#enlarging lens

[calochortus]

Popp Art by simple.joy Via Flickr: Shot with a Tamron "(Noritsu) 48.5 mm F 2.8" (enlarging) lens on a Canon EOS R5.

[robertmatejcek]

Untitled Large Format Still Life with Pears - analog photograph - paper negative, 8 second exposure +/-, hand-built cardboard box camera, wollensak 127mm enlarger lens, caffenol developer - robert matejcek - 2024

“I want my food dead. Not sick, not dying, dead.”  - Oscar Wilde

tags:

[askshivanulegacy]

This is a great breakdown of phone cameras and worth a read if you do most of your photography with a phone.

Phone cameras are comparable to or better than many point-and-shoot digital cameras (especially older generation cameras, and this has been the case for several years now). But there is no such thing as a "pro" phone camera, just like there's no such thing as a "pro" point-and-shoot.

You can get really great photos and they can absolutely serve your needs. It's a fantastic solution if you're not in a position to carry extra gear with you.

But they are not "pro".

They can also be a perfectly acceptable tool for photography as an art form. You use the tools and explore and maximise their capabilities as you feel driven to. You certainly limit yourself in major ways with a camera phone, but that's part of the art. ALL photography is bound by the limits of your tool, and the entire point is to work within those and push your craft to see what you can do. So you can use the camera phone AS a pro (i.e. someone who understands the tool and principles of photography), but you have to understand the tool for that.

If you want a pro camera though, get a real camera.

Also, you need to identify the type of photography you like or want to do in order to choose the right camera.

I do a LOT of handheld, low-light photography w/o flash (museums, early or late hiking, etc.) so the sacrifice of low light quality in these cameras is the wrong decision, to me. But I also have a real camera which specifically caters to what I do. You just need to choose the tool or work within the bounds of what you have.

Smartphone cameras are NOT getting worse. (See below for phone photography tips)

I've now seen 3 pro photographers reviewing the iPhone 16 and complaining the cameras are "worse" and blaming Apple for not including revolutionary new camera technology.

And I suppose this is partly Apple's fault. Their marketing and hype machine always goes overboard. But also, that's just how marketing works. Samsung has a "200 megapixel" sensor and Sony has a "Zeiss" lens. And I think it is unrealistic to expect smartphone companies to say "This product has entered the iterative phase and each new model will only be marginally improved over the last one."

Smartphones (from any brand) have become an appliance. You don't buy a new model of microwave every year. And you don't expect every new model of microwave to have new revolutionary technology. And that is pretty much the expectation you should have with most computer hardware from here on out.

And in some ways, that is a good thing. That means the design of the phone has pretty much been perfected and it will last you a long time if you take care of it. You will not be left behind and your phone will be able to handle any new software for most of its lifespan.

So, is Apple getting lazy or is there a reason their hardware is stagnating?

It seems that neither money nor marketing can change the laws of physics.

They cannot make transistors much smaller. Phones and computers are about as fast as current hardware designs can make them (unless there is a shocking scientific breakthrough). From here on out, heavy compute tasks that are beyond your phone or computer will be done in the cloud on giant computer clusters. Thankfully computers and phones seem to be plenty fast for the majority of tasks we ask of them.

I remember Katrina telling me her new computer didn't seem any faster. And I explained the computing tasks she does regularly were not really affected by the increased power and speed of her new computer. If something took 0.1 seconds before and now it takes 0.05 seconds, that is twice as fast. An increase in speed that looks fantastic in advertisements. But it is hard for our brains to perceive. She just didn't do anything on her computer that took it long enough for her to notice. But having a faster and more powerful computer/phone will increase its lifespan and resale value, so it is still prudent to get the best things you can afford at time of purchase.

And I'm afraid smartphone cameras are hitting their own hardware limitations. They can't make the sensors much larger to get better depth of field and low light performance. And cramming in more megapixels doesn't actually add much more detail, if any.

It's physics.

Again.

You cannot get any more performance out of a small plastic lens. Why do you think pro photographers haul around 10 pound lenses still?

