposure times of a half second or more. The tripod and a cable release allows this technique to give a nice sharp image with a great deal of depth of field. It also lets you take your time positioning lights and subject to reduce or eliminate glare (sometimes moving something only a few degrees can make or break you in this regard), and allows for repeatability when taking a sequence of photos - provided that you keep the subject in the same spot on the bench, the images will not jump around a lot with reframing by hand, and the lighting will be consistent.Smooth, even lighting is also important; I have an articulated lamp that I can reposition as needed, and also keep a piece of foam core board handy to use as a fill reflector to help reduce shadows.-Pat

author: Tomorokoshi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 05:54:33 pm
content: Quote from: TiN on January 07, 2016, 03:02:13 pmI like Greenshot:http://getgreenshot.org/

author: chris_leyson
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 06:27:46 pm
content: If you are having trouble photographing reflective surfaces try using linearly polarised filters on the illumination source and camera.I found this out while taking close up photos of laser marked PTFE/ETFE wire for a character recognition project that never happened. Without the filters there was too much glare or reflection from the insulation and it took a lot of post processing to clean up the image so it could be used for character recognition. Linearly polarised sheet in front of the illumination leds and camera fixed the problem.Circularly polarized filters, used in some 3D cinema glasses, might work but I havn't tried it.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 07:46:39 pm
content: While post production editing is not optimum, I have had quite a bit of success eliminating reflection problems by orienting the camera off perpendicular from the subject, and then correcting the trapezoidal errors with software. Just a couple of mouse clicks. If the original image is of sufficiently high resolution the correction is not noticeable. To make this work well the camera distance has to be large with respect to the height of the tallest objects on the board, and the off axis angles have to be kept as small as possible consistent with eliminating whatever reflections are present.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2017, 05:58:46 pm
content: Bump .... as a reminder for making a better photoshoot.

author: daqq
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2017, 06:18:32 pm
content: Great thread! For PCBs I use our office scanner - it's hard to beat with flat-ish PCBs.I would add my piece of advice on publications: When you convert to PDF (or any other format) make sure you check the output. The default settings on PDF converters can mangle the images in your publication beyond recognition. The considerable effort put into making very nice pictures like those presented will be laid to waste due to the fact that the PDF converter was set to "Fit it into 100bytes or less, chop of the extra bits".The other side of this (what's done to vector stuff) is also disturbing. See:http://www.daqq.eu/?p=1135Here are four examples of different compression settings on a PDF generator:

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2017, 06:29:37 pm
content: Another example, especially for those who still making excuses can't make a decent photos ...This below was taken using cheap 7 years oldpoint & shoot camera (yes, NOT those expensive DSLR) , with built in self timer, a crappy 3 dollars tripod and just a simple table lamp, thats it.Oh yeah, no need for gazillion bytes sizedeither, this photo was cropped, resized & compressed down to 117 KB, and still has enough details to convey the message and meaning, imo.PS : It was made to discuss certain old and nasty rotting plastic connector that oozed out flakes.

author: Twoflower
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2017, 07:17:03 pm
content: My approach to reduce reflections: Using off-camera flash(es). This already reduces the direct reflections of surfaces which are parallel to the cam. Avoid direct flash the target: Use a white wall as bouncer to soften the flash. And optional: For beauty-shots using an additional reflector (e.g white paper) to reduce further hard shadows.The down side: It takes a bit to set up the rig (including the right position and direction for the flash. And TiN is right even with a single lightbulb you can get good results.But the most helpful thing is a Tripod! This way you can correct reflections reliable as the cam does not move between the shots and it prevents unsharp pictures from potentially longer exposure times.@BravoV: Good point: Point&Shoot cams can do great macros. Remember to enable the macro mode first. They have smaller sensors. This results in bigger depth of field which helps. With a (D)SLR you might need macro-lenses or extension tubes to get close enough. And you still face shallow DoF.

