Mike et al.

In the greater would of macro photography, you never run into this issue.  AutoMontage was a system that only institutions could afford.  Private individuals could not.  They, however, did use the techniques using all sorts of inventive rigs of their own.

See:  
http://www.photomacrography.net/

For a concise review of what the larger field is working on see:
http://www.extreme-macro.co.uk/

Now there are many alternatives.  Commercial and not.

Focus stacking is the primary term, often simply truncated to "stacking."

Automontage is only mentioned when someone talks about the history of focus stacking.

sam

Photographs of Flowers 

In the morning, the red tulips 
are closed, but when I return 
at night, their petals are open 
and looking for light, black centers 
exposed, pinprick pupils. 
I want to photograph them 
and the flowering trees along 
the street, the pear blossoms 
and the magnolias. The petals 
are already tearing off 
and being blown into the road.

The park is full of people 
holding cameras out in front 
of them like maps. How close 
can they zoom in on a petal, 
a bee, a stamen. This is almost 
like pornography, the flower 
lying there, open before 
our eyes, the camera we crouch 
with. The flower's stillness, 
a nd our scrutiny, our breathing. 
Those we love, we pose them 
in front of flowers, petals next 
to their faces. This is how we 
talk to them about their beauty.

          - HANNAH STEPHENSON
__._,_.___




On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Mike Ferro <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
​​I haven’t spent hard time looking into this, but my conception is that a company was born that was called AutoMontage that sold a system that created “focus stacked” photos. 

Now, like kleenex and google, it seems that the company name “AutoMontage” has become “automontage”, a noun, verb, adjective, etc. for any focus stacked image.  I’m guilty of this when I speak to colleagues and the common man. 

How do we deal with this? Do we accept it and move on? (Fine by me.) Do we have a better name for the process? And how does this all sound when written out? 

The issue I have now is “comparison with automontage images of an authoritatively identified specimen”. 

Several possible solutions: 
“comparison with automontaged images”
“comparison with automontage-images”
“comparison with focus stacked images created using a(an) XXXX system" (where XXXX is the official name of the system used)

Any ideas? 

Thanks, 

Mike



--
Michael L. Ferro
Collection Manager, Clemson University Arthropod Collection (CUAC)
Dept. of Plant and Environmental Sciences
MAIL: 277 Poole Agricultural Center
OFFICE: 307 Long Hall
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0310
Subject Editor: The Coleopterists Bulletin; Insecta Mundi



--
Why Did you Mow My Flowers? 
- Bee