There is a formula for detail that never seems to be explained in any camera marketing.

Here is the simplified version...

Detail = Sensor x Lens

Let's say 1 is perfection. You have a sensor that performs at 0.5 and a lens that performs at 0.2.

The total detail will be 0.1.

But in the new model you increase the performance of the sensor to 0.8. WOW! That's so close to 1!

The total detail will be... 0.16.

Now let's imagine we've discovered a magic, physics-defying tiny plastic lens that performs at 0.8 as well.

The total detail jumps to 0.64!

But we all get sucked into a wormhole because we violated the laws of the universe.

Even if you were to design a near perfect (perfect is impossible) sensor that scores 0.99.

Without that magic plastic lens... 0.198

This is why I put Samsung's "200 megapixel" sensors in quotes. Because when paired with the same tiny plastic lens, there isn't much improvement. And that's why a 12 megapixel DSLR from 10 years ago with a giant honking lens can still capture more detail.

Most of the quality from smartphone cameras comes from the computational software processing. Phones actually take many photos at once and combine them to get you a decent image.

While that is still improving a little bit each generation, those improvements are stagnating as well. Until image processing can do a better job of inventing more detail realistically, smartphones are going to have to obey the laws of physics.

So... why are photographers saying the iPhone cameras are worse?

First, the ultra wide angle lens looks softer in low light.

And if you zoom between 1x and 5x, the images look less detailed.

But neither of those things make the cameras *worse*. In fact, the cameras are better for the most part. It's just that Apple decided to compromise on one aspect to improve another. Probably due to market research telling them most people prioritize certain things over others when taking photos.

They increased the resolution of the ultra wide angle sensor to match the detail of the main sensor, but that seems to have lowered the low light performance of the ultra wide. So in good light, you will see an improvement in sharpness. But they could not increase the sensor size to compensate and smaller pixels can have trouble with dim conditions. They probably discovered that people mostly use that lens in good light and they would appreciate the bump in detail more.

But pro photographers often photograph in more challenging lighting conditions because you can capture a more artistic shot. I don't think I could have gotten this shot on a smartphone.

But photo normies are just taking pics of their kids doing weird kid shit.

They aren't really trying to push the limits of their ultra wide angle lenses.

And they increased the zoom of the telephoto lens to 5x from 3x because most people never used the 3x. So images at 5x look great now, but unfortunately if you use anything between 1x and 5x, your image will be *digitally* zoomed. Which is never as good as optical zoom. They basically crop the photo, zoom in, and add sharpening.

So they prioritized people having longer reach and more zoom at the expense of that middle zoom range. Every camera system makes tradeoffs and compromises.

And I hate that I always feel like I am defending Apple, because they do have misleading and dishonest marketing regarding a lot of aspects of their tech. But hating on Apple gets more clicks so content creators also make misleading and dishonest claims.

And so we are just surrounded in a circle of hyperbole from all sides.

Now, if you know these limitations, you can change your approach to photographing stuff to keep them from being an issue. You can reap the benefits without dealing with the new compromises.

Here are some tips to help owners of the new iPhone, but also everyone else too.

Smartphone Photography Tips

Whenever possible, try to use the main 1x camera at only 1x zoom. This has the largest sensor with the most detail and works best in the lowest light. Only use the ultra wide or telephoto if you cannot get the photo otherwise. If you aren't sure you have enough light for ultra wide, take the photo, and then as a safety, take two photos with the main camera side by side and stitch them later with a pano app.

"Zoom with your feet" and don't use "in-between" zooms. Let's say your lenses do 0.5x, 1x, and 5x zoom. Even though you have the option to use other zooms, like 2x or 3x, that is going to compromise your picture quality. It is essentially going to crop your photo and enlarge it, which causes a loss of detail. If fact, if you use 4.5x instead of 5x, your picture will probably look like trash. You are always going to get better results if you can move closer or step back so that you are using the native focal length of your chosen lens. For example, let's say you are taking a photo and you judge the best framing to be at 4x. But you still have 10 feet of space behind you. If you back up and then zoom in to 5x, the phone will switch to that lens and you will get a much clearer picture.

