taking pictures in the operating room

Just came upon this by happenstance. Would something like this work?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

i should think so. this is exactly what the guys at my local camera
shop tried to sell me. can i borrow $700? (no jokes about rich doctors.
that doesn't apply to residents)

--b

Can't get the hospital to splurge on it and bill someone's health
insurance? What is medicine coming to?

Okay. Call b & h and ask them. www.bhphotovideo.com

Otherwise, you can assume the distance from the ceiling to the brain is
close to a constant, varying only be placement and possibly dropping
the slippery little bugger on the floor.

If you want to do it on the cheap (oh man, that hurts my head -- cheap
brain surgery), there are a few options. First, you could install a
flash over the table with a flash diffuser (like Sto-Fen). This would
be better, assuming people don't steal out of the OR. Or, you could
buy a cheap tripod and a cheap "slave" flash. Then, bring the tripod
into the OR when you need it and place it in the same place every time
-- aimed at the same spot on the ceiling. Put your camera's pop-up
flash up and put the camera in full manual mode. Use your flash to
trigger the slave and light up the place. It'll take a few exposures
to get the right settings. A better (but slightly more expensive
option) would be to put the flash on a light stand (maybe with an
umbrella). If it's at an angle, it will minimize the reflection.

For more money, don't use a cheap slave, use two flashes that
communicate between themselves. Canon has them and I assume Nikon does
too. Then you can put one to the side but you still have full metering
and don't have to use manual setting on camera.

These option will work if you can get light in, but if you are working
inside a deep hole, then you need a light right or something like I
showed you.

Of course the ideal solution would be to take one of those big wonking
lights what you see on TV and cut a hole in the bell-housing. Then,
shoot down through the hole and use the OR light to light up the work
area. No cost, and explaining it to maintenance would be fun.

If you want to be super cheap (and you have absolutely no price) (poor
brain surgeon who isn't arogent, like that'll happen), you could get a
"wedding bracket" that is used to hold a flash, such as
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search
and tape a couple of cheap, bright, LED flashlights to it for lighting.
It would be pretty close to getting light into a hole. You might need
to put a diffuser over it, but you could make one out of a translucent
paper or the bottom of a clear alcohol bottle.

Artists have portfolios to show their work. Do doctors have the same?
Like, hey, look at THIS fancy stitching!!!

Good luck and remember, don't misplace your lens cap in there.

Hey, I'm still using Brain v. 1.0 Any chance of an upgrade?

I have a Parade Magazine cover article on open-heart surgery published way
back in in 1972. No problem. They won't let you violate the sterile field.

There is plenty of light in an operating room. What, you think they work in
the friggin dark? Further, quite often the lights are daylight-balanced. Do
you think they learn this shit in green carbon or flourescent light?
Diognostic color is critical.

Poster "Pat" is full of shit. He's never been there, never done it, at least
in a country with better than 19th century medicine.

Me thinks you are a dreaming amateur without a clue.

Me thinks you haven't been following the thread. If so, you would know
that he said it isn't as bright as you thing (or did he say that you
weren't as bright as you think) because they turn the lights away from
where they are operating. If you are going to jump in, don't be stupid
about it -- or are you just trolling.

The OP is trying to find a cost effective solution to photographing a
shiny object in a not-so-bright area -- and to complicate it, it
involves going down into a hole in the brain. I don't know, but my
guess is you can't cut around and make big incisions there -- unless it
is empty like your head.

There have been many good suggestions, for him. But he's an MD on a
budget (go figure).

In most cases you'd say, don't worry about it, it's not brain surgery
.... but in his case, it IS brain surgery. Who'd have thunk.

BTW, you're right. I've never "been there, never done it". Just out
of curiosity, how many brains have YOU done surgery on. Please post
your medical license number or shut up.

If you're going to just in, at least be polite, civil, and useful.
Otherwise, you just come across as a complete idiot.

Here's yet another thought for you (sometimes it takes a while to get
the old brain fired up, that's why I need the upgrade or transplant or
something).

Go to www.computerhacker.com and ask him/her for a solution. He has
come up with a number of elegantly simple hacks for things. Maybe he
can invent something for you. Usually his solutions involve a bit of
manual dexterity and the courage to rip something apart, but seems like
you must have both of those things going for you.

He might be able to invent a cheap ring light for you. You never know.

"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1147739044.867136.79980@y43g2000cwc.googlegro ups.com...
> Me thinks you haven't been following the thread. If so, you would know
> that he said it isn't as bright as you thing(k)

It is certainly bright enough for any digital camera, and any conventional
camera. Do you think surgeons work in the dark? Look to diagnostic metrics.
Or visit an OR in person. It's brilliantly bright.

"Pat":

> BTW, you're right. I've never "been there, never done it". Just out
> of curiosity, how many brains have YOU done surgery on. Please post
> your medical license number or shut up.

I did the photographs for the Parade magazine cover article that I wrote of.
I also spent four years in the OR doing similar things. It is one of the
reasons I was chosen as the photographer for the article.

Pardon if I was short - I'm just sick of inexperienced, impressionistic
bullshit.

Are we Okay, Pat?

Go read the thread. From his description, it isn't brillantly bright.
Also, I think he is taking a picture deep in a small hole in the skull.
So parts are probably pretty bright and others fairly dark. So a
ring-light would make sense, but is too expensive.

He is also concerned about glare from the lights/flash because he needs
to get in pretty close to the subject because the area he is working on
is so small.

I don't know, but I guess that doctors have come a long ways in making
things minimally intrusive since the 70s. I don't think it's like
taking a picture of the heart, it's more like taking a picture of the
heart while looking through a hole the size of a quarter.

Another difference is that I don't he isn't interested in "broad"
expanses like a heart or chest or brain. I think he is interested in
very small areas within the brain that have a problem -- more like
trying to take a pictures of a single blood vessel that is 6" inside
the skull through a small hole. We've been busting on him about not
dropping the brain or losing equipment in there, but I think we're
talking more like very small areas.

BTW, P&S has been discussed but we are looking for better results than
that and a pop-up-flash.

Since you know about this subject, why not be helpful to the poor guy
and propose a cheap/free way to take better pictures in such a
difficult environment.

Maybe the solution is to just hold a flashlight with one hand while you
take the picture.

Your ideas are encouraged. Being nasty is distained.

"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1147741985.235063.216070@u72g2000cwu.googlegr oups.com...
> Go read the thread. From his description, it isn't brillantly bright.
> Also, I think he is taking a picture deep in a small hole in the skull.
> So parts are probably pretty bright and others fairly dark. So a
> ring-light would make sense, but is too expensive.

If the ring-light and camera are not made compliant with sterile
procedures, then he's out of luck.

> Since you know about this subject, why not be helpful to the poor guy
> and propose a cheap/free way to take better pictures in such a
> difficult environment.

Okay. There are cameras with lights that make such pictures all the time.
Many are for diagnostic purposes that only MDs can interpret.

What's his objective, anyway? To make a picture for medical purposes, or
what?