>Saw something a year or so ago (an ad in Am Cine I think) about a lens that would focus on a coin for example, providing a macro shot, yet the coin was a good distance from the front element. I have to film a big c/u of an eye and this seems to be a solution as when I've done it before reflections of the lens etc have been a problem, Anyone know what this lens is?
>Bear in mind that with a wide open stop of f22 you are talking about a LOT of light...and when you photograph an eye with a LOT of light, you get a very small pupil opening - not necessarily a deal breaker, but definitely a consideration
>Mark Weingartner Wrote :
> ...and when you photograph an eye with a LOT of light, you get a very >small pupil opening...
>Although, depending on context and whether the image of the eye is a straight cut, a pupil contracting could add a certain dramatic element (cover up talent's eye, roll camera, uncover eye).
LD / Wannabe DoP
>Iâ€™ve met this challenge a couple of times. Zoom or long lenses 200/300 mm with close-up diopters worked. The lens was generally far enough away from the eye not to be seen in the reflection. Lighting there is no real short cut.
>Build a white tent-trace or something similar- around your subject and hammer in the light. Then cut the smallest hole for the lens, and off you go.
>Les Parrott Prods wrote:
>Iâ€™ve met this challenge a couple of times. Zoom or long lenses 200/300 >mm with close-up diopters worked.
>I recommend the Schneider Achromats in the diopter department.
>Although, depending on context and whether the image of the eye is a >straight cut, a pupil contracting could add a certain dramatic element >(cover up talent's eye, roll camera, uncover eye)
>I did something similar by dimming the light up and watching the pupil contract.
>In my case, I took a 50mm Zeiss SS and flipped it around so that the front element projected onto the film plane. Very little dof which I had to move the subject or camera to find (didn't have a bellows), but cool shot!
>>In my case, I took a 50mm Zeiss SS and flipped it around so that the >front element projected onto the film plane.
How do you mount the lens?
Director of Photography
High Def./Standard Def./Film
Aaton Xtr Prod owner operator
Brisbane, Australia www.npdop.com
>Jeff B. wrote :
>> I think this is brilliant!!!
I KNEW IT!!! I've been trying to tell people for years I was brilliant. Finally, some evidence! Thanks Jeff!
Nick P. wrote :
>> How do you mount the lens?
No really - for those shots, the camera moved very little - so I could just support the lens and keep it held flush up against the lens port.
There are two stills from it on my as of yet unfinished "cinemexoticatography" page - under 'recent projects' at my website. I can email other stills as well, if there's any interest. I shot about two dozen different things last Summer with a flipped around 50mm, and 24mm (now THAT was tight) lens.
Just to give you an example of the magnification. The 50mm was my best standard lens for anything macro. The tightest shot I could get was the entire LCD face of my cell phone almost filling up the screen. When I flipped the 24mm lens around backwards and lined it up with the same cell phone - ONE digit on that LCD screen filled up my ground glass.
Nutty I tell ya' - like peanut butter.
Roderick E. Stevens II
Director -o- Photography www.restevens.com
>25-250 Angenieux with a 2X extender and an achromatic diopter. Or something like that.
>Quite a while ago, I did some filming of an eye using a half silvered mirror similar to how an ophthalmoscope works, which is where I got the idea. It was for an industrial film for safety glasses.
>It worked extremely well in keeping the lights out of the way.
IA 600 DP
>Sound like many of us have done the shot !
>Another tip if you are using lots of light is to flag of the area around the eye to protect the model. Make sure lights can be switched off easily when not needed.
>Some models get quite panicky staying totally still surrounded by equipment a few inches from their faces under high level lighting. On the shot I had to do ( I think at the old Oxford scientific studios) the iris had to open in shot. We did it by running the shot in reverse.
>Another trick. In most people the iris in each eye does not work independently. So keeping the non subject eye in the dark and covered helps the subject eye iris stay open. (small irises don't look attractive)
>Our producers did consider bringing a medic in to use dilating drops but the above method worked so no chems were necessary.
>Mike Southon bsc
>The K2 is a great tool for tabletop macro but for living things it can cause problems as it requires a lot of light - wide open at t22. Unless your shooting a glass eye you may want to consider a 200mm macro. I use a Nikon 200 f4 macro all the time, it offers room to light, covers 35 &16 and gives a sharp image. It fits PL mounts easily with an adaptor.
> Another trick. In most people the iris in each eye does not work >independently.
>Excellent point. I seem to remember that the people at the safety glasses company did put a pirate's patch over the subject's other eye. We also used a head brace that made focusing a cinch -- well a lot easier.
