Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!hecate.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!newsgate.duke.edu!nntprelay.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!206.109.1.106!ultraneo.neosoft.com!uuneo.neosoft.com!scooter-ppp-port-23.neosoft.com!uthman
From: Ed Uthman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: sci.med.pathology,rec.photo.misc,sci.answers,rec.answers,news.answers
Subject: Gross Specimen Photography (monthly posting, 34K, v. 2.03)
Followup-To: poster
Date: 4 Mar 1998 19:46:45 GMT
Organization: Pathanarchy, Inc
Lines: 725
Approved: [email protected]
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scooter-ppp-port-23.neosoft.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Summary: This paper is an introduction to photography in general and
gross specimen photography in particular. It is aimed at pathology
residents who have suddenly found themselves in the position of
taking pictures of specimens on a copy stand using a camera unlike
any they are familiar with.
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0_PPC
X-XXMessage-ID: <[email protected]>
X-XXDate: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:52:26 GMT
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu sci.med.pathology:6706 rec.photo.misc:72341 sci.answers:7923 rec.answers:38290 news.answers:124743

Version: 2.03
Last-modified: September 2, 1996
Archive-name: pathology/gross-specimen-photography
Posting-Frequency: monthly (first Wednesday)
URL: http://www.neosoft.com/~uthman
Maintainer: Ed Uthman <[email protected]>

       AN INTRODUCTION TO PHOTOGRAPHY IN GENERAL...

       AND GROSS SPECIMEN PHOTOGRAPHY IN PARTICULAR

A Guide for Residents Who Have Had This Unwelcome Chore
                    Dumped Upon Them

           Ed Uthman, MD <[email protected]>
         Diplomate, American Board of Pathology



At its birth about 1824, photography as practiced by its
first devotee, Joseph Nicephore Niepce, was a messy, all-
consuming pursuit that made use of such substances as
bitumen of Judaea, lavender oil, and pewter. Today,
chemical, mechanical, and electronic technology has made
photography a neat, transparent, facile technique which we
may easily apply to another messy, all-consuming pursuit:
gross anatomic pathology. Despite the amount of automation
available in photography, it is important to grasp a few
general principles, so that we may use to our advantage a
few powerful controls we have over the photographic
environment.

The main considerations in gross photography are exposure,
focus, image size, composition, color balance, and film
selection.

I. EXPOSURE

This is essentially the problem of balancing the amount of
light coming through the lens with the sensitivity of the
film. We seek the ideal exposure and eschew the
underexposure (slide too dark) or overexposure (slide too
light). The determinants of exposure are:

A. FILM SPEED, measured as arbitrary standardized units
  ("ISO" or, formerly, "ASA"). ISO and ASA are numerically
  equivalent units. The film speed depends on film
  manufacturing process and type of development used on the
  exposed film. Although films are packaged with a stated
  ISO rating, some may be "pushed" to higher speeds by
  special processing techniques. This should be kept in
  mind before throwing away valuable film you have
  mistakenly underexposed. The faster the film, the less
  the resolution (causing increased "graininess"); also
  colors are more subdued in fast film (such as Kodacolor
  1000) than in "slow" film (such as Kodacolor 25). The
  graininess and subdued colors of very fast films can be
  used for artistic effect but are of no value in technical
  photography. Therefore, we tend to choose slower films
  for our gross lab cameras, so that we may produce
  pictures with the greatest resolution and most accurate
  color rendition. A film faster than ISO 160 should
  probably not be used.

B. APERTURE, the setting of the iris diaphragm in the lens,
  determining how much light is allowed through the lens
  into the camera. Aperture measured as "f/ stops" (f/2.8,
  f/4, f/16, etc). The f/ ratio is calculated by dividing
  the focal length of the lens (see below) by the diameter
  of the iris diaphragm opening through which light passes.
  Therefore, the greater the diameter, the more light is
  let in, and the smaller is the f/ ratio. Each f/ stop is
  1.4 (the square root of 2) times the preceding f/ stop.
  Each "stop" multiplies the amount of light by 2X. As an
  example, f/1 lets in twice as much light as f/1.4 and
  four times as much as f/2. The "speed" of the lens is its
  f/ ratio at its widest aperture setting. An f/1.2 lens is
  considered very "fast," while an f/5.6 lens is "slow."
  Generally, fast lenses are more expensive than slow ones
  and in fact do not have as good corner-to-corner
  resolution as slower lenses. Because we generally have
  plenty of light at our disposal in gross photography, we
  opt for excellent resolution over lens speed. Most lenses
  for our purposes are f/2.8 to f/4 at their widest
  aperture settings. We typically choose to "stop down" our
  diaphragms in most cases, because almost all lenses have
  optimal resolution when not used at their maximum
  aperture. The "ideal" f/ stop is generally taken as 2 to
  2-1/2 stops "down" from the maximum aperture. For an
  f/2.8 lens, therefore, the optimal aperture setting would
  between f/5.6 and f/6.7. The other reason to stop down
  from maximum aperture is to improve "depth of field" (see
  "Focus," below). I personally shoot almost all my
  specimen photos at f/8.

C. EXPOSURE TIME, or "shutter speed," measured in seconds or
  fractions of seconds (1/30 s, 1/1000 s, etc) represents
  the total time the film is exposed to the focused image.
  It is determined by setting the camera shutter to open
  for a specified length of time.

  Effects of various shutter speeds:

  1/1000 sec - 1/60 sec: These are OK for hand held camera
  in existing light.

  1/60 sec : Always use this with electronic flash, since
  just about all flashes are specifically synchronized for
  this speed. Using a slower speed (e.g., 1/30 sec) will
  also work, but a faster speed (e.g., 1/125 sec) will ruin
  the picture by failing to expose part of the frame. Note:
  Some of the more modern and/or expensive cameras allow
  flash synching at 1/125 second or faster speeds, but make
  sure this is true of your camera before trying it.

  1/30 sec - 1/2 sec : We tend to use this range for tripod
  or copy-stand work, including gross photography. This
  range is generally not acceptable for hand-held cameras,
  because most people cannot hold the camera still enough
  for this length of time. By using these slower speeds for
  gross photography, we allow ourselves the luxury of
  smaller apertures (giving us good depth of field and
  maximum resolution from the lens) and slower films
  (giving us maximum film resolution and best color
  rendition).

  For example, each of the following exposure parameter set-
  ups give the same exposure. Which would you choose for a
  gross photograph taken on your copy stand, assuming you
  have a camera with an f/4 lens?

    A. ASA 50 film; f/4; 1/30 sec

    B. ASA 50 film; f/8; 1/8 sec

    C. ASA 200 film; f/16; 1/8 sec

 I would choose set-up 'B.' Set-up 'A' involves shooting
 at maximum lens aperture, at which lens resolution is not
 the best. Set-up 'C' lets us stop down the aperture for
 good lens resolution but requires us to use faster film
 with poorer resolution than the ASA 50. Therefore, 'B'
 looks like the best compromise.

 Even though a good copy stand will keep the camera
 motionless and allow long exposure times, there is a
 theoretical problem, called "reciprocity failure," which
 may interfere with color balance in very long exposures.
 But this is never a problem as long as you don't allow
 the exposure time to exceed 1/2 second, and you'd
 probably not notice it even if you shot a 2-second
 exposure (which may occasionally be necessary when using
 bellows at maximum extension; see below).

 How do you determine exposure? There are two ways to do
 this:

 1. Most cameras have a built-in light meter that monitors
    the amount of light coming through the lens. This meter
    attempts to optimize the exposure either by averaging
    the total light hitting the film plane (an "averaging
    meter") or using a small sample area (usually the
    center of the field) to measure the amount of light
    focused on that particular spot (a "spot meter"). In an
    "aperture priority" system, the meter then looks at the
    aperture you have set on the lens and automatically
    adjusts the shutter speed to give the desired exposure.
    In an "shutter priority" system, you set the shutter
    speed and the light meter automatically adjusts the
    aperture. These functions are available in what is
    referred to generally as the "auto" mode. In addition,
    most modern cameras have a "program" mode, which
    completely automates exposure determination by choosing
    both the aperture and the shutter speed for you. This
    means all you have to do is compose the picture, focus,
    and push the button.

    Program mode has been a boon for photography in
    general, because it allows you to concentrate on
    composition and not have to worry about fiddling with
    aperture rings and shutter speed knobs. There is,
    however, a price to pay, especially in technical
    photography. The main problem is that automatic
    exposure systems (except in high-end cameras) are
    standardized for snapshot type photography, where there
    is no striking difference between background and
    subject illumination. Also, an automatic exposure
    system will attempt to make the subject have a
    "neutral" brightness. In technical photography, we do
    not necessarily want this; we want brain to look light
    and spleen to look dark, just like these respective
    subjects appear to us in real-time. Therefore, I do not
    use the camera's automatic exposure system for routine
    specimen photography.

 2. Because of the above considerations, I recommend that
    you take advantage of the rigidly standardized exposure
    environment of the copy stand and virtually always use
    manual exposures. Determine the ideal exposure by
    shooting a roll of film at various settings and then
    stick with this exposure when shooting specimens. You
    can still use the light meter when faced with an
    unstandardized situation, such as having one of your
    four floodlights burn out on Saturday and not being
    able to find a replacement.

    Parenthetically, I have found through experience that
    when shooting documents of black printing on white
    paper, you should use an exposure one stop brighter
    than your standard setting for specimens. For instance,
    if you normally shoot specimens at f/8 and 1/8 sec, you
    should choose f/8 and 1/4 sec when shooting a document.
    Never, never let the camera shoot black-on-white
    printed documents on "Auto" or "Program," because the
    camera will think you want the white paper to appear
    neutral and will force a bad underexposure.

    Another hint: When forced with shooting pictures on a
    set-up you are unfamiliar with, you may have no idea
    what settings to use. A good solution is to meter on
    the palm of your hand (believe it or not, it makes no
    difference what color you are; the palm of everyone's
    hand looks about the same to a light meter) and note
    what settings the camera's light meter indicates.
    Simply switch over to manual and enter these settings.
    Then you can shoot away and always get at least
    acceptable results.

II. FOCUS

There are two things to consider here, methods of focusing
and depth of focus.

A. Methods of focusing.

 1. Autofocus. Most manufacturers today produce autofocus
    cameras aimed at various markets. The most popular of
    these, aimed at the advanced amateur and the
    professional, are probably the Minolta Maxxum series
    and the Canon EOS. These cameras are packed with
    automation which allow automatic film advance and
    rewind, automatic and program exposure modes, and
    autofocus. Automatic focusing uses a system whereby a
    computer in the camera uses vertical lines in the
    subject and focuses the lens by analyzing these lines.
    I have not used autofocus systems in specimen
    photography but have experience with them for snap
    shooting. The problem is that if there are insufficient
    vertical lines in the picture, the focusing system with
    be fooled and can leave you with a terribly out-of-
    focus picture. I have stuck with manual focusing for
    specimen photography but would love to hear what the
    autofocus aficionados have to say about its use.

 2. Manual focus. In this method you simply view the
    subject through the viewfinder and turn a focusing ring
    until the subject sharpens. If you have a choice, I
    recommend a viewfinder with a split-field focusing
    prism to help with critical focusing, but others prefer
    a focusing grid, which, as far as I know, is only
    available on high-end cameras, like the Nikon F series.

B. Depth of field

 It is easy to focus on a flat object, such as a slice of
 brain, but things get stickier when photographing objects
 with depth, such as a windowed pediatric heart specimen.
 Shooting these subjects requires a knowledge of the
 concept of depth of field. It turns out that the zone of
 depth at which the camera is in focus is greater at
 smaller apertures (larger f/ numbers) than at larger
 apertures. Therefore focusing is very critical when the
 lens is "wide open" but much less so when "stopped down."
 Let's say you are shooting an opened colon to
 demonstrate, en face, a large villous adenoma. If you
 focused on the "top" of the tumor (the part nearest the
 camera) and shot the picture with the lens aperture at
 f/2, the tip of the adenoma would be in focus, but the
 sides would be slightly out of focus, and the surrounding
 colonic mucosa would be totally out of focus and probably
 not recognizable. However, if you stop down to f/16, the
 entire specimen would be in focus. Since this results in
 decreasing the exposure by six stops, you would have to
 compensate by increasing the exposure time by a factor of
 two to the sixth power, or 64. For good depth of field
 and optimal lens resolution, I use f/8 routinely and
 reserve f/16 and f/22 for subjects like the windowed
 heart. Most cameras have a "depth-of-field preview
 button" that lets you stop down the lens to its preset
 aperture, so you can view how much depth-of-field you'll
 end up with in the resulting picture (normally the
 aperture diaphragm stays wide open until the instant the
 picture is taken, so you have a nice, bright viewfinder
 in which to compose the shot).

III. IMAGE SIZE

The size of the image in the camera depends on 1) the size
of the subject (of course), 2) the distance of the subject
from the camera, and 3) the focal length of the lens. The
focal length is the distance from the lens to the image when
the lens is focused on infinity. The effects of lens focal
length are as follows:

The greater the focal length,

 1. The larger the image appears for a given distance.
 2. The farther away from the subject you can be for a
    given image size.
 3. The more critical the damping of camera motion to
    prevent blurring.
 4. The slower and more expensive the lens.
 5. The less the sense of depth and perspective.
 6. The less the curvilinear distortion of straight lines.
 7. The _more_ flattering to the face in portrait
    photography (makes face less moony and nose less
    prominent).
 8. The _less_ flattering to the body in figure
    photography (makes subject look stouter).

Depth of field (see section II.B, above) is independent of
focal length in the world of close-up photography [this is
not true in landscape photography, where lenses with shorter
focal lengths have greater depths of field].

Lenses are classified in groups based on their focal lengths
and other properties:

 16 - 35 MM (WIDE-ANGLE LENSES). Rarely used in medical
 photography, these are best for landscape and
 architectural photography. They make landscapes look more
 expansive and buildings more imposing. They tend to be
 extremely sharp lenses that have excellent contrast.

 50 - 58 MM ("NORMAL" LENSES). These are used for most
 routine work, including gross photography. It is rarely
 necessary to use anything other than a normal lens for
 our purposes except when shooting close-ups so extreme
 that the bulk of the lens shadows the subject, so that it
 cannot be illuminated sufficiently. In this case you
 need:

 80 - 135 MM (MEDIUM TELEPHOTO LENSES).These are used for
 high-magnification macrophotography to increase working
 distance, and for "over the shoulder" intraoperative
 photography. For instance, you can be twice as far away
 from the subject with a 100 mm focal length telephoto
 than with a 50 mm normal lens and still get the same
 image size on film.

 200 - 2000 MM (LONG TELEPHOTO LENSES). These are usually
 not used in medical photography but are indispensable in
 sports, nature, and journalistic photography.

 MACRO LENSES. Operationally, the only thing special about
 these is that they have an extra long focusing extension
 to allow you to focus on very close objects. They are
 generally available in the "normal" focal length and the
 medium telephoto ranges. For instance, Nikon makes two
 excellent macros, a 60 mm and a 105 mm. Since they are
 aimed at the technical market, macro lenses tend to have
 excellent optics, are very durable, and are several times
 more expensive than normal lenses of corresponding focal
 lengths. Most macros in the normal lens category allow
 you to focus down to objects close enough to give you a
 "3:1" or "2:1" ratio; that is, the image size is one-
 third or one-half, respectively, the size of the subject.
 Most macro lenses can be used with an inexpensive
 extension ring, which allows focusing down to 1:1 or
 "life size," i.e., the image size is the same as the
 subject size (Sigma makes a very nice, not-too-expensive
 macro lens that focuses down to 1:1 without an extension
 ring, and Nikon's  much pricier 105 mm AF macro lens
 allows a 1:1 focus). This allows you to take some
 breathtaking shots of otherwise unimpressive subjects,
 such as pituitary adenomas. You can even make a corpus
 luteum look spectacular.

