Observation 130724: Spathularia Pers.
When: 2013-03-09
No herbarium specimen

Notes: This is another very small example of a fungi that I always have difficulty with in ID. Danny Your expertise please. ( I think this may be Isaria.)?

Proposed Names

28% (1)
Recognized by sight
62% (2)
Eye3 Eyes3
Recognized by sight

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus

Comments

Add Comment
Reply

You are spot on with your logic. All variations work somewhere along the imagery timeline. Flash unfortunately does create colour shifts and I try to show my images as is through the human eye. Off camera fill flash is not so damaging. Focus stacking works well too, but as you said 105mm f2.8 macro lens do do it well. (that was a mouthful of prepositions).
Without making too many excuses, as I have two artificial knees I tend to stradle the space in lieu of being on my knees. That is why I move some fungi to a higher position for better results all round. The lower fstops (f8-f11) do two things, reduce DOF and give blurred backgrounds. It’s what is your desire of presentation I suppose. I will just have to get down closer and hope to please us both. Chow, kk

Ian
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-03-25 10:19:35 CET (+0100)

you have me beat on photo know-how. still, with what you’re describing, you should be able to capture the spray from a bee sneeze. I’ve heard tell of extremely tiny apertures sacrificing some amount of foreground sharpness. I don’t remember where I heard it. I don’t know if it’s true. food for thought, perhaps. are file-type and -size settings to max? remote shutter release? Alan’s shooting with a 105mm macro and getting images sufficiently close and sharp enough to see any and all detail of diagnostic value. I think the major difference is flash, which permits the use of higher shutter speeds, sometimes enough for hand-held shooting. with f/32, ambient light, and ISO 100-200, you must be sitting behind an open shutter for up to a minute or more. that may explain the fuzzier IQ. one false move and you image blur everything to pieces.

for whatever my comparatively inexperienced opinion is worth, try splitting the difference in your choices of ISO, shutter speed and aperture. I, personally, limit myself to f/16 (most of the time it’s f/8 or f/11), ISO400 or below (usually stays on 100), and make shutter adjustments as needed. to the extent that there’s any truth to the “sweet spot” roughly in the middle portion of the aperture range of a given piece of glass, this allows for shooting in closer proximity to that f stop or range of f stops. when and where you find you’re simply not getting enough DOF without cranking down to f32, there’s always the not-as-complicated-as-it-may-seem-art of focus stacking, achieved either via CS6 (poorly) or CombineZP (quite unpoorly). i ponied up for a camera body that could do remote mirror lock up shutter releasing (D7000) and a quality ballhead (Acratech Ultimate) to always keep vibrations to a minimum. uploads of mine containing images taken in adherence to all that are still in the works, but it seems to have worked at least half as well as I expected it would.

my $0.02… a long $0.02.

Danny

Thanks Danny. I realise that what I presented was an enlarged section of the same image ; thus the same resolution. I always do use a tripod and shoot at f32. ISO is generally 100 or 200, depending on the ambient available light. I rarely use Flash and always white balance my images before editing on a high quality calibrated monitor. I use CS6, (Photoshop) and some detail enhancing software when needed. The lenses I use are prime lenses with max aperture f2.8 I use two different focal lengths Nikon Macro 105mm and Sigma 180mm. The magnification factor is 1:1. As you say closer is better, but not always possible. It must be appreciated that what I am photographing can be as small as 1mm in some cases. Depth of field at high Fstops(f32){shutter opening very small thus long exposures}, gives maximum DOF, but even so in most cases image sharpness is related to the angle of the plane.(in camera in relation to subject.) (Parallel is optimal) Several CM’s is about the limit for DOF in focused images. Saying that, I appreciate your aspect for difficulty in identification and both of us have to work within the limits of the available equipment and images. As usual, any comments are always gratefully taken, and between us we seem to arrive at some solution. Thanks again for you valuable time and assistance. kk

Ian
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-03-25 06:54:14 CET (+0100)

by closer, I mean re-photographing at a closer distance. the second image you added looks to just be empty magnification of image one or another image of similar resolution. what equipment are you using when you photograph? do you have a tripod?

as for the fungus in question, I don’t really know. looks a bit like a Spathularia with a secondary fungus at the margins, or maybe another Thelephoroid thing. better detail close up could be either helpful or just add to the confusion. maybe Noah knows more, as he’s visited your part of the world before in search of fungi.

sorry I can’t be of more help.

tough to say
By: Danny Newman (myxomop)
2013-03-24 12:00:53 CET (+0100)

though definitely not Isaria or any other entomopathogen. closer images could help. i take it your microscope access is still limited, yes? if so, there are very capable chinese scopes to be had for around $400-$500. if it’s a purchase you can afford to make, check out what eBay has to offer. Byrain owns one such scope (made by AmScope). though build quality can’t really compare to any of the big names (Olympus, Nikon, Zeiss), they seem to get the job done fairly well.

Created: 2013-03-24 07:56:22 CET (+0100)
Last modified: 2013-05-20 00:35:59 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 80 times, last viewed: 2016-10-26 00:48:02 CEST (+0200)
Show Log