Jumping spider eating cricket: test of new flash bracket and diffuser

Jumping spider (Phidippus sp.) feeding on a two-week old house cricket (Acheta domesticus)

OK, it has been way too long since I posted anything substantial. This time, however, I have a pretty good excuse for my lack of productivity: two weeks ago I lost my job. After 13 years with the same organisation the decision was made to cut my program (and me). I wasn’t given any warning and I have been scrambling ever since. Mind you, we are having a beautiful summer and I should be enjoying all my new found free time. But the whole loss of income thing is rather distracting…especially with two kids and a mortgage.

But enough about all that, I didn’t create this blog just to whinge about my personal life.

My subject today once again is a jumping spider [either Phidippus borealis or P. johnsoni—I’m really not sure how to distinguish them]. And once again it is eating another critter [I tend to post a lot of pictures of one critter eating another don’t?].

Jumping spider (Phidippus sp.) feeding on a two-week old house cricket (Acheta domesticus).

I have to say that I am really happy with these photos. I love jumping spiders and as far as I’m concerned one can never have too many pictures of these delightful little beasts [or of bugs eating other bugs apparently]. But I am especially pleased with these images because they are the first test of a new flash bracket and diffuser I made. For the past while I have been relying too much on my ring flash. It is really easy to use but I haven’t been completely satisfied with the results I have been getting. I’ll write more about the new set-up in a following post [no, really, I will]. Right now I’ll just write about this particular spider and how it came to star on this blog.

Yesterday I was home with my two boys. They are on summer vacation and of course I am now an unemployed bum for the first time in 30 years [sorry, whinging again]. They know of my interest in creepy crawlies [which they sort of share] and are always keen to point out any interesting bugs they spot, whether they are dead or alive. Well, yesterday they called me into the living room because there was a black spider on the ceiling. I went and took a look and found this nice young jumping spider. It was about half grown, approximately nine millimetres long.

Jumping spider (Phidippus sp.) feeding on a two-week old house cricket (Acheta domesticus).

At first I was just going to release the spider outside, same as I do for any other spider that wanders into the house. But I thought maybe I’d hang on to it for a couple of hours so I could take a few photos. Its abdomen looked a little small, so I decided to give it a meal in the meantime. So the spider went into a plastic cup with a mesh lid and I tossed in a two-week old cricket for it to munch. However, although the cricket was very small, it was still a little too big for the spider—or so I first thought. The spider jumped on the cricket a couple of times, but seemed to be trying to kick it away rather than feed on it. It then [the spider that is] retreated to the top of the cup and stayed there while the cricket explored the bottom.

A couple of hours later, after a leisurely dinner on the patio [by the family and I, not the spider], I grabbed my camera and the cup and went outside to shoot. I chose a large dead leaf from the lawn as a background. The spider was still at the top of the cup and the cricket was still milling around the bottom. I took the screen off the top and just as I went to shoo the spider out on the leaf it leapt the length (depth?) of the cup and tackled the cricket. So much for it being too big for the spider to catch!

I have to admit, I was a little disappointed with the spider’s timing as I would like to have taken a few photos sans cricket first. But on the other hand it is much easier to corral these critters when they are hauling around an insect as big as they are.

Jumping spider (Phidippus sp.) feeding on a two-week old house cricket (Acheta domesticus). This photo was taken with a Zuiko 60mm macro lens + two extension tubes (10mm + 16mm). The magnification is approximately 1.5:1

And that brings me to the images themselves. I am really pleased with the quality of the light. Compare these photos with those I posted previously of another feeding Phidippus (see: A jumping spider joins the family BBQ) and I’m sure you will agree that these are superior. Of course the background and composition also makes a difference, but in general the quality of these later photos are (in my humble opinion) much better. I am particularly fond of the image at the top of the page. I love the composition and the way that the cricket is in focus for the length of the body. The spider had backed into a little cave made by the curled edge of the leaf and I really like the “feel” of the photo—if that makes any sense.