 VARIABLE FOCAL LENGTH (ZOOM LENSES). These are very
 convenient for general photography, since you don't have
 to move the camera so much. I am still waiting for
 someone to come up with an affordable zoom lens that is
 macro at all focal lengths and can focus on close
 objects. Many of the lenses advertised as "macro-zooms"
 are really just zoom lenses that allow close-up
 photography only at a fixed focal length. When in "zoom"
 mode, such lenses are not macro. Other zooms supposedly
 have "continuous close focusing" throughout their range
 of focal length, but the specs I have seen on these show
 that they all have a minimal focusing distance that is
 too long for practical use on a copy stand. My advice is
 too stay away from zooms unless you are really up on the
 capabilities of the individual models and know exactly
 what you need. If are absolutely set on using a zoom
 lens, you could try this: get a regular (non-macro) zoom
 lens which zooms by turning a ring rather than sliding a
 slide (i.e., a zoom lens which is not a "one-touch" zoom).
 Then put extension rings between the zoom lens and the
 camera. Extension rings are simply a set of tubes which
 extend the lens forward from the body of the camera.
 This will give you a zoom lens which focuses close-up
 but not far away. Extension rings can usually be had
 for less than $100. Appropriate zoom lens focal lengths
 would include 28 - 85mm and 35 - 105mm.

 BELLOWS. This is not a lens at all but simply a shade
 that extends the lens very far away from the body of the
 camera. This allows you to take true photomacrographs,
 producing an image size up to three times that of the
 subject. For instance, when shooting a 105 mm lens on a
 bellows at full extension, the Lincoln Memorial on the
 reverse side of a U.S. penny fills a 35mm frame. Multiply
 this magnification by the amount you get when projecting
 a slide in a lecture hall and you get some idea of how
 Brobdingnagian a world you can present to an awed
 audience. The only problem with the bellows is that light
 intensity fall-off (as per the inverse square law) at
 maximum extension requires you increase the exposure
 accordingly. Also you have to be extremely careful about
 camera motion, which is magnified correspondingly.

IV. COMPOSITION

If you consider yourself more of a technical type than an
artiste, you are probably intimidated by this aspect of
photography. Although Ernst Haases and Edward Steichens are
probably born and not made, much technique of composition
can be easily learned by the average eye. In gross
photography, first step is good specimen preparation. This
is what separates the excellent from the mediocre; the
inspired pathologist from the drudge; art from mere visual
documentation. After you get comfortable with the camera,
you should spend almost all your time preparing the
specimen, with the actual photography being a brief
anticlimax. Here are some tips I find useful:

A. Cut away tissue that is of no interest, or that obscures
  the interesting features.

B. Use props to position the specimen when necessary. A
  slice of liver needs no props, but a gallbladder looks
  better when you shove a few wads of paper under the
  periphery to make it look like the saccular structure
  that it is. Modeling clay is also a good material from
  which to devise custom props.

C. Watch out for the obtrusive ruler. A lot of pathologists
  remonstrate incredulously when I tell them I almost never
  shoot a specimen with a ruler in the field. For one
  thing, no one has made a ruler yet that is as unobtrusive
  as I would like. Most specimens need no ruler, especially
  full organs or full organ slices. We all know how big a
  lung is; if not, we're only there for the free lunch
  anyway. If you really want to know how big the lesion
  was, just read the gross; it even gives all three
  dimensions! If you really want to impress the conference
  attendees with how big a goiter is, take a picture of it
  with an everyday object, such as set of keys. Or, better
  yet, bring the gross specimen to the conference and
  ceremoniously drop it on the table with a loud thud.

  I quit using rulers when I realized I never looked at
  them except to marvel at how distracting they were. I
  really don't think any one else looks at them either.
  But if you're so anal that I can never convince you to
  lose the ruler, do me a favor and shoot just one of your
  frames on each specimen without it. I'll guarantee you
  that nine times out of ten, that's the pic that you're
  going to want to show at the conference.

D. Keep the background clean. This is a real pain, but to do
  otherwise really compromises the photograph. It is much
  easier to keep things clean when dealing with a fixed
  specimen than a fresh, bloody one. On a related note, try
  to keep the camera clean. Layers of dried gore
  accumulating on the body of a tough Nikon F3 probably
  won't hurt the camera, but it tends to gross out certain
  people, particularly OSHA inspectors.

E. When photographing lungs or hollow viscera, use inflation-
  fixed specimens when possible. You have to resist all
  sorts of pressure from various circles to cut up the
  specimen when it is in the fresh state, but, then again,
  all great artists suffer for their work. I have yet to
  see a gross photograph of uninflated, unfixed lung that
  was any good. Inflation fixation of gut segments delays
  your diagnosis a day but rewards you with gross
  photographs that would bring tears to the eyes of any
  radiologist.

