I’m sure you’ve seen many photos like the one below. [Click on image to enlarge, then click back arrow to return to this post.]
What is the subject? The tire and wheel? The intruding part at the upper left (which was actually from an unrelated truck)? The gravel? Is there something important that I should be seeing in the gravel?
It was actually the tire and wheel. But if you draw a vertical line down the middle of the photo, almost the entire right half of it is unrelated to the subject.
In the image below, the tire and wheel are still featured, but now you can see how they relate to part of the truck’s frame rail and steering system, too. [Click on image to enlarge, then click back arrow to return to this post.]
This photo makes more sense and eliminates unnecessary and confusing elements. It’s easy to pay so much attention to your subject that you forget what it looks like in the frame. Make sure you haven’t included too much empty space or too many unrelated elements that are not only distracting and confusing, but look sloppy, careless, and unprofessional.
Even when stopping down a macro lens to f/16, you often won’t have enough depth of field (DOF) to keep your entire close-up subject sharp. Fully stopping down a macro lens to, say, f/22 or smaller won’t yield a meaningful increase in DOF, but will likely make your entire image appear less sharp due to diffraction.
Here is an example photo of the rusted ends of steel belt cords made at f/16:
Some of the ends of the cords are sharp, but both the wires closer to the camera and the rubber skim coat of the belt farther away were soft. Focusing closer to the ends of the wires would make everything below them more out of focus. Focusing on the belt rubber would cause all the wire ends to be soft.
The solution is to take a series of photographs using a middle aperture (usually between f/5.6 and f/11) starting with the focus on the part of the subject closest to the camera. Focus slightly further away from the camera for each subsequent photo until you’ve focused on the part of your subject furthest from the camera. All exposure settings should be set manually and held constant for each frame; only focus should be changed.
For larger subjects including vehicles and accident sites, only two or three frames might be needed. More on that in another post. But close-up or macro images will typically need several more.
To create an image with all the belt edge wires sharp, I made thirteen photos at f/11, changing only focus. I started by focusing on the tip of the wire closest to the camera. Subsequent photos were made focusing slightly further from the camera with each frame.
All thirteen images were brought into Photoshop through Adobe Camera Raw as individual layers into a single image. All layers were auto aligned, then combined in a stack. As you can image, thirteen 45 megapixel Nikon D850 images brought into a single image resulted in a gigantic file. In fact, at five gigabites(!), it was too big to save as a PSD (Photoshop Document) file; I had to save it as a PSB (Photoshop Big) file. Of course, I flattened it, reduced its size, and saved it as a JPEG to send to my client and (even smaller) to post here:
If you look closely, there are some small artifacts around the edges of some wires. With a bit of work, these can be removed, but they are unobtrusive enough to ignore, unless an image will be used as a trial exhibit.
As alternatives to Photoshop, I also use Zerene Stacker and Helicon Focus to process stacked images. Different software processes create different artifacts, so sometimes I’ll process the stacked images in all three, then choose the best.
If you already own Photoshop, it’s well worth practicing focus stacking. It’s an effective tool that can produce images that can’t be captured in a single shot. I use it regularly for tires and products, and have even used it at accident sites on occasion.
During my analysis of a failed tire, I noticed what looked like a tiny, tiny nail in one of the sidewalls. I looked inside the tire, but couldn’t see if the tip had penetrated the innerliner. I gingerly felt around the inside to detect if the tip had protruded through. It had. Now I had to document that.
Photographing the head of the nail on the outside was easy, but photographing the tiny tip on the inside was quite a challenge. It was both minuscule and inaccessible.Here is a photo of the nail made with my usual lens, the ZEISS Milvus 50 mm f/2 macro. (Click on any image to enlarge. Then click on back arrow to return to the post.)
Even with the arrow, it’s impossible to get any useful information about the nail tip from this photo.
I photographed that nail tip with several other combinations of lenses, lights, and camera supports, but couldn’t get close enough to it optically. Then I remembered my beanbag called “The Pod” (now sold as either The Red Pod or The Green Pod) to which I had added an Arca-Swiss-type quick release clamp.
To get the camera lens closer to the nail, I propped the beanbag with a mounted Nikon D850 and the Laowa 25 mm 2.5 to 5x Ultra Macro lens (which I discussed and showed in previous posts) on the opposite side bead. I removed two Nikon SB-R200 macro flashes from the R1C1 ring and placed them on either side of the nail tip. This photo shows the positions of The Pod and the flashes with the camera, lens, and on-camera SB-910 flash removed.
Below is the resulting single-shot, uncropped, full-frame image with the incredible Laowa Ultra Macro lens. A single shot was necessary because the beanbag setup was not rigid enough to allow for focus stacking of multiple images.
