Macro photos of the inside of musical instruments

On Behance, art director Bjoern Ewers shows off the gorgeous macro-photo ads he produced for the Berlin Philharmonic, which depict the insides of instruments as airy atria (or, as Colossal has it, "vast and spacious, almost as if you could walk around inside them.")



    1. they’re centered around the bridge, which in a stringed instrument like a violin is a floating one. in a violin, they’re not meant to work the same way the holes in a guitar work. violins are fairly rigid on the top bit, so the f-holes create a bit of springiness around the bridge, allowing the vibrations to transmit through the body of the instrument. as far as I know the shape is mostly traditional, but it seems to me the shape of the classic f makes for the most springiness with the least reduction of stability / change of tone.

      also, boo. ;)

  1. I’m being pedantic.  Stop reading now if that bothers you (it bothers me, too) but I was a photographer for too many years to let this one go by.

    I went to the links.  I saw some lovely, fairly close-up photography.  I saw no macrophotography.  “Macro” has a specific meaning and I don’t care if the Wikipedia article is waffling about it and indicating that the terms is being used more broadly.  If it ain’t 1:1 reproduction or higher, it ain’t macro.

    This is almost as irritating as people referring to EVF (electronic viewfinder) cameras as SLRs.  Any camera type with “reflex” in the name has a mirror in it.  I’ve actually seen manufacturer advertising that gets this wrong and it drives me nuts.

    OK, two pet peeves aired.  Everyone feel free to jeer away.

    1.  I marvel at the depth of field they’ve managed to get with this photography.  I have to assume either very long exposure times, or magic.

      As a(n ex)photographer, would you care to comment on that?

      1. I have no good explanations.  Some of the shots (e.g., the pipe organ shots) could have simply been good light and a small aperture.

        The shots inside the stringed instruments are more problematic.  I can think of a dozen possibilities and it may be some combination of them all and not all of them involve the way the photos are shot.

        Notice the first picture at this link:

        Look at the finish of the wood edges of the f-hole on the right.  It’s quite clear and it looks like it was hacked out with a penknife wielded by a spastic hand.  Then look at the f-hole on the left.  It’s fuzzy.  Both are approximately the same distance from the apparent camera position.  Both should be just as in focus.  They aren’t. 

        I won’t hazard a guess but something funny is definitely going on.  “Funny”, in this context, isn’t by any means the same as “bad” but this pretty clearly isn’t “straight” photography.

        1. Maybe they used some sort of tilt-shift setup, and combined multiple images at different focus distances in photoshop.

    1. That’s what I want to know. Are those photos, or is it CGI? I can’t find any description at the link to explain.

      1.  Yeah, that was my first thought.  You can probably buy a cheap violin and a hacksaw for less than a high-quality camera small enough to slip through an f-slot.

  2. I recently found the otherwise junky lens on my android (HTC Evo 4G) phone took some really nice pictures of the interior landscape of a kind of open lid pot by just looking over the brim. I wonder if there are endoscopy like extensions one could connect to a camera phone so as to allow photos of tight places.

Comments are closed.