In my next post I’ll provide the details about the new flash set-up I used to take these photos. Yes, I know, my posts have been rather few and far between as of late. But I’ll write again promptly. After all, I’m unemployed now right? What else do I have to do?

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/200 sec)
Lighting: Olympus FL-36 flash (1/4 power)
ISO: 200

Video: tiny tropical harvestman eating midge

 

Juvenile Central American harvestman (Acromares vittatum) cleaning the tip of one of its legs. The harvestman had a leg span of approx. 15 mm.

Once again I’m writing about one critter eating another…

The video below shows a tiny juvenile Central American harvestmen (Acromares vittatum) very rapidly devouring a chironomid midge (like a mosquito that doesn’t bite). There are lots more photos to follow in a much longer blog…so consider this to be a bit of a teaser.

I shot this video last weekend on my kitchen table using 3 tabletop LCD lamps. Unfortunately I didn’t get the colour balance quite right so the video is a bit warm. I’d also like to use a lower ISO to get a higher resolution, but that would mean substantially brighter light, which I don’t know it the critters would tolerate. I need to experiment a bit more.

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: aperture priority exposure (F11 @ 1/30 sec)
Lighting: 3 Ikea LCD lamps
ISO: automatic

Whip Scorpion Meets Cricket

Juvenile African whip scorpion (Damon diadema) feeding on a two week old cricket

I’ve come to realize that I take great pleasure in photographing animals when they are feeding…especially if the critter in question is a predator (and the food, obviously, is its prey). Part of the reason is simply the fact that “action” photos tend to be more interesting than portraits—but not always so easy to take. But I also just take inordinate pleasure in observing arthropods eating. That’s a little weird isn’t it?

A few weeks ago I received some nice captive bred juvenile Damon diadema whip scorpions from a breeder in Quebec. Whip scorpions (also known as the tailless whip scorpions) belong to the order Amblypygi which are found in tropical and subtropical regions worldwide. D. diadema is one of the largest species with a leg span reaching about 20 cm (8 inches). The species ranges through Central and East Africa.

I “met” my first whip scorpion in the Amazon jungle one night back in the 90s. I shone my flashlight on this amazing beast as big as my hand and it was love at first sight.

My specimens are still very small, with a body length of approximately one centimeter and a leg span of a little more than a loonie (about 30 mm for those non-Canadians out there). The photo above is a nice picture of one of them making friends with a two week old cricket (aka dinner).

The photo couldn’t have been much easier to take. Each whip scorpion is housed in a clear plastic container (originally designed to sit in your fridge filled with baking soda) along with a large piece of bark and a moist substrate. The whip scorpions hang out on the nearly vertical bark. I set up my gear and waited until the critter was distracted by dinner. Then I just popped the top of the container off, and while holding the camera in one hand I lifted the bark up until the whip scorpion was clear of the plastic. Took the photo, and put the bark back. Easy-peasy!

These are great critters! And it’s always nice to see them enjoying their food. I guess that makes me either overly motherly or particularly demonic, depending on whether you are a whip scorpion or a cricket…

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/200 sec)
Lighting: Olympus RF-11 ring flash (TTL)
ISO: 200

Bumble bees mating update

A few posts ago I wrote about my experience with posting videos on YouTube over the past year (see: My year of posting videos—a little review). I noted at the time that my video entitled Bumble bees mating had been easily the most popular with 1649 views at the time. I also noted (unlike my other videos) the number of views of Bumble bees mating had been slowly but steadily increasing.

Well, I’m delighted, and somewhat mystified, to report that tread has continued. As of today, Bumble bees mating has now been viewed 3,246 times. Almost twice as many compared to when I last brought this up. There hasn’t been any real peak in views, just a slow trickle…an average of 40 views per day.