author: matseng
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2017, 06:09:15 am
content: Even a half-crappy cellphone (in my case a 3 years old Nexus 5) can take decent pictures.I don't say that this image have studio/DSLR quality, but I'd say it is good enough for a forum or website posting.

author: Dubbie
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 09, 2017, 07:26:57 am
content: Here is a tip I haven't seen here yet, if you have a bath that is white and isn't too dirty, it makes a great "cyclorama" for small objects. If you reflect a flash off the white ceiling, you'll get nice shadowless evenly lit pic.Here is an example with my old beat up meter.This is just taken with my phone, handheld using the bulb in the ceiling. I took care to use my body to cast a shadow from the direct light, so no hard shadows or harsh glints.

author: salbayeng
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 24, 2017, 05:54:53 am
content: @TiNI like the K2002 picture looks like it was taken with a Nikon , with a bounceflash off the ceiling, but wait... the JPG still has EXIF metadata.so ..... It's a Nikon D800 at F7.1 with a 1sec exposure , 150mm focal length.So probably done with a light tent with ambient indoor light and on a tripod.(See attached picture for a light tent photo of TWO ants, count them! That's f7.4 1/200s 280mmFL (I had to use digital zoom so I could stay about a foot away))I can get similar looking results (on a sunny day) under a patio (with acrylic sheeting on the roof) using a coolpix 5700 at f8 and ~ 1/30 to 1/60 , zoomed to ~ 100mmFL.I've also got an ancient speed light, that can be spun 180degrees so bounce flash off ceiling, (being careful not to blind yourself), but then you have find some batteries put them in, setup the camera, setup the flash. So sometimes in a hurry I just go for room lighting (the lab is 1200lux on the bench) and 1/30 at F4 and use a monopod (whatever stick I can find) take 4 exposures, hope one of them won't be blurry!

author: salbayeng
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 24, 2017, 06:47:39 am
content: And now I've read the article on the Xdev,com website , I would highly recommend that to budding photographers.Using the methods in the article you should be able to take reasonably adequate photos without trying too hard. Here's an example GFM1 PCB , a reasonable shot taken fairly simply on the kitchen bench, under a skylight with ones own head used to block direct light (An A4 piece of cardboard with a hole in the middle is good too)This shot is ISO100, F3.5 at 1/125 35mmFL and handheld (using such a short 35mm focal length setting is not recommended as it distorts things (e.g. the studs all lean out) but it means camera shake is less significant)It's adequate to post on a blog, but you wouldn't use it in a report that someone paid money for!If you wanted that money shot you would use a ceiling bounceflash, and set up for ~ 100mmFL and F8, and manual focus , with a modelling light set up somewhere for a hint of shadow to get some depth.And another shot of a burnt transistor using a convenient plastic box as a mono-pod , (barely enough focal range for the macro shot , but you can't get better than f8 without spending $$$ on a proper DSLR lens. )

author: Twoflower
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 24, 2017, 07:07:15 pm
content: Quote from: salbayeng on January 24, 2017, 06:47:39 amIf you own a DSLR you might consider to buy extension tubes. They're cheap as they are only tubes. But you should get some which route the signals through them. I got a set of 3 tubes as a set with different length and they're very useful.The picture shows a hole in a shielded audio cable pierced by a 2.5mm header. Learned the hard way to check if there is enough space between the housing and the PCB for the cableCode:Flash used : NoFocal length : 135.0mmExposure time: 0.500 s (1/2)Aperture : f/16.0ISO equiv. : 6400I don't know the tube-length I added, probably 28mm. Light: One 60W incandescent bulb. I only cropped and no other post processing.Another way is to attach the lens other way around (reverse). It works well but it's a bit cumbersome as you don't have control of the diaphragm. For this there are also adapters to mount your lens. In the past I used this by carefully place the lens in front of the cam. And it worked rather well. So you can try it without any additional equipment. Obviously don't do this in dusty areas as the mirror box is open to the environment.So if you have a DSLR you can get macro capability for very little additional $/€/¥/£/z?/?...

author: tkuhmone
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 24, 2017, 07:27:14 pm
content: I have tested the extension tubes (Nikon DSLR). It affects to closest distance, where the lens can focus. My extension tube set, has only aperture ring to camera, no other controls & info pins. The cases when I use extension tubes, I do focus lens manually.Also I own a reverse ring, to use Nikon crop sensor SLR with lens reversed. I have used mainly 24 / 35mm manual focus lenses. Extension tubes can be used with the reverse ring also...I have not tested the focus stacking, what could be used for small targets. Might be worth of trying, since some free software exists....

author: salbayeng
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2017, 04:54:02 am
content: Ah yes back in the days of film cameras we always had some macro rings in the bag!The coolpix can do sort of do macro but depth of field at f/8 limits it to postage stamps and the like.On the attached picture it is focussed ~1 mm in front of the target, and as a result the pin is a bit blurry.

author: switchedmodepsu
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2017, 11:44:53 pm
content: You either have an eye for a composition or you don't. A certain amount can be learnt, but if you're not a natural photographer then it'll take you more effort to produce something that someone with a natural gift will knock out in a couple of seconds with barely any effort.Head-on flash: ALWAYS AVOID.Shadows cast by side-illuminating components: ALWAYS AVOID.When I take photos of devices with my iPhone 5S, I never trust its built-in flash to get the exposure and amount of flash right - I have a Moto G 3rd gen which has a handy feature where you shake it in a "chop chop" motion and the flashlight just comes on, which I then position optimally to illuminate the subject, whilst my iPhone takes the photo:

author: skylinrcr01
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 20, 2017, 02:13:12 am
content: Echoing others, lighting, position of item, having a neutral background, and position of camera are all very important. It's nice to have a SLR and softboxes and lightroom, but wax paper over a box with a lightbulb works pretty well too, just be sure to not use an incandecent bulb or you'll start a fire.

author: moz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2017, 12:20:14 am
content: These days cellphone cameras are pretty good, you just need to be able to persuade them to behave. Turn the flash off, obviously, but also delayed and long exposures. The tiny sensor gives huge depth of field even in (near) macro which makes life much easier.My big hack with the phone was buying a couple of lab stands at a garage sale for $5. They're generically useful, but they work a treat for holding a cellphone still. You can get new ones for $40-ish online, but garage sales and dumpsters FTW (at your own risk, they sometimes get thrown out because they're contaminated and proper disposal costs money)Rotate the clamp 90 degrees from that, insert phone, tighten clamp. But not too tightI've got a pile of camera gear at home, but I still mostly use my cellphone for blog and social media shots. At work I've persuaded them that for some photos they're better off waiting until evening and using a long lens from the balcony to reduce distortion and get maximum depth of field on the taller components. They'd be better off with a smaller sensor or focus stacking to get the DoF, but instead they've gone for 3D renders. Again, a remote release or a long timer is essential to make that work.At the rocket science end of the spectrum, I can't overstate the usefulness of high ISO and frame rate with focus stacking. If you can shoot 20MP at 10fps, or even 4k video, you can get the input for focus stacking a macro image very quickly indeed. This is not usually necessary for blog images, but especially if you have bigger chips and are complaining to someone about a board, being able to have the whole thing in focus with enough detail to show solder hairs can be very handy. Doing a manual focus pull while firing lots of frames gives you an excellent image series to drop into software.Overview here

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2017, 03:15:55 pm
content: Mounting the lens in reverse only makes really sense if you need to go to extreme macro - that is objects considerably smaller than the sensor.With a relatively long focal length lens one can also use an extra close up lens for closer focus. I got quite good results with the front lens of an old binocular in front of a Sony P&S camera, just holding it by hand. Just for a web page, if you don't need full resolution (e.g. because small image size is more important) one can also use quite some cropping / digital zoom. Sometimes digital zoom in the camera gives better details than later cropping.In case you have the choice, for close up photos a camera with a large sensor (e.g. full format DSLR) is often not the best choice. It helps if the camera has a relatively high pixel density, even if the sensor is smaller. With large sensor the depth of field tends to be bad unless a really small aperture is used - provided such a small aperture is possible at all. This can be a problem with an additional close up lens in front. For macro photos, as APS_C sensor is usually large enough.

