Hibiscus also

This is the x-ray image with slight blue tinge to simulate x-ray film view on a light box.

This is very neat Gary. I do love the detail you've captured. Surprisingly (or maybe not) I prefer the negative. I think it has more impact but Terri prefers the other, so It's probably just my penchant for dark bgs. (smile)

Compositionally, I think this would be stronger if there were no overlap in the image elements, except for the pistil and bloom. I also think more of a macro would make a very interesting image, although I have no idea though what resolution the machines are capable of. I like your processing and conversion very much. The structural detail is absolutely fascinating. I'm looking forward to the next.

pat

How cool and artistic. Fabulous, really. Of these two posted here, I prefer the high key version, but both are great. The colorized version posted in PA is also great. So, how much are x-ray machines?

Hardly worth mentioning, but I'd probably crop a little off the top.

Wonderful results here. I prefer the first version.
Thanks for the explanation.

D&L

My goodness - Gary this is superb. Simply love the finest of fine details the XRays have brought out. Overlapping portions is a very minor thing - I did not even think of those when I first opened the post. Even the innards of the buds have come out in so much detail

WoW! How beautiful and unique is that? What a wonderful technique even with all the manual work you put into it. I really love the soft delicate look and with all the detail, us detail fanatics could want.
This inspired me sooooo much that I grabbed an armful of flowers from the garden and drove to the local General Hospital. I showed a copy of your image to the head X-ray technician but he still called security and had me removed, now what?

Another wonderful image Gary. I echo Pat's comment about not having overlapping elements. Don't know if you have seen the magazine or if your library carries it: Garden Design. They had an issue late last year I believe of ferns with all the photos being radiographic. You can find them on their web site www.gardendesign.com. Just search their site for Gallery of Ferns. Might give you some ideas. From the brief amount I've read on the subject it seems the newer m/cs are really too powerful for floral work. The older "retired" ones are better. Don't know if that's the case really or if your hosital/clinic would have such m/cs to try?? Looking forward to the next in th eseries if you decide to carry on.

Gary: I wonder what would happen if I ordered a CT scan of one of my flowers? The radiologists at our hospital would then be certain that I had lost my marbles. Both images are very cool but I much prefer the original high key version. Superb creativity.>=))>

Hi Gary Flowers are not covered be medicare in Canada So i'm stuck with my puny camera I'm amazed by you fine imaginative floral radiography work, but still prefer the last post
Albert Darmo

Thanks everyone for your comments. It is encouraging me to do more.

Pat:
I also like the negative more but most people are more used to looking at positives and can relate to them more and that is why I have put the positive one first. The resolution of this is 1:1 - like a scan or contact print. I suppose one can do macro on this and the mammo machine can have up to 2x magnification (I think digital enlargement but in the film days the film cassette was placed further back). I am still finding my ways with this technique and I take your point about overlapping. However, unlike scan, you cannot weigh down the specimen as the washers would show up in the image - if you look very carefully at the edge of the lower petal, you can see a denser area when I have use adhesive tape to hold the stem. The strong point of radiography is the fine details that are not visible to the naked eye; and since color is not part of the equation, the shape and arrangement are the only two variables one can play with.

Scott & Bob:
I have no idea how much a x-ray machine is but it would be easily more than 100x a DSLR! However, I did a quick e-bay search for used faxitron machine which are available for US$1000-4000. This is in fact the best machine for floral photography and does not require radiation shielding of the room as it is an enclosed cabinet. I have used a faxitron machine in the 80's during my residency training at the hospital for x-raying surgical specimens (not flowers). The unit is easy to operate and does not require any specialized training - as easy as operating a microware oven! This unit can be adjusted for low kV (10-50 kV) and longer exposure of several minutes; ideal exposure level for floral radiography. I have not access to a faxitron now. The new medical machine can only go down to 25kV which is what I have to work with. The drawback of the high radiation is higher bg which is why I had to spent a lot of time manually cleaning up the bg.

Bob:
Thanks for the pointer to garden design and the fern images are certainly very beautiful. It gives me more subjects and ideas to play with.

Bill:
The x-ray department in our hospital already know I have lost my marbles.. that is why they are so accommodating

The emphasis on the flower's structure is very striking and your arrangement works very well. Both images are striking. I find it interesting that the dark version emphasizes the interior structures of the buds and flower more than the light version.

Cool and very graphic. I like both versions, but for some reason like Pat, I prefer the negative one a little more.

Gary, I may have to start following Flora just to watch for these images :). I actually tried this on a dried up rose a couple weekends ago after seeing one of your images, but couldn't drop the KV low enough, and I don't know how to use the mammo machine. I then practiced on some rocks, and got decent images but nothing artistic at all. Keep up the good work, I am enjoying your adventure very much. Naturally, I prefer the negative version, and the blue tint is just right.

Rob:
It is good to hear that you are also experimenting with floral radiography. This paper in Radiographics is quite helpful background reading. Most newer medical machines are too powerful for floral work but would work if you set the kV down as low as possible. With my calla shot, we use the setting for 'finger' which is around 40kV; the bg was a little high but the image is workable. We find the mammo a little better and the bg is cleaner. The mammo machine can go down to 22 kV. This hibiscus is shot at 25kV 40mAmps. I look forward to seeing some of your floral radiographs posts in this gallery in the near future.

Gary, Great work and very innovative and creative. Is this still a photograph or just a radiograph?
I like both of them and the color version in PA gallery as well. But, I wonder how the light one would look with a dark BG?
And do you get free trial for radiography???
Great job, now we can see the normally hidden details.

Talk about going the extra mile. You went several. Great result.

Gary thanks for your email. Cheers. Chris