Compare the size of the nail tip in the the top and bottom photos, and recall both were full-frame, uncropped images. Considering there was such a significant enlargement of the subject, the detail in the bottom photo was remarkable despite the limited depth of field and the less-than-rigid support from the beanbag as opposed to a tripod. I’d say that about nailed it!
From August 12 through 14, 2019, I will be teaching the third Photography for Accident Reconstruction, Product Liability, and Testing class for SAE. This time it will be at Southeast Toyota Technical Center in Jacksonville, FL. We’ll cover a lot of material in the three days, and you’ll come away making better quality, more professional photographs from that point on, regardless of the location or lighting conditions. After all, your photographs are at least as important as any other part of your work. You’re a professional, and your photographs should reflect that professionalism. After this class, they will.
This post shows another example image using the amazing Laowa 25 mm Ultra Macro lens. In an earlier post, I discussed what that lens is, and how to best use it. For this example, I made a 5X image of a small torn flap of rubber from a failed tire.
The green box in this first image highlights the tiny flap I wanted to make an extreme close-up photograph of.
To illuminate the flap, I used a Nikon SB-910 flash mounted on my Nikon D850 camera hot shoe to control off-camera lights. I zoomed the lens all the way out to 5X magnification (5:1 reproduction ratio) to get the greatest enlargement possible. I then moved the camera on a pair of Really Right Stuff focusing rails until I was able to fill the frame with that tiny flap. Here is the result:
That is the full size image; there was no cropping. The flap was covered with small dots of colors from the oils in the rubber compound. I felt these colored dots interfered with the subject, so I turned the image black & white.
You’ll notice that both the tip and the base of the flap are going out of focus. This is due to the inherent limited depth of field with such high magnification. It would have been easy to make everything appear to be in focus by taking a couple additional photographs at different focus points, then blending them together in focus stacking software such as Photoshop, Helicon Focus, or Zerene Stacker. But the purpose of this photo was to demonstrate the lens by itself.
Using this lens can’t be done on automatic, but if you align, focus, expose, and light properly, it’s an amazing performer at an amazingly low price.
Even before I started teaching Accident Reconstruction, Product Liability, and Testing Photography classes, I’ve often been asked about what photo gear works the best for those areas.
In response, I’ve created two wish lists at B&H Photo Video: one for Nikon Nikon Gear Wish List and one for Canon shooters Canon Gear Wish List. I’m a Nikon shooter, so most of my direct experience is with Nikon equipment. Here are some notes on the lists:
-1- I currently use the Nikon D850. It’s arguably the best all-around camera on the market, but I recommend the Nikon D750 for Nikon shooters for several reasons:
– Its files are more manageable in size, but are still plenty large.
– It still has the manageable body size and shape, and even has the really useful flip up and down LCD screen.
– It has a built-in flash to use to trigger the Nikon 4804 R1 macro flashes.
– The built-in flash isn’t terribly powerful, and can’t be rotated or removed, but can be used in a pinch.
– Right now, it is on a fantastic sale—especially with the 24-120 mm lens. You save $1,200 instantly.
– It’s been out for a while, and is tried and true.
There are similar advantages for Canon shooters with the 6D Mk II vs. the 5D Mk IV. If you have the budget, the Nikon D850 or Canon 5D Mk IV can’t be recommended highly enough. But they are not necessary for the work we do.
-2- The lists show both the ZEISS Milvus 50 mm and either Nikon 60 mm or Canon 100 mm macro lenses. I use the ZEISS, but also have the Nikon. I use my ZEISS Milvus 50 mm lens for most of my work photography, since it has a normal perspective. I also use the ZEISS Milvus 100 mm lens when I need to fill the frame with a macro shot, but can’t get close enough.
Advantages of the ZEISS are: Precise manual focus; amazing micro contrast; and, 50 mm is accepted “normal” lens that I use for almost everything.
Disadvantages of the ZEISS are: Manual focus only (but that is my preference); and, only enlarges to 1:2 (or half life-size).
Advantages of the Nikon: 1:1 (life-size macro); autofocus (but see note below); close enough to “normal” focal length; and, less expensive.
Disadvantages of Nikon: Not as easy to manually focus. Note: When shooting macro images, you’ll most likely have to manually focus anyway, so having a more precise manual focusing ring is a real benefit.