author: steve30
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2017, 08:19:11 am
content: Reverse mounted lenses can be fun. Here's a few which I did with the camera handheld, and the lens just held up to the camera (no actual mounting). Can't remember which lenses I used, but my Chinon 28mm K-Mount is quite good for this.

author: steve30
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2017, 08:20:49 am
content: Here's another with a reverse mounted lens.The other photo in this post (showing two ThinkPads) was taken using the camera's onboard flash, and a mirror to reflect the light upwards, so it will bounce off the ceiling. This illuminated the black Thinkpads well and enabled the screens to show up with no glare (which would have happened with direct flash). Typically you can do 'bounce flash' with a proper flash gun, but in the case, a mirror worked just as well.Where possible, I have recently been using a tripod, small aperture, low ISO, and long exposure for photos of still objects. Its been working really well.

author: brainwash
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 16, 2017, 10:26:14 pm
content: For documenting purposes it's better if you shoot with a small-sensor camera (smartphone for example), straight-on, with a lot of indirect lightning.Lightning is number one, I would just use a lot of lamps, with the same color temperature, spread out. A lot of light will also raise the f-number (unless you do that manually), which increases the depth of field (DOF).Where the light is a point source, use some diffuser, like a piece of paper.Shoot at angles where the light does not reflect directly on the surface, takes a bit of experimenting.A flatbed scanner cannot be beat if you want to get direct dimensions, but is has a very shallow DOF.Second thing, after light: learn to adjust exposure. Shadow areas should have enough information, light areas should not be pure white (overexposed). Shoot in aperture priority mode (if available) to lock the DOF.Third thing: this also deals with light, but make sure you have a rich color. This will help you in post, as you can just hit Shift-U in Irfanview and auto-adjust everything. This means staying away from cheap LED lights or older CFL bulbs. You should look out for lamps with >80% CRI (5000K-5500K preferably). Or shoot in daylight.Other things:- you need to experiment a lot and always study the pictures on the big screen, not just the smartphone or camera LCD. Those lie.- for fast, temporary uploading, the best to use now is imgur. You can just paste an image from the buffer or print capture, no registration required.- for long-term usage, Google Photos is hard to beat. It automatically uploads, has nice adjustments and easy sharing. But not anonymous.- even with steady hands, your photos can be blurred. So either take at least 3 photos or invest in some tripod/mount- use a grey background (such as a cutting mat). It will help your camera from over/under-exposing and keep the focus on the piece you are trying to shoot- use digital zoom (sparingly) to get a straight shot. A lot of cheap cameras distor at the edges. It also decreases macro distance, so it lets you see small lettering.- if you have a shallow DOF, focus on what you want to show, not everything- crop and zoom in on the significant/useful bits, keep the other stuff blurred or awayRandom examples, pulled from my Google Photos archive:http://imgur.com/a/oSdcJ

author: eliocor
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 17, 2017, 04:20:58 pm
content: Sometime a good scanner can be ideal: the following pictures (they are rather big, so I will publish only the smallest one, for the others see the attached links) where taken putting theFE5680A boarddirectly* on the scanner bed.The one I used is an Epson Perfection V550: it has a very high focus depth unlike (to my knowledge) the Canon ones.See also :High resolution BOTTOM viewwith ICs(.JPG/10MB)without ICs(.JPG/8MB)High resolution TOP viewwith ICs(.JPG/10MB)without ICs(.JPG/10MB)*) take care to not scratch the glass pane!!!

author: tkuhmone
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 18, 2017, 07:22:34 pm
content: Quote from: eliocor on June 17, 2017, 04:20:58 pmI have also used occasionally flatbed scanner for similar purposes. I own Epson 4990, need to doublecheck the driver functionality win7 - after I got PC back from storage (I use scanner mostly on 35mm slide film).

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 02:31:56 pm
content: Quote from: eliocor on June 17, 2017, 04:20:58 pmA clean transparent A4 foil used for overhead projector could do the trick.

author: Jr460
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2018, 02:56:14 pm
content: Had to take close up photos of bones and parts of bones once. Done a bunch of other things like that over the years.Used two monblock flash heads, each 750Ws each into photo umbrella up real close. from two different directions. The larger the light source is compared to subject, the smoother things will look. To get the depth of field that close up, needed to be at around f16 or f22. So the flatheads were set high so the shutter was short to avoid and camera vibration. Also a Nikon 105mm Macro on tripod does wonders.Other said it, if you can, fire an one camera flash into the ceiling. Can't point it, put a white card in front of it to bounce the flash up.

author: grizewald
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2019, 10:03:51 pm
content: There's some great advice on this thread!Personally, I'd like to thank TiN for all his excellentfull resolutionpictures here and on xDevs.comBeing able to click on a picture and have it expand to the full resolution of the camera is fantastic, particularly when it comes to circuit boards and other things with lots of fine details.

author: electromotive
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 05, 2019, 05:34:20 pm
content: There are some fairly decent macro lenses available for iPhone. I don't know that I would trust using a device designed to shatter in every conceivable manner with it's glass everything, but it does exist.

author: klimm
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2020, 09:57:45 am
content: Hi all,All right, I have the photos of an old PCB. No silk screen but having identified main blocks and components and would like to tag components, blocks onto the photo for future reference. What graphic app do you use for labeling components, blocks, drawing lines, arrows or having text boxes

author: DrG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2020, 03:06:04 pm
content: Quote from: klimm on February 16, 2020, 09:57:45 amPhotoshop is good.For quick and easy, believe it or not, I like to use PowerPoint (see below).

author: DrG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2020, 03:08:40 pm
content: A tip that I have picked up is to use one of these (the battery is for size comparison):to check that my camera is level on the copy stand.It is a little thing, but sometimes I am surprised at how off it can be when I just use me eyeball.

author: DrG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2020, 03:15:30 pm
content: +=...and while we're at it, let's turn up thef-stop so that the high points are in focus.

author: Ultrapurple
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2020, 10:37:24 am
content: Bump...I work for an electronics hobby magazine publisher and we ask for-photosat highest resolution (straight off the camera as raw or .JPG), not edited in any way and NOT embedded (eg in a Word document ... ugh!)- leave a w-i-d-e margin around your subject (maybe 20% of image width on each side) so the publisher has flexibility in cropping to suit the page- don't get too close to your subject or you'll introduce all kinds of perspective weirdness- remember to have as plain a background as possible (a sheet of paper works wonders; for larger items, use a plain shirt or a bed sheet)-screendumpsas PNG, TIFF (or any full colour range losslessly compressed format), but NEVER EVER SAVE SCREENDUMPS AS JPG no matter what the compression settings are- If sending graphs etc from Excel or similar, always include the original spreadsheet- Ditto if you've done any line drawings, in whatever package you used to create themProfessional publishers are usually pretty good at manipulating images to make them support the text but - particularly in the case of photos - that's usually only possible if you give them enough pixels to play withWe need the originals of graphs and drawings etc because often the line weight isn't appropriate for dead tree publishing - one pixel wide looks great on the screen and maybe even on your inkjet printout but it doesn't work well on a glossy printed page, particularly (as is often the case) if we're reproducing the image fairly small: a line one-third of a pixel wide doesn't print! Also, we use specific fonts and type sizes for annotations and axis labels and these have to be right at the finished size, not whatever Excel randomly decided looked nice onscreen.Not all of these specs are necessarily requirements if you're just documenting your own project for your own blog or whatever but still worth bearing in mind for future flexibility.Just my $0.03 (adjusted for inflation)

author: DrG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2021, 01:56:22 am
content: Try different backgrounds...