Rule of thumb...

1 to 3x... try to move closer.

4 to 5x... try to move back.

If you hit a wall and end up at 4.5x, you might see if you have a panorama mode and try that instead. Switch to your 5x and do the pano. Or you can take two photos and then stitch them together with software later on. (Stitching panos with an app later will give better quality than pano mode, especially in low light.)

Low light needs stability. Get some sort of stabilizing device for low light photos. Either a phone case that lets you stand up the phone on its own or a mini tripod.

This thing folds to the size of a credit card.

Your phone will detect when it is stable and not being handheld. It will then automatically extend its shutter speed allowing it to drink in more light and give you a better picture.

Tripods are photography magic and will improve your low light photos quite a bit. Motion blur of moving subjects can still be an issue, but photos of a cityscape or landscape will look great.

For selfies, shoot a little bit wide and then crop in. This goes a little contrary to my earlier advice saying cropping lowers detail, but this is specifically for shooting a face. The 0.5x and 1x lenses on smartphone cameras are fairly wide angle. This can cause unflattering proportions with human faces. Wide angle lenses exaggerate distance. Near things look very near and far things look very far. To a wide angle lens, the tip of your nose looks like it is super close but your ears seem like they are a mile away. And that's why you may look a bit "alien" in your selfies.

People's natural instinct is to "fill the frame" with a face. The outer edges of a wide angle lens are more distorted than the very center. So try to keep faces away from the edges of the frame.

And one other trick you can do for selfies and pictures of faces is step back a few feet. Sometimes this is hard, especially with selfies, as your arm is only so long... but if you can take your face photos from just a little bit farther back, you will almost entirely eliminate unflattering distortion. In some cases, just stretching out your arm as far as it will go is enough.

Then you just crop the image with the framing you originally wanted, and your facial proportions will look great.

An example...

Here the distortion is bad because I am not in the center and the lens is too close to my face. The lens thinks my nose is really close and my ears are in Canada.

But when the lens is farther back the edge distortion is less prevalent and my nose and ears (relative to the lens) seem roughly the same distance away. So my proportions look great, but I don't quite have the framing I want.

But with a little cropping...

For social media there is still plenty of resolution to crop in. Cropping isn't bad, it's just always better to use it as a last resort or in a special circumstance like this. I get roughly the same framing as in my wide angle shot, but I don't look like I'm behind a door's peephole trying to sell you the Good News.

I wish they made a "mini" selfie stick that only extended a foot or so. With the main camera that is usually all people need to undo any wide angle issues. I have one of those mini tripods and that works well, but there is no activation button so I have to do a timer. Mirrors work great to help you get some selfie distance.

In any case, all cameras have limitations and compromises. Clickbait titles saying something is WORSE THAN THE OLD ONE are frustrating and wrong.

And people upgrading phones every year are silly. All current name brand smartphones have promised at least 5 years of software updates. I think Google and Samsung are offering 7 years on some models. And Apple has always just let you use your phone until it literally will not work with new software. Which has worked out to 8 years in some cases (with a battery swap).

Phones are now appliances. For now, hardware will improve 10 to 15% from generation to generation until physics breaks. So if you want a 50% improvement, wait 5 years and you'll think your new phone is awesome. If you upgrade every year, it is going to be difficult to see the change.

I hope to be starting a little course on smartphone photography in the near future. All modern phones are capable of taking amazing pictures. And as long as you understand their limitations you can mitigate or avoid them. And that is what I plan to teach.

[camerist1]

Solar Eclipse in Totality

These photos were both enlarged digitally with Lightroom, to compensate for the short reach of my 200mm telephoto lens! 🙂

[pnwander]

High on a hill was a lonely goatherd...

Shout out to the hiker staring at a tiny white dot in the distance who noticed my 400mm mft lens and asked, "Does that camera have zoom?" (Enlarge the top photo to see our perspective standing on the ridge.)