F. Try to get rid of as much blood as possible. Otherwise,
  the specimen ends up being just varying shades of red and
  pink.

G. Watch out for distracting highlights. Fresh specimens
  usually have very shiny surfaces that produce glare.
  There are several things you can do to cut the glare on a
  fresh specimen:

 1. Formalin dip for just a few minutes; this preserves
    color but dulls the surface; in overnight-fixed
    specimens which have lost their color, soak in 70% EtOH
    to partially recover color.

 2. Turn off room lights.

 3. Consider changing the lighting situation of your set-
    up. Nice copy stands are usually set up with four big
    floodlights. You may consider turning off the two on
    the front of the stand and leave the two on the rear
    on. Remember to adjust your exposure to accomodate the
    loss of these lights.

 4. Polarizer/analyzer filters do a great job, but the big
    polarizers that go between the floodlights and the
    subject are very expensive and fade out fairly rapidly.

H. Photographic backdrops. The choice of a proper backdrop
  is essential for a professional looking photograph. The
  best background is the one no one knows is there. Several
  options are available:

 1. Transilluminated light board with non-glare glass -
    expensive; klutzes drop things on the glass and break
    it; departmental business manager is incredulous at
    expense of replacement and usually stalls its purchase.

 2. Wet black velvet - less expensive ($12/yard); reusable
    for a long time if you're careful; keep fresh, bloody
    tissue off! Give each resident his/her own piece. Of
    course, if you shoot anything that may have infectious
    agents on it, you can't re-use the velvet, unless you
    can find a way to sterilize it (another argument in
    favor of shooting only fixed tissue).

 3. Water immersion tray - Incredible shots of delicate,
    "three-dimensional" objects make you into an amateur
    Lennart Nilsson; solves problems of gravity and glare
    simultaneously for such objects as villous adenomas,
    chorionic villi, emphysematous lungs, etc. In my
    experience, it takes quite a bit of patience to get a
    good shot, as undesirable bits of grunge tend to float
    into the field of view just as you are releasing the
    shutter.

 4. Towel from surgery - sure sign of an amateur; an
    embarrassment to say the least. However, if that's all
    you've got, ask for a clean towel to replace the bloody
    one they handed you the specimen on.

V. COLOR BALANCE

We perceive a sheet of paper illuminated by an incandescent
bulb to be just as white as if it were illuminated by direct
sunlight. This goes along with our concept that "white"
light is composed of light of all colors. This is true to an
extent, but various "white" light sources produce their
component colors in varying proportions. For instance, the
surface of the sun has a temperature of about 6000 Kelvins
and has much more blue light in it than the radiating
surface of a tungsten filament glowing at 3200 Kelvins,
which has more red light. This relation between temperature
of a glowing object and its color is well known to most
people (although not by its scientific name - Wien's First
Law), since we are taught from the fifth grade that a blue
flame is hotter than a red one.

Although the neurological visual processing system behind
our eyes compensates for this variability, the film in a
camera cannot. The solution is to make film where
sensitivity to the colors of the spectrum is specifically
balanced for the color distribution of the light source.
When shooting in daylight or with an electronic flash, we
need to use "daylight" film. Alternatively, when using
incandescent lights (such as the floods on the copy stand),
we need to use "tungsten" film. This is not some theoretical
consideration. If you try to use daylight film with the
floodlights you will get an unacceptably orange picture;
conversely, shooting tungsten film with a flash will produce
a picture that looks like it was painted by Picasso during
his "blue" period.

VI. FILM SELECTION

You will select film based on your need for good resolution,
your budget, the necessity of rapid processing turnaround
time, and the format in which your photographic work is to
be presented.

A. Color transparency film. These yield the 2" x 2" mounted
  transparencies known affectionately as "kodachromes" (in
  the way that facial tissue is known as "kleenex"). The
  actual frame size of the transparency is 24 x 36 mm.

 1. E-6 process color reversal film (Ektachrome,
    Fujichrome). Compared with Kodachrome (see below),
    these are expensive; they have quirky color response
    (being notoriously poor in rendition of eosinophil
    granules, which look kind of dull purple rather than
    vivid orange), and the slides fade with time (although
    this may not be true of newer films in this category).
    Nevertheless, the E-6 films are by far the most popular
    in med center settings because of the ready
    availability of the E-6 process. Most professionally
    oriented processors can routinely turn around the film
    in four hours. With a readily-available kit, you can
    even process these films at home for about US$3 per 24-
    exposure roll (plus a one-time US$30 investment for a
    developing tank and reel).