author: tunk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2021, 11:55:44 am
content: Big Clive just made a video about making photos of (small) PCBs:

author: Peabody
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2021, 04:05:11 pm
content: Yes, and notice that Big Clive does this with a cell phone - a Moto6 Play (very much a "budget" phone). None of that DSLR rubbish.

author: DrG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 20, 2021, 03:32:50 pm
content: Crop Your PhotosWhich makes more sense for a post?This,or this (same photo cropped)?You probably have some software on your machine (or even your phone) that can crop photos, but you can do it online - search for "crop photos online"

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2021, 01:41:48 am
content: I have not posted much to this forum yet, but I have been posting photos to other forums for over ten years. Here are some things that I have learned:1. USE a tripod or other support for your camera. Digital cameras often use longer exposures so any movement will result in a blur.2. Many inexpensive digital cameras have a time delay function to allow the camera user to get into the photo. Another excellent use for these time delays is to avoid the camera shake (even if it is on a tripod) that can result from the small motion of your finger pressing the shutter release button. I almost always use a two second delay when taking photos. That gives me time to get my hands off the camera and for the camera to stop shaking.As for flash, I use it when needed and avoid it when I can. I am making my first post here in a few minutes and the photo was made with a flash. But the flash was needed and did not cause any glaring hot spots in the image.

author: Zucca
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 11, 2022, 02:21:19 am
content: Nice macro photo discussionshttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/best-lens-for-macro-electronic-components/

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2022, 08:55:23 am
content: That's nice!In terms of minimizing the pics for web, I'm using 'convert' (from the 'imagemagic' package, often preinstalled), a command line tool for Linux, good to strip the extra info and to resize the original jpegs to half (1024px wide), then compress them a little better.The camera is an ancient Minolta DiMAGE Z1, 3MP, better than a DSLR for close up pics. In general, cameras with a smaller area sensor give better depth of field for closeup/macro shots than a camera with a big sensor. DoF is bigger when the sensor is smaller (small in size, not in pixels) and this is so because of physics/math, it's not just an artistic bias.The set of parameters that worked best for me, by turning a 1.5MB (2048x1536 px) .jpg into a 30-50kB (1024x768 px) .jpg, about 30 times smaller while the quality is preserved well enough for web posting:Code:convert "PICT3090.JPG" -strip -matte -resize 1024 -quality 50% -sampling-factor "2x2, 1x1, 1x1" "PICT3090_s.JPG"Same pic as in the attachment, but resized + compressed 50% using Gimp has about 80k, looks slightly better but the quality difference is noticeable only when compared side by side, otherwise the smaller one prepared with 'convert' would be just as good:For a comparison, the original is PICT3090.JPG, 1.5MB.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 06:42:48 am
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on August 11, 2022, 08:55:23 amAre you sure that sensor size comes into equation and not just your numerical aperture and the size of the minimum feature you want to resolve?The rule goes the opposite way: a compact can't match a large sensor camera for shallow DoF and diffraction-limited resolution (which is a different matter altogether, unrelated to anything above, but equally important), because the focal length and the F-number of a lens required for such feat become impractically low.That being said, a 6x crop compact stopped down to f/8 has the same NA as full frame at f/48, so you may struggle to find a lens capable of that. But at just 2x crop on 4/3 systems there are lenses that go down to f/22.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 10:49:40 am
content: IDK, see these comparative pics (not mine):https://petapixel.com/2019/07/12/does-sensor-size-affect-depth-of-field-the-definitive-answer/