[korpuskat]

Multitasking

[Ao3 Mirror] Pairing: Megatron/Reader/Soundwave Rating: E WC: 600 Contents: Gender/Sex neutral Reader. kinda dubcon voyeurism, but it's Soundwave so like, what do you expect? === Written for Day 1 of @tf-kinktober2024 but I'm bad at posting things on time lol ===

There were few luxuries Soundwave afforded himself, few that would interfere with his near single minded focus. It was fortuitous, then, that his aptitude for surveillance dovetailed so neatly with his desire for you.

The other members of High Command were perfectly pleased to turn their attention away from their actual duties and to instead busy themselves with their little organic distraction. Not that this was your fault, you are simply so small and delicate and soft in their collective servos. For the record, Soundwave did enjoy when his workload lightened enough for him to be able to be the one cradling you in his spindly digits, even if it was not fundamental to his own satisfaction. Still, Soundwave does resent his fellow officers' inefficiencies, because unlike them, Soundwave can multitask.

With just over half his processor focused on the sifting of actual surveillance data from his Earth-based network, the other almost-half sorts through cameras aboard the Nemesis itself. He calculates the likelihoods on where he'll find you- his schedule dictates you should be awake with your diurnal sleep cycle and when he cross references that with which officers are off duty... It doesn’t take him long. Well below his estimated time in fact to find what he’s looking for. The habsuite is familiar- even from the elevated, unnatural angle of the camera’s lens- and it is occupied.

Soundwave is almost surprised; Megatron is well known among the crew to have no compunction on enjoying his pets anywhere he likes. In his own berth is practically mundane in comparison. But there he is, lounged back against one wall, half-turned with his legs spread. One servo lazily strokes his own spike, his warframe claws drawing thin lines up and down the underside, while his other holds... you.

Soundwave’s fans click on.

So tiny in his liege's palm, Soundwave has to zoom in on the feed, enlarging the image until it’s nearly entirely Megatron’s unpainted plating and the shining sweat on your skin. Soundwave watches you, focuses on how your limbs twitch and twist as Megatron’s glossa glides against your body. You're close, Soundwave can tell from the tremors in your legs, the rise and fall of your torso, how your mouth opens in silent cries. Megatron slows, changes his angle before you can overload. And in the tight frame of the camera, the corner of Megatron’s intake quirks upwards, revealing a few more of his sharpened dentae.

Was he so pleased with your vocalizations, with having denied you? Soundwave zooms out a touch, to capture all of his lord’s faceplate and-

Red optics meet his through the screen, white arpetures burning directly into the camera. His dermals still curled into as much of a smug grin as they can while also licking incessantly between your legs. If you even notice his distraction, you don’t seem to show it, tiny servos clutching at Megatron’s plates in fervid desperation.

::How is the angle, Soundwave?:: To the untrained optic, Soundwave knows his reaction to Megatron's com is nearly imperceptible. Still, Soundwave adjusts his posture, self-aware in the way only Megatron can make him feel.

Now, Soundwave understands that Megatron's unusual position- half turned, legs spread to frame his spike- was intentional. By way of response, Soundwave sends him the feed.

He watches as steam rises from Megatron’s vents, the servo on his spike squeezing at the base, his optics darkening as he watches himself. You, in his palm, have latched your tiny hands onto his digits, body rolling into each teasing lick.

::Join us.:: He orders after a moment. ::And send me the full file after.::

[broadcastarchive-umd]

The Pilot TV-37 “Candid” was introduced in 1948 at the then-amazingly low price of $99. Most 1940s TVs sold for hundreds of dollars, the cost of a decent automobile. Pilot made this set for only a few years but sold a lot of them during that time. You could get a magnifying lens to place in front of the picture tube for an additional fee. (Click to enlarge the picture.)

Originally posted January 9, 2014. | Tumblr Archive 

[beautification-tales]

The Bunny

A caption Tale

Barbara was smiling as took photos in her bunny costume. “Do you think the kids will like these photos Luke?” She asked her friend and photographer. He looked at her through the camera lens and nodded with a grin. “They're going to love them. You're a natural with those rabbit ears!”