Speaking of ZEISS lenses, four ZEISS manual focus prime lenses make up my work kit: the classic ZEISS 25 mm f/2 Distagon; the ZEISS Milvus 35 mm f/2; the ZEISS Milvus 100 mm f/2 macro; and, the aforementioned ZEISS Milvus 50 mm f/2 macro. I use the latter for 90 percent of my work. ZEISS makes lenses for Nikon, Canon, and Sony mounts. They have unrivaled sharpness and micro-contrast, and such smooth and accurate manual focusing that you’ll forget autofocus exists! Continue reading “Suggested Gear for Accident Reconstruction, Product Liability, and Testing Photography”
Even once you get your flashes dialed in to give you the exposure you want, there may be areas where you need more detail in the shadows. You can add lights, or just use a reflector. For this example, the flash lighting illuminated the tire just as I wanted, but the tread area in the foreground was too dark. (Click on image to enlarge, then click on back arrow to return.)I could have added one or more lights to illuminate the tread, but I chose to place a simpler silver reflector at an angle next to the shadowed tread. This allowed me to redirect the spill light from the flashes back into the tire’s tread.I used the silver side of a Profoto collapsible white/silver reflector to bounce light into the shadows. The beauty of a reflector is that it does not affect the overall exposure, so there was no need to re-meter to determine the proper exposure.
About half the truck wheels sold today are aluminum rather than steel. As with anything, there are trade-offs when comparing steel and aluminum wheels. Aluminum wheels weigh less but cost more than steel wheels. Aluminum wheels don’t rust, of course, but they can suffer from flange wear. Alcoa recommends checking for excessive flange wear using a simple go-no go gauge (Part No. 000700).Here’s a photograph of the gauge in use. (Click on image to enlarge, then click on back arrow to return.)While the gauge is quite easy to use, it is more challenging to photograph. It can be tricky to hold the thin aluminum gauge in the proper position while also making a photograph. To make the photograph above, I used a Wimberley The Plamp II with one end clamped on the wheel center hole, and the other end clamped to the gauge.The Plamp II is fantastic since it is flexible enough to get into any position, yet stiff enough to remain in place once released. Here’s a link on B&H: Wimberley The Plamp II from B&H. The Plamp II allowed me to quickly and steadily hold the Alcoa gauge perpendicular to the rim and properly up against the flange. It was easy to focus and shoot without any motion from trying to hold the gauge by hand. It also allowed me to get the flashes into position with no shadows from my arm across the photo.
If you need to photograph something like a gauge or ruler, it is worth taking the few minutes to secure it and light it properly. You can often just tape it in place, but that wouldn’t have worked to position this flange wear gauge.
That is the question you’ll have to answer before making each vehicle, product, or component photograph.
To minimize noise and maximize dynamic range for any image, use the camera’s minimum ISO (it’s ISO 64 on my Nikon D850). For most tire, product, and vehicle component photos, you’ll also want to optimize depth of field (DOF). That requires stopping down the aperture to somewhere between f/11 and f/16. (Stopping down to f/22 or smaller will give you more DOF, but may result in softening due to diffraction.)
Exposure consists of aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. With minimum ISO and a small aperture already chosen, that leaves only shutter speed. The shutter speed will depend on how much light is available. To get enough light for a proper exposure, you can use all ambient light, flash only, or a combination of ambient and flash (often called fill flash).
Flash allows you to add the light you need to get a proper exposure, while maintaining a reasonable shutter speed. This is particularly important if you are handholding the camera. Way too many photographs are blurry because the shutter speed was too low. This can be true even with the image stabilization built into many cameras or lenses. Image stabilization helps some, but many times, component or even vehicle photos have to be made where light is insufficient for handholding.
For tires and other vehicle components, getting enough light to handhold a camera usually requires the use of flash. The alternative is putting the camera on a tripod to keep it steady during a long shutter speed.
You can get the same overall exposure using a long shutter speed with ambient light only, using a combination of ambient light and flash, or using 100 percent flash. But the resulting image will look different. (Click on image to enlarge, then click on back arrow to return.)In my studio lab, I have so many bright white LED shop lights some have said it looks like an operating room. Even with all that apparent light, I still either have to use flash or a very long shutter speed to properly expose an image.
Above are two images of a rubber valve stem. They were both made using my incredibly sharp ZEISS Milvus 100mm macro lens mounted on my Nikon D850, which was mounted on my rolling studio stand. I focused the ZEISS manual focus lens using Live View at 100 percent.
Both images were made at ISO 64 at an aperture of f/16. The image without the flash required a shutter speed of 2.5 seconds, which was obviously not handholdable. With an image completely illuminated by flash, the shutter speed doesn’t contribute to the exposure. (Shutter speed does contribute if the image is a combination of ambient and flash.) In the flash image below, the shutter speed was 1/60 second.
Both images are properly exposed, but they look very different. The image with flash has more contrast, which gives more of a three-dimensional appearance, where the ambient (no flash) image has more even light. When sharp and properly exposed, there’s no right or wrong to flash versus ambient light, but be aware there can be a profound difference between them.