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 12:59:39 pm
content: Well, you said that it mattersThe pics show once again that stopping down FF to f/5.6 produces similar effect to MFT f/2.8, as expected.MFT f/16 would be matched by FF f/32 and FF f/16 by MFT f/8, but these variants are not shown.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 06:05:31 pm
content: Sorry, it was you who used the word "matter", not me.What I was talking about is visible in that comparison article linked above.For any pair of two pics taken with thesame f-stopand thesame framing, but withdifferent sensor size, look at the middle plank, and then look at the last plank:- the middle planks are perfectly in focus no matter the sensor size- the last plank however, is sharper for the pic taken with the smaller size sensorIf it were to compare with an even smaller than a 3/4 sensor, like a webcam sensor or a phone camera, then the smaller sensors will show the last plank even more sharper, almost as sharp as the middle plank.For me that's a fact, visible in the pics, won't gonna argue about.

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 07:31:06 pm
content: It's an irrelevant fact because large cameras can work with a wider range of f-stops so there is no point comparing images taken at the same f-stop as a point & shoot.MFT at f/16 has more DoF than any phone camera on the market today. And less resolution too. Well, unless you can find one with a VGA sensor or similar

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2022, 09:35:42 pm
content: So, you admit that for the same framing and the same f-stop, the smaller sensor pics show more Depth of Field.Just that now you are trying to declare that irrelevant (after you first question if the sensor size matters).Then you try to find an escape by suggesting f/16. F/16 is the last pair of pics in that link, and the smaller sensor still won at DoF.For me a point&shoot is better for taking pics in the lab. When compared with my Nikon D90 DSLR, the point and shoot Minolta DiMAGE Z1 has the DoF advantage of a smaller sensor, is less bulky, and most of all can take macro shots from as close as ~3cm. No macro rings needed, no inverted objective, no lens changing, just point and shoot, no cropping, and can take macro shots like these straight out of the camera:Did I won?

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2022, 05:56:13 am
content: This gimmick lens can produce similar shots.https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-15mm-f/Cost and size are the only factors in favor of a P&S, have always been.There is no performance advantage.

author: RAPo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2023, 01:41:22 pm
content: Quote from: BravoV on January 07, 2016, 07:39:01 amIndeed, but what aperture/shutter time should you use? I got a Philips PM3230, in the manual was a handy reference table

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2023, 07:47:01 am
content: I have a problem with inserting uploaded photos in the text of my messages. I can upload them OK, but nothing that I do seems to allow me to insert them inside the text. I normally use Firefox but for this message I am using Chrome as a test. Here, I hope, is a screen that I just copied to illustrate this: {Edit 4/21/23: New attempt to post the screen shot here}{Edit 4/21/23: Wow, that worked. Now let me see if I can do that any easier way down below.}The PREVIEW button also does not work so I need to POST this message to see if that worked.So I am back and the image did up-load, but all I see in the text above is the phrase "attachimg = 1" inside of square brackets []. In Firefox the message inside the square brackets is just "attach = 1" or other numbers if I try to insert multiple photos.But I see that others can have either full sized images or thumbnails inside the text. And I have no trouble doing that on other internet BBs. What am I missing here?TIA for any help on this.Edit: ExperimentAnd a third image which I must upload now, after the others were inserted:This experiment is to see if I can post an image in the text.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2023, 08:14:31 am
content: Those features you are seeking does not work any more, a broken forum plugin, or so.To embed pics you'll have to publish the post first, with the pics attached. Do not use the embed feature, it is broken. Then once you published your text+attachments, click on the published pic to make it big, then copy its address (usually by right click "copy image link" or so, depending on the browser). Then edit your post, and insert the image link where you wanted it to be in your text. Put the link between img tags. Then publish again.The above workaround is for attachments only, external pics will appear as expected from the first time, once they are put between "img" tags (the button to insert pictures will write the img tags for you).