Barbara smiled knowing that her first grade students would get a kick from seeing their teacher dressed as a bunny for Easter. Luke continued to snap photos completely bored. He agreed so quickly when Barbara asked for his assistance with taking photos. He honestly thought Barbara was flirting with him when she said. “I bought a new costume and I need you to take pictures.”

But here he was, lying on the floor with a camera pointed at Barbara, who was frolicking around with the same enthusiasm as a kid in a candy store. He couldn’t help but feel like he was in a sitcom episode. He quickly closed his eyes and imagined her in a different kind of bunny costume.

“Alright, let’s try some action shots!” Barbara exclaimed, hopping towards him. Luke snapped away, trying to keep his focus on the task at hand. Luke aimed his camera as he felt his dreams shoot at her. The flash was like a strobe light in a disco,

capturing Barbara’s laughter and the twirl of her fluffy tail.

Barbara began to feel extremely hot. It was as if the flash poured heat upon her as her bunny costume felt like a sauna. “Hey Luke can I lower my zipper a bit? The suit feels a bit warm.” Luke nodded, trying to keep his cool. The costume was a bit too tight, and Barbara felt like she was suffocating. She reached behind her neck and with a quick zip, the costume loosened, allowing a gust of cool air to hit her skin. The relief was instant.

The heat increased as Luke continued to snap photos. “I feel a bit woozy.” Barbara said as she stumbled trying to find balance on her heels. “Wait… when was I wearing heels?” She looked down to find that she had on black stiletto heels on her feet. The room spun and she reached out for something to hold onto.

Her hand grazed a table and she looked up to see her lips had plumped as her cheekbones became more prominent. The heat became unbearable as she lowered the zipper revealing her enlarging breasts. Barbara looked down to see that under her costume was a tight black leotard. It clung to her body like a second skin, highlighting every curve and contour. She gasped as the reality set in. The bow tie sat rested on her neck. The pink bunny suit fell at her feet. A new pair of black bunny ears sat on her head as her hair became long and luscious.

Her eyes widened and she began to panic, her heart racing as the fabric of the leotard grew tighter and tighter. “What’s happening?” She shrieked. Luke looked up from his camera, his jaw dropping at the transformation. He enjoyed seeing his dreams become reality. The room grew brighter, and Barbara could feel the fabric squeezing her tighter with each flash of the camera. She looked down again and noticed her waist was now cinched in and her hips had widened dramatically.

Luke smiled as he grabbed at his crotch. “Now this is a photo shoot!” Luke continued to take photos as Barbara felt her body move into sensual poses. “What did you do to me?” Barbara asked unable to control her body as every flash of light made her feel warmer.

“It’s all in the camera, baby!” Luke said, his voice deep and hypnotic. Barbara looked into the camera and felt a strange compulsion to obey his every command. She could feel the camera lens caressing her, moving with her every move, capturing every inch of her new form.

“Why does this feel so good?” Barbara thought to herself as she struck pose after pose, her body moving in ways she never knew it could. The leotard was stretching and molding to her new form, accentuating every curve and leaving nothing to the imagination. She felt a strange mix of fear and excitement as she looked down at her new body. Her once plain Jane look had been replaced by the image of a bombshell bunny, and she couldn’t help but feel a rush of power from it.

“Mmm let’s take some photos outside Luke baby.” Barbara’s voice had a new seductive lilt to it. Her eyes were glazed over as she followed the instructions of the camera lens, her body moving in a way that was both mesmerizing and unfamiliar to her. Luke nodded eagerly, his mind racing with the possibilities of the new direction this photoshoot was taking.

“Sure thing Babs!”

[muirrum]

Tell us about your film setup? 👀

as in my cameras? sure!!!

I guess my "primary" film camera is my canon AE-1. Lenses are expensive so I usually just use a 50mm f/1.4 lens. My grandfather left me his Nikon F that I have yet to actually use but I've been waiting for a good time to walk around with it.

