Peter wrote:
> And the internal flash is almost worthless for macro. "Fortunately" most 
> amateur
> cameras do not go down anywhere near F/1.2 so that problem is "solved". 
> The
> macro button with the friendly flower icon, the digital photography snake 
> oil of
> the early 21st century. </sarcasm>
<blah blah blah>
> Pick your poison and IGNORE bullshit 'snake oil' solutions.
>
> A proper macro setup implies a ring light or ring flash or light-box with 
>  >2000
> lux of illumination on the subject, and it has to be all specular 
> reflection
> proof (diffuse). A valise type setup starts at $200 and that's the Chinese
> knockoff of the $900 original, and that's just the light-box, not the 
> camera.

The picture I posted was raw, untouched up photo taken with a very 
inexpensive consumer grade digital camera, without any sort of special 
lighting, using the macro mode. You can call it "bullshit" and "snake oil" 
or whatever, the fact remains.

This thread is not about taking studio-quality pictures. At work, we have a 
photo room with high-CRI lighting, light boxes, a $400 tripod and a 
professional digital camera with a macro lens. I know how to set up the 
lights and the camera to take studio-quality pictures. My intent was to show 
that you DO NOT NEED to spend a lot of time and money to take sharp pictures 
of near objects (in this case, a circuit board), and to point out a simple 
technique that seems to be overlooked ("just click the little 'flower' 
icon").

Maybe it's ime to stop kicking the dead horse, already?

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist