>>4151960largely practical
>no bubbles>not an edgesurveying the landscape in the lowest 40x magnif usually shows some areas that stand out in terms of color or texture. then zooming into usually 400x or 1000x helps get as much of the area of interest into a shot. otherwise, it's the same as normal photography: rule of thirds, center the subject, diagonal, bend the rules
the "correct" way to do it is similar to astrophotography
>take several shots at one level>fine zoom until the next thing is in focus>take several more shots>repeat until the whole depth of field is done>take several dark frame shots>stitch together in software>open all as layers and selectively soft-erase the blurry parts from each layer>final white balance, curves, unsharp mask on the composite>export and scrub exif datai think tonight i'll start on a little project i wanted to do for a while, photographing a pizza. i think a set of micro photos of sourdough starter, onion, tomato, basil, mushroom, cheese, etc. would be cool all together. lots of different colors and textures
>>4151966yeah it's kinda crazy how different stuff can look under a microscope. hopefully i can finally get into alt-spectra imaging soon, like fluorescence, UV, and IR. picrel is weed trichomes for example, one of my first micro photos (1000x magnif)
>>4146566>>4146758>>4146759gotta say i love the detail on these