I also have One medium format camera (currently missing ;-;), it's a Yashicaflex TLR that shoots 6x6. I have darkroom chemistry that I use to develop everything myself, really the only thing i'm missing is a good scanning setup and an enlarger!

[silencedrowns]

I got some new cosplay lenses and since I can’t find anyone with light eyes using these online anywhere, I thought I’d share! These are Etia Reorv lenses, in Nephrite.

Green does admittedly blend really well with blue eyes, but the pupil hole is pretty small and they blend to being so light near the center that I’d feel confident ordering these in significantly more different colors! They’re also one day disposables and super comfortable. My partner says you can’t even tell they’re color contacts from about five feet away, and even as close as a foot away they just look more saturated than real eyes can. These pictures are 100% unretouched!!

you have to use a shopping service to order Etia lenses since they don’t ship outside Japan, but since I’m pretty regularly proxy ordering from Classe, I don’t have a problem with that. Here’s the link with the full color range if anyone else is interested!

Personally I think I have a new go to cosplay lens for when I want minimal enlargement but gorgeous and bright color!

[calochortus]

Bubbling up from the depths by simple.joy Via Flickr: One of my attempts at the "Crazy Tuesday" theme "Abstract". Shot with a "Tomioka-Copal 75 mm F 2.8" (enlarging) lens on a Canon EOS R5.

[robertmatejcek]

Untitled Large Format Still Life with Metronome - analog photograph - paper negative, 8 second exposure +/-, hand-built cardboard box camera, wollensak 127mm enlarger lens, caffenol developer - robert matejcek - 2024

“Lost time is never found again.”  - Benjamin Franklin

tags:

[sirfrogsworth]

Are you familiar with Jared Polin, aka 'Fro Knows Photo'? I'm not a pro like him, nor do I aspire to be, but I can put his tips into practice, such as putting my money into 'glass glass glass glass glass' with the D600. Thanks to a miserable season, baseball tickets today are dirt cheap. Thanks to KEH, heavy artillery glass was a bargain. Plan on getting action shots with the 80-200mm at f/2.8, 1/2000 sec and letting the camera deal with the ISO. Beauty shots around the park 'f/8 and be there.' Hope you're well today. Let's Go Bucs!

I have mixed feelings about Jared. He can be crass and some of his photography opinions are old school and outdated. Though he has gotten better over the years and I actually enjoy his videos more now than in the past.

My main gripe is that he doesn't believe in cropping photos, which bothers me to no end. The beauty of having high megapixel cameras is the ability to crop in and almost get a "second lens" without having to actually buy one. As a disabled photographer who cannot always "zoom with my feet" sometimes I have to take photos knowing I will be cropping them later on.

The main reason for "not cropping" goes back to film and prints. Your photos would always end up the same size and aspect ratio. Also, 35mm film did not enlarge very well, especially with the low sharpness lenses from the past. That is not a constraint with presenting photos in a digital medium.

I also think he cranks the contrast up on his photos to a ridiculous degree. I want to re-edit all of his photos because anything in shadow gets lost. But that is more of a subjective complaint.

He is a great natural light, documentary style photographer. And I do think his real world testing of gear is a good perspective over some of the other camera reviewers that do nothing but lab tests. (Both have their place.)

In the end, he has a lot of experience and has some pretty stunning photos in his portfolio. And I do like that he isn't afraid of high ISO photography like some others can be. So as long as you ignore his advice about cropping, I do think he has a lot to teach.

If I could recommend one photographer to folks who are in the beginning of their photography journey, I think it would be French-Canadian wildlife photographer, Simon d'Entremont. (pronounced see-mon) Even if you aren't into wildlife shooting, his photography education/communication skills are fantastic. He breaks everything down into very easy-to-understand chunks and makes very few (if any) factual errors. He is a good balance of artistic and technical and gives very practical advice for getting better shots. And his work is absolutely stunning.

I also think you might enjoy Sean Tucker. He tends to be less about gear and more about the art and philosophy of photography.