What really fascinates me is that only 1.5% of the views have been on the video imbedded in my blog. All the rest have been people watching on YouTube. What is even more surprising is that only 11% of the views have been referred from sites outside of YouTube (presumably my blog or a number of discussion forums I frequent). All the rest of the views have been from mobile apps and direct traffic (12%) or YouTube referrals (77%). In other words, people are mainly finding the video on YouTube and perhaps sharing it with others. I can’t help wonder how this works. Seriously, how many people search for videos about bumble bee sex?

Not that I’m complaining of course, it’s fun to check periodically and see that the number of views has gone up. I just don’t really understand why or how.

In any case, I really need to get off my butt and start shooting more video…

Cheers,
EC

A jumping spider joins the family BBQ

Juvenile Phiddipus jumping spider feeding on another spider (possibly a philodromid crab spider). Photographed with a Zuiko 6omm micro 4/3 macro lens

Last weekend I was enjoying the beautiful weather by preparing a nice BBQ dinner for the family. We had just sat down at the table (out on the deck) when my youngest son pointed out a “spider carrying another spider” (as he put it) on one of the deck posts. It turned out to be a jumping spider that had caught and was feeding on another spider. Naturally I wanted to take some photos, but seeing as we had just sat down to eat—and I am always after my boys to finish their dinner before jumping up to play with something—I opted to eat first and shoot later. So we all had dinner together: the humans ate sockeye salmon, nugget potatoes roasted in herbs and olive oil, Caesar salad, corn and a crisp white wine (yum!); while the arachnid feasted on its hapless cousin (tentatively identified as a philodromid crab spider). I have to admit it was a little torturous because the spider just sat on the post, a few feet away from me, the whole time. It munched while I munched and I expected any moment that it would finish and be on its way un-photographed.

Somewhat surprisingly the spider was still there when we finished eating (it even waited while I did the dishes). Then I was able to grab my camera and start shooting, and even more surprisingly the spider was quite cooperative…

Juvenile Phiddipus jumping spider feeding on another spider (possibly a philodromid crab spider). Photographed with a Zuiko 6omm micro 4/3 macro lens and 16mm + 10mm extension tubes.

Juvenile Phiddipus jumping spider feeding on another spider (possibly a philodromid crab spider). Photographed with a Zuiko 6omm micro 4/3 macro lens

At first, given the size of the spider I assumed it was an adult Salticus scenicus (zebra jumping spider) or Platycryptus californicus, both of which are pretty common in my back yard. But when I got a closer look through my camera lens I could see that it looked quite different from these other two species. It also behaved differently—not nearly as timid.

Juvenile Phiddipus jumping spider feeding on another spider (possibly a philodromid crab spider). Photographed with a Zuiko 6omm micro 4/3 macro lens and 16mm + 10mm extension tubes.

Juvenile Phiddipus jumping spider feeding on another spider (possibly a philodromid crab spider). Photographed with a Zuiko 6omm micro 4/3 macro lens

It turns out that the critter in question was a juvenile Phiddipus, a younger version of the jumping spider I photographed last summer feeding on a huge (compared to the spider) caterpillar (see: Macro big game hunting: a boreal jumping spider feeding on a western tent caterpillar). Apparently these spiders are pretty fierce predators for their size.

I have to admit to being a little bit uncertain about the species however. I identified the spider I photographed last summer as a boreal jumping spider (Phidippus borealis). But the spider I photographed last weekend looks identical to photos of a juvenile female red-backed jumping spider (Phidippus johnsoni) posted on Bugguide (http://bugguide.net/node/view/15740). It turns out that both P. borealis and P. johnsoni range into my area, and to be honest, I’m not so sure I can tell them apart. So do I have P. borealis or P. johnsoni in my yard? Or maybe both? At this point it’s a mystery…

A mystery that 99.99% of people really aren’t going to be concerned about! I’m really starting to sound like a nerd aren’t I? In any case, the photos turned out nice.

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/200 sec)
Lighting: Olympus RF-11 ring flash (1/2 power)
ISO: 200

Flyday April 11, 2014: the fantastic and fenominal filth fly!