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2023, 08:26:08 am
content: The forum's attachment feature has problem, the cure is use the 2nd slot upward, never use the 1st attachment slot.Yes, this below image was attached to this post started on 2nd slot, and use IMG feature.Click image to enlarge.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2023, 09:15:39 am
content: Nope, the "Inline full-size image" on slot 2 (no drag and drop, just browse for the pics to attach, a rotary mirror)and the "Inline expandable thumbnail" [ Specified attachment is not available ], a Lithium super capacitor, not working.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2023, 01:16:59 am
content: Quote from: EPAIII on April 12, 2023, 07:47:01 amManually attached files of the permitted type and size using the manual way and BravoV outlines.To insert attachments within a post you must use the attachment URL[_/_i_m_g_] flags with all _ removed so it looks likeimgand/imginside brackets. Sometimes I don't even use the Insert Image (2nd row top left) and just type in the img flags inside brackets.I use place holders in complex posts to help get images into the correct location but always include just one set of img flags for which the first thing you do when editing a post is to Copy/Paste into every location you intend to insert a image. The SMF forum auto removes more than just 1 img flag.All this is best done in Edit mode, that is the Modify within the post (bottom right paper and pencil icon) that only the OP can see and NOT the Modify at the top of the post.The reason being is the post Modify retains access to the attachment URL's and their filenames for which URL's have been assigned when you posted. These you simple Copy/Paste within the img flags and then Save the edit to have your images wherever you like within a post.Here's your attachment embedded full size where if you Quote this reply you can examine the syntax used with the img flags whereas inspecting BravoV's post you can see he's added size constraints to his image.Once you have your head around this it's quite straightforward and simple. Use the post Preview to check you have it all correct before final posting.Have fun.

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2023, 01:05:53 am
content: OK,Everybody that responded, THANKS A LOT! I seem to have it down, at least for me and my browser.1. Put the image tags in the message where you want the photos to appear.2. Choose how you want the image to show (full size, expandable thumbnail, etc.)3. Upload the photos but don't worry about getting them to show.4.Post/publish the post. No images will appear in it. But they will be at the bottom.5. Change the image at the bottom to full size if that is how you want it in the text.6. Right click and chooseCopy Image Link.7. Choose either of theModifyicons, top or bottom.8. Paste the link into the image tags where you want it.9. Repeat for additional images.In #7 above, I prefer the top Modify button because it brings up all the editing buttons at the top of the screen. And I can still insert the copied image link.One more thing to test: When using multiple images, paste multiple image links into a word processor (Word) so I don't have to open and close the Modify window multiple times. I think that would/should work.Yea, simple! Oh well, at least it works. I need to go make some posts with images to get it impressed on my ageing memory cells.I still get nothing when I try the Preview button. Probably my browser or Pop-Up Blocker or something. I can live with that now that I have a procedure that should work.PS: While I used the Chrome browser in my first post, above, for all the experimental posting today I used Firefox.Again, thanks to everybody who responded. I do appreciate it.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2023, 03:34:50 am
content: Quote from: EPAIII on April 22, 2023, 01:05:53 amMostly correct above ^^^ and we learn better if we make a few mistakes.Preview appearsabovethe post text entry box.Scroll up to see it.

author: chinoy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2023, 05:49:55 am
content: Proper lighting (Google ring light or Ring Lamps). These are special LED Lamps that work perfect for good lighting. No ugly tupperware boxes or strips of LED held on with gaffer tape.Proper Cropping. (Remove all the stuff you don't need).Proper Apps (Your default camera and its settings will not cut it. Chk out apps like Magnifier and Microscope.)If you want to take it past Magnifier and Microscope type apps. Then pickup a cheap HD USB Microscope. I got the Andostar. For under 50$ you get a HD Microscope.

author: tridac
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 05, 2023, 01:47:53 pm
content: Have been using a Lumix FZ18, then FZ38 for a decade or more. Years out of date now, but has good autofocus, even at macro, perfect exposure, image stabilisation and much more Usb plugged in, automounts and appears as a disk drive in windows explorer, making file copying trivial. No apps needed. Best of all, s/h examples can be found at givaway prices on the usual site. Natural light is the best if possible, no flash, but more care needed to avoid reflections with an artificail light source...