And you are correct, lenses are far more important than any other piece of gear. They are the main thing that sets big cameras apart from smartphones. You can't break the laws of physics and certain things require more than a tiny plastic lens can do.

Also, I miss baseball. I really enjoyed watching games with my dad when he was sick and had trouble concentrating on shows with a narrative. But it has been hard for me to watch a game since he passed. So I just follow some baseball YouTube channels to dip my toe back into that world every once in a while. I think I just need more time and I will get back into baseball again. Also, the Cardinals seem to be struggling so this was probably a good time to step away.

Though I do feel like I am missing out on seeing Shohei Ohtani's career develop.

[slingbats]

WHAT ARE YOUR OSWALD'S HC ? !

Oh uhhhh I've talked about my only major deviations from canon before but I've never been satisfied with the way his eye was injured in canon, so I guess I'll touch on that?

I'm kind of unhappy with specifically uh. Okay, the framing isn't good but that's what a shoestring budget gets you, I don't blame the production as much as like, budgetary issues for it looking hokey, but like...

Mmmm, it's not clear what exactly damaged his eye in the show, I guess you're supposed to just say "shrapnel" and leave it at that, bc if it were the blast itself he would be a lot more injured than just his face

I seem to recall Ed in the show carrying his glasses for him after he's bandaged up, but imo it would... make a lot more sense if the blast damaged his glasses because he was closer and like, the broken pieces of glass are what injured his eye, or idk

I guess this isn't really a headcanon because I don't have the details solidified, I never decide anything with any amount of certainty tbh

basically my point is I can never decide if I want his eye to be damaged to the point that that eye has veryyyy limited visibility or if the eye itself is glass - I think it would be more interesting if it was glass, but honestly like... he visibly still had the eye when the injury was shown, it's not like Gotham has never done gross effects with missing eyes before, so if they wanted his eye Gone it would've been

it's just i'm particularly bothered by the contact lens they chose - a damaged eye with a permanently blown out pupil would become a Darker color, not lighter (dark blue is possible but this is Bright, unnatural blue, it's the wrong shade to mimic natural colors), um, as seen for example with David Bowie, who's commonly depicted with heterochromia across media he's involved with (even his voicework a lot of those characters incorporate this trait) because his darker eye actually had an enlarged pupil, which made it appear more green

long story short I guess what I'm saying is I would probably draw his eyes a different color to how they appear in canon post s5, either because I just don't like the blue and think it should be naturally darkened, or like. If I decided his eye is fake I would still have it be a different shade of grey/green from his regular eye (green/blue eyes are harder to match) but in no world would I ever draw it blue, basically. Hate the blue.

[lichenaday]

Calicium abietinum

Fir pin, black stubble

So like, I need to clarify that the fruting bodies of pin lichens aren't *technically* mushrooms, but also what is the technical definition of a mushroom anyway? ("an enlarged complex fleshy fruiting body of a fungus (as most basidiomycetes) that arises from an underground mycelium and consists typically of a stem bearing a spore-bearing structure") So like, go ahead and call them mushrooms if you want, but just know that at some point some pedant might correct and I would have to give it them on a technicality. But in my heart, when I look at C. abientinum I am screaming "look at the bitty lil baby mushrooms!!!!" This pin lichen has an immersed thallus sunken into old and dead wood and bark, particularly that of hardwood and firs. It produces brown-black, thin-stalked apothecia up to a measly 1 mm in height, covered in a transparent gelatinous sheath and topped with a lens- or bell-shaped cap. It has a chlorococcoid green algal photobiont. C. abietinum can be found in dryer, temperate to boreal-montane habitats in North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.

images: source | source | source | source

info: source | source | source

[moonlight12086]

Hello, I wanted to show you something that I did for a contest that was recommended to me to enter, it is to write a story or story, something like that with a free theme and a maximum of 600 words.

I don't have much time to translate everything so here it is translated by Google lens, sorry 😔

It is better that you enlarge the images and sorry if it is not fully translated, I accept criticism :33