 

Muscina sp., sometimes called a “filth fly”

I haven’t posted a “Flyday” for a very long time. Originally, my goal was to post a different fly photo every Friday [“Flyday”, get it?…Yeah, I know groan…], but I dropped that ball a long time ago. Sigh…

A little warning, if you are eating right now you might want to wait and read this blog after you have finished…

Muscina sp., sometimes called a “filth fly”

These pictures are of a specimen (or specimens, it’s hard to know) of Muscina. This is a small genus of flies (less than 30 species) that are found worldwide, commonly hanging around livestock facilities, restrooms, outhouses, cadavers…you can see where this going can’t you? Yup, many of these flies breed in manure and on corpses. As if that wasn’t enough, they also defecate on food and spread disease by transferring fecal material stuck to their feet to food or open wounds. Hence the common name “filth fly”. To be fair, “filth fly” seems to be a widespread term for any type of fly that is attracted to feces, urine or dead things and tends to also be applied to flesh flies (Sarcophagidae) and blow flies (Calliphoridae). Apparently another name for the Muscina is “disease-causing flies”, but that just doesn’t have the same ring to it.

Muscina sp., sometimes called a “filth fly”

So how do you photograph these critters? Well, first you get some filth…

I took these pictures last summer the day after I had put out a piece of salmon carcass to attract flies to photograph (I do this quite often, see for example: Macro photographs of insects feeding on salmon: take 2). The salmon was long gone (thrown in the garbage after the shoot), but the “essence” of dead fish must have still been present on the wood the fish had rested on. Interestingly, the fresh fish had mainly attracted flesh flies, blow flies and yellow jacket wasps (Vespula sp.). But the next day (when the fish smell would have been rancid) it was these flies that were hanging around—along with the bald faced hornet that was trying to catch them. I wonder if that is the succession of arrivals at a corps too. I’ll have to check on that…

Anyhow, getting the shots was just a matter of patience—waiting for a fly to pause long enough, and in the right position for the picture. I shot at F11 as a compromise between depth of field and resolution.

Muscina sp., sometimes called a “filth fly”

I hope you agree that despite their rather unpleasant but ecologically very important natural history (well, maybe except for the whole defecating on food thing), they make for great photos!

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/160 sec)
Lighting: Olympus flash (I don’t remember which one or the setting—oops!)
ISO: 200

Update: way back on Aug 23, 2012 I posted a couple of fly photos I created using photo stacking (see: More image stacking: portraits of flies). I originally misidentified one of the specimens as Calliphora vomitoria when it was actually Calliphora vicina. Many thanks to Marcello for leaving a comment that corrected my mistake. That post has now been updated with new information.

My year of posting videos—a little review

At about this time last year I bought my newest camera, an Olympus OM-D EM-5. One of the (many) attractions of this camera was the option of shooting high definition video—something I’d wanted to try my hand at for a long time. My goal was to complement my photography by producing high quality video of tiny critters to post on YouTube and my blog. Needless to say, video production is quite different from still photography and my learning curve has been steep. As a result (and due to the sheer lack of time) I have only created four videos, all of which I have shared on macrocritters.

My first video was: Western thatching ants in spring, March 2013 and it turned out painfully amateurish. I really can’t watch it without cringing a little [see blog here: My first attempt at video: western thatching ants in action]. The second was: Thai micro crab (Limnopilos naiyanetri) and was definitely better (at least I used a tripod this time) [see blog here: Portrait of a Thai micro crab]. My third video was: Bumble bees mating (of two half black bumble bees mating on my back deck last summer [see blog here: half black bumble bees mating]). This video was kind of fun to make [for me and the bees, badum tish…] as I edited different views and put it all to music. My final video (so far) was Charles goes on a zombie walk: my youngest son dressed as a zombie and interacting with other participants of the 2013 Vancouver Zombie Walk [see blog here: the 2013 Vancouver zombie walk]. This is easily my most ambitious and best video. I spent many hours working on the editing, selecting music and generally tinkering with the production. I consider it my magnum opus (so far) and actually still enjoy watching it. How can you go wrong with a video that has good music, a cute little boy and zombies?