> Our producers did consider bringing a medic in to use dilating drops >but the above method worked so no chems were necessary.
>Several of the people we were working with were ophthalmologists. It might help to talk to one.
>Tricks of the trade and all. You can get your eyes checked at the same time.
>Speaking of ophthalmologists, some of the newer ophthalmoscopes are set up for video for teaching purposes.
IA 600 DP
>I just shot extreme time-lapse macro shots of my watch with the backwards 50mm SS trick, testing the new 7205 daylight stock-it's quite bizarre, select areas come into focus depending on very minute movements-with the lens backwards, the aperture size really changes things dramatically! The watch was only inches away from the element, and anything much farther would be impossible. I suppose one could use 2 inch gaffer's tape(I was using regular width) and make a bellows, shoot while moving the lens, etc.
>To the original poster: I personally like the Arri 200mm macro(for various situations) if budget allows.
>To the original poster: I personally like the Arri 200mm macro(for >various situations) if budget allows.
>The 2x extender is another option with the 100mm or the 200mm if you can afford the stop loss. Might be too hot for an eye but it works great on a watch.
>__ I just shot extreme time-lapse macro shots of my watch with the >backwards 50mm SS trick
>I suppose one could use 2 inch gaffer's tape(I was using regular width)
>I always thought 2-inch gaffer's tape WAS regular width!
Marin County, CA
> Did you compensate your T-stop at all?
>I'm not clear on this. Why would we need to compensate the stop? I just assumed the same amount of light would travel through the lens - but is it because of the much smaller 'rear' (now front) element?
>Roderick E. Stevens II
Director -o- Photography
>I just assumed the same amount of light would travel through the lens - >but is it because of the much smaller 'rear' (now front) element?
>That's what I'm thinking. I wouldn't expect the same amount of light to collect at the film plane from the front element because the lens is designed to focus light on a smallish area to the rear of the lens... but then my degree in optics came from a small unaccredited university high in the Himalayas. They operate on the honour system: I paid them for the diploma, and on my honour I'm supposed to show up and take a class someday.
>They said they cover every kind of lens, from free range to Cornish Game. I think there might have been a typo somewhere in our correspondence.
>Art Adams, DP [film|hidef|video]
Mountain View, California
San Francisco Bay Area - "Silicon Valley"
> I'm not clear on this. Why would we need to compensate the stop? I >just assumed the same amount of light would travel through the lens - >but is it because of the much smaller 'rear' (now front) element?
>No it is because you are using a smaller portion of the lensâ€™s useful coverage to fill the same amount of negative. There are charts dealing with exposure compensation on most manuals that deal with marcophotography.
>Also, if you have noticed the Arri marco's will not allow you to shoot wide open if you approach beyond a limit. If you set focus closer than that you will notice that the iris ring rotates by itself towards a deeper stop. However it is not the iris that is closing, only the ring is rotating to compensate for the light loss caused by the high magnification.
>So, Arri macros: they do the job for you. Common lenses: you have to adjust for yourself.
>Did you compensate your T-stop at all?
>I overexposed by a stop, and since I was at the end of the test I didn't have much film left to bracket...Depth of field was bizarre, at the slightest movement I could focus on the glass and see the microscopic abrasions or shift over to the dials or face with numbers. I also did a quick pass at 24fps, watch was on the table on top of a white piece of paper so I could slide it. But I'll do more of it soon, time-lapse macro is wild.
>It might be cool to shoot time-lapse of ants or decomposing stuff(LOL)
>Dan Drasin writes :
>I always thought 2-inch gaffer's tape WAS regular width!
>I meant I was using camera tape -
>Art Adams writes:
class="style7">>That's what I'm thinking. I wouldn't expect the same amount of light to >collect at the film plane from the front element because the lens is >designed to focus light on a smallish area to the rear of the lens...
>Correctomundo, Grasshopper, but only if the light emanating from the front element -- now the rear element -- is not cut off by the precision lens mount ( gaffer's tape in this instance) or whatever.
>Lens designers cottoned on to the idea of putting lenses on backwards the first time-- well maybe the second time -- a lens designer looked through the wrong end of a telescope and thought that it would be a really keen way to make a WA or retrofocus lens. A couple of still camera gadget manufacturers used to make adaptors to turn lenses around.
>Most have concluded that a macro is the way to go for lenses if not diets.
>Or in the immortal words of the Zen master Chevy Chase: 'A flute with no holes is not a flute, and a doughnut with no hole is a Danish.'
IA 600 DP
>Thanks for all suggestions - used regular 200mm macro in the end and ringlight