 2. Dye injection film (Kodachrome). Kodachrome is
    superior in every way to the E-6 films, except that the
    processing is slow and is usually done in large
    reference centers where the film must be sent.
    Eosinophils look great, and the slides last essentially
    forever if stored properly. It is difficult to find
    tungsten versions of Kodachrome, but the daylight
    versions can be shot under tungsten illumination if a
    special filter is used.

B. Color negative film (Kodacolor, Ektar). Also generally
  available only in daylight versions, these films yield
  color negatives which must be printed. It is preferable
  to use color negative film for posters, rather than
  having color prints made from your transparencies. This
  is because color prints from transparencies usually
  suffer from enhanced contrast that compromises the
  accuracy of the rendition. When having color prints
  processed, you must work closely with a skilled print
  processor for good, publication-quality prints. The
  automated printing machines used in "one-hour" facilities
  are not capable of producing an accurate print from a
  color negative of scientific subject (unless, perhaps, it
  is a portrait of the scientist).

C. Polachrome film. This abomination of a transparency film
  develops in a few minutes in a processor you can keep in
  your desk drawer. It is extremely expensive, and the
  dense emulsion makes slides too dark on projection; the
  colors are less than impressive. It is best not to let
  the clinicians know you have a Polachrome processor. They
  will start giving you the conference cases even later and
  will not realize how lousy the pictures are, while you
  are grinding your teeth trying to find that audience-
  pleasing mitosis somewhere on the screen.

D. Black-and-white film. Not to go into this at any length,
  but you should use this for originals to be used for
  publication. Black-and-whites made from color negatives
  or transparencies are generally second-rate. Also you can
  experiment with color contrast filters, which can really
  improve results.

NOTES ON PURCHASING PHOTOGRAPHIC EQUIPMENT

1. Only a fool or the government pays retail for photographic
  equipment.
2. The best prices are available via mailorder. You can find
  ads for these companies in any photography-oriented
  magazine.
3. The only drawback to mailorder is that you have to know
  exactly what you want when you order it. Mailorder outfits
  are notorious for bait-and-switch. Decide what you want
  by reading and talking with other photographers before
  calling to make the order; otherwise, you _will_ be taken
  to the cleaners by these extremely effective salespeople.
4. Don't pay any attention to brand-specific chauvinism.
  Many photographers are quick to look down their noses at
  any brands other than Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, and Leica.
  I think you will be very pleased with other brands, for
  which you will pay a _lot_ less money. The major factor
  which determines the quality of photographs is the skill
  of the photographer, not the brand of the equipment.

                     ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Dr. Donald McGavin, Professor of Pathobiology, Univ. of
Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, generously
provided many fine suggestions from detailed review of the
first version of this paper, and I have incorporated most of
them into the current version.

Lisbeth Kuehn provided some helpful information concerning
depth of field, which I was previously unaware of.

Norbert Fuerst sent me some good information on macro and
zoom lenses.

I also wish to posthumously thank my father, G. O. Uthman,
who taught me, among many other things, the basics of
photography.

All opinions given here are ultimately mine, as are any errors.

_______________________________________________________________

An HTML version of this FAQ is available through the author's home
page at:

              <http://www.neosoft.com/~uthman/>


                         IMPORTANT

Please send any constructive comments about this paper to Ed
Uthman, <[email protected]>. I am especially interested in
correcting any errors that may have crept in.

                     COPYRIGHT NOTICE

Copyright (c) 1995, Edward O. Uthman. This document may be
freely distributed. It may be reformatted for purposes of
compatibility. It may be freely used for personal and
educational purposes, but it may not be used for commercial
purposes without prior written consent of the author. It may
be included in toto or in part as components of other
documents with proper attribution.

                        DISCLAIMER

While I have made every reasonable attempt to include only
accurate information, it is possible that some of the
information is wrong and may result in inadequate photos.
Photography is an empirical technique, so experiment liberally
with test rolls before "shooting for keeps."