So, after all these months I thought I’d present a little report card on how they have all been received on YouTube. As of today (April 8, 2014) their standings, from lowest numbers of views to highest are as follows:

In last place, with only 126 views is Charles goes on a zombie walk! I’m absolutely surprised at that! I guess good production, a cute little boy (and some cute if bloody girls) and zombies aren’t enough for the YouTube audience. Tough crowd.

In third place, with 380 views, is Western thatching ants in spring, March 2013 with 380 views. I bet all of the viewers are readers of this blog! Thanks folks!

In second place, with 766 views is Thai micro crab (Limnopilos naiyanetri. I have to admit, for21 seconds of footage of an obscure species of little crab, that doesn’t seem so bad!

Finally, in top spot (drum roll please) is: Bumble bees mating with an astonishing 1630 1649 views! Not only has it received far more views than any of the other videos, the number of views has been slowly but steadily increasing over the past few weeks. In fact, the number of views increased by 19 since I started writing this blog yesterday! A month ago there were less than 1000 views. Another cool thing is that if you google “half black bumble bee” the first three images that come up are of the same two bees and are from my blog (see ). That’s pretty cool! I guess the old adage is true, sex really does sell—even if it is between bees!

Cheers,
EC

Portrait of a bald-faced hornet

Portrait of a bald-faced hornet, Dolichovespula maculate. This species isn’t a true hornet; it is a type of yellowjacket wasp.

I have to say, I’m really digging this picture of a bald-faced hornet (Dolichovespula maculata). The cool thing is that I barely remember taking it last summer. As I noted in my previous post, up until last week I hadn’t picked-up my camera for months. But I did a lot of shooting last summer and have quite a number of images stored on my computer. So I went into my files to find something to post. I was going through a series of photos of flesh flies that I just barely remember taking when I came upon this portrait. What a nice surprise! And how the heck did I forget about this image?

I love the details in the face! The textured white face and black markings make it look like it’s wearing a mask made from an animal skull. I’m also fascinated by the way the wasp is resting with its front legs off the ground. I’ve noticed before that these critters do this, but I have no idea why. Does it allow a quick getaway, or maybe keeps the front legs free to help capture prey? If anyone knows, please leave a comment.

The sad thing is that is has been so long, and I have been so distracted by other interests (see I’m Baaaack) that I don’t remember all the technical details about taking the photo. I know I shot it with the OM-D E-M5 using the 60mm macro lens. But I have no idea whether I was using the Olympus RF-11 ring flash or the Olympus FL-36 flash with diffuser. I’m pretty sure it was the ring flash, but I’m not sure. I guess that is another good thing about posting on my blog—it gives me a record of my photography to refer back to and augment my admittedly spotty memory.

Wait, what was I talking about?

Cheers,
EC

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/160 sec)
Lighting: Olympus flash (I don’t remember which one or the setting—oops!)
ISO: 200

Video: the 2013 Vancouver zombie walk

Earlier this month I took my youngest son (six) to the 2013 Vancouver zombie walk. What is a zombie walk you might ask? Basically it’s an event that involves people dressing-up as zombies and going for a mob walk through a city. Planned zombie walks occur in many cities around the world. This was the ninth annual Vancouver zombie walk. There was a huge mob of easily a thousand or more people. Interestingly, I think the photographers may have outnumbered the zombies! It was great fun and yes, we were both dressed as zombies. I took my camera and tried to shoot video from the perspective of a six year old. The YouTube video linked to below below is the result. 

What do zombies and my six year old son have to do with macro photography or tiny wildlife? Well, nothing really. My son is small, but hardly macro sized. And zombies are creepy, but not creepy-crawlers. No, this could be considered a completely gratuitous opportunity for me to show off a “home movie”. 

On the other hand, I have been working to improve my videography techniques with the goal of eventually posting more and much better wildlife videos. My last video attempt (see Video: half-black bumble bees mating) was far better than my previous video postings. And today’s video is the best yet. It was also the most time consuming to shoot and edit. I learned a LOT about shooting and editing through making this video, and that will translate to improved critter videos in the future. 

One of the biggest challenges to shooting macro video is getting the lighting right and especially getting enough light to shoot at a low ISO with small enough aperture for decent depth of field. If you compare the stills on my Video: half-black bumble bees mating post to the video, the difference in both the quality of the light and the depth of field is striking. I clearly have a lot to learn. Working on this video about my son allowed me to relax and not worry so much about technical issues. I was able to just have fun and be creative. After all, I was with my son and we were both dressed as zombies, how could I not have fun? 

The other benefit of working on this video was that I shot a lot of footage, which gave me ample opportunity to experiment with editing. I feel much more prepared for my next macro video attempt. 

I have spent quite a bit of time on YouTube lately, mainly learning techniques for Adobe Premier Pro, the software I used to edit both this video and half-black bumble bees mating. It’s amazing what a resource YouTube has become! But old-school research has been just as important. Over the past month or so I have read four books on video and film making. Two were very helpful, the other two, not so much. The following are a few brief comments and recommendations about each book. 

First, two negative reviews: 

• Careers In Wildlife Film-making by Piers Warren, 2006. The blurb about this book on Chapters/Indigo states: “The essential book by Piers Warren, packed with guidance and advice for aspiring makers of natural history films…” I beg to differ. There is nothing essential about this book. It is a series of bios of people working in the wildlife film industry, each of which talks about what they do and how they got their start. It’s boring and, not very helpful. Worse, it is dated, having been written before YouTube and the use of DSLRs for video production. I found this book to be a waste of money. 
• Wildlife Film-making: Looking To The Future by Piers Warren, 2011. I made the mistake of buying this book along with Careers In Wildlife Film-making online. This volume is equally boring and unhelpful. Another waste of money. 

Now, two positive reviews: 

• The Visual Story: Creating the Visual Structure of Film, TV and Digital Media by Bruce Block, 2007. This is a serious book about visual structure of a video or film, and how to link story and visuals. I learned a tremendous amount from this book and now find myself watching films with a much greater appreciation of the art and skill of cinematography. It’s not a casual read, but I strongly recommend it. 
• How To Shoot Video That Doesn’t Suck: Advice to Make Any Amateur Look Like a Pro by Steve Stockman, 2011. This book is hands-down the most useful reference I have found. It’s well written and fun to read. Best of all it is full of practical advice directed to the amateur videographer. I highly recommend it. 

OK, that’s enough of a preamble…I now present you with my latest video attempt, Charles goes on a zombie walk: 

I hope you enjoyed the video and would love to read any comments. I hope the book reviews were useful too. I’d appreciate any references to video production that you would like to recommend. 

Cheers
EC 

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 12-50mm micro four thirds zoom
Settings: shutter priority exposure (@ 1/50 sec shutter speed)
Lighting: Natural light
ISO: 200

Flyday August 23, 2013: portrait of a flesh fly

A flesh fly (Sarcophaga sp.) feeding on a salmon carcass.

When in doubt, post a picture of a flesh fly… 

There is no real story to go with this picture. It’s just another photo of a beautiful red-eyed flesh fly (Sarcophaga sp.) feeding on a salmon carcass. I’ve already posted once today, but it is Friday, and time to post another fly photo. This is probably the same species I posted on July 26, 2013 (see the fabulous flesh fly), but it wasn’t on the same piece of fish. This piece had been sitting out in the sun for a while and was quite dried out. 

I never get tired of photographing these critters. I just love the red eyes, white face and all those fantastic hairs (setae). 

Happy Flyday!
EC 

The technical stuff:
Camera: Olympus OM-D E-M5
Lens: Zuiko 60mm micro four thirds macro
Settings: manual exposure (F11 @ 1/200 sec)
Lighting: Olympus RF-11 ring flash (1/4-1/2 power)
ISO: 200