Guest guest Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 I was wondering if if anyone was aware of any digital archives of tongue photos, either online or on CD. Chinese Herbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 26, 2005 Report Share Posted January 26, 2005 I don't know of any medical archive photos but if you go to google and use the images search and type in tongue you'll get plenty of hits. As you might imagine there are many that are useless but just as many may be what you are looking for. Regards, Michael , wrote: > > > I was wondering if if anyone was aware of any digital archives of > tongue photos, either online or on CD. > > > > > Chinese Herbs > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 online digital tongue images; Images of oral cancer http://www.usc.edu/hsc/dental/opath/Guides/ImageQs/13_01Q.html GEOGRAPHIC TONGUE http://www.usc.edu/hsc/dental/opath/Cards/GeographicTongue.html click on the individual images to enlarge Link to research (for example) GEOGRAPHIC TONGUE http://www.emedicine.com/DERM/topic664.htm USC's home page offers a study guide Study Guides O R A L P A T H O L O G Y http://www.usc.edu/hsc/dental/opath/Guides/index.html and of course the insane funnies flower tongue http://insanefunnies.com/pictures/twisted_tongue.shtml Ed Kasper LAc. Santa Cruz, CA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2005 Report Share Posted February 27, 2005 I don't know of any archives, but am intrested in the subject. I've been trying to find a way to take good quality digital pictures, but have found it to be very tough. I use an external canon speedlite with a reflector on a canon G3 digital camera, and have not been satisfied with the results. I think it might be best to use a ring flash though. The problem with my pictures is glare off of the tongue coating. If there's any interest, I can post some samples on my website to give you an idea of what to expect. I know Sharon used to be on this group and had some suggestions as well. If anyone has any suggestions to improve quality, please fire away. Thanks, Geoff , " mpplac " <inquiry@c...> wrote: > > > > I don't know of any medical archive photos but if you go to google and > use the images search and type in tongue you'll get plenty of hits. > As you might imagine there are many that are useless but just as many > may be what you are looking for. > Regards, > Michael > > , wrote: > > > > > > I was wondering if if anyone was aware of any digital archives of > > tongue photos, either online or on CD. > > > > > > > > > > Chinese Herbs > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 , " yingsuke2002 " <list@a...> wrote: > If anyone has any suggestions to improve quality, please fire away. > Thanks, > Geoff The Canon G3 allows for setting the white balance manually. I would suggest that you get a 15% grey card and use that as a target to set the white balance before each tongue picture. That way, the colors will be the same in a relative way. Also, use the manual controls to set the shutter speed and aperature, making sure that they are the same each time. With this and consistent lighting (not flash), the pictures should all be decent and be able to be compared to one another to see acurate relative changes. Brian C. Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Thanks Brian - I am using a grey card already, and that has helped. I thought the flash would regulate the light color better, but maybe the glare is worse than not using it at all. I'll give it a shot! Geoff , " bcataiji " <bcataiji> wrote: > > , " yingsuke2002 " <list@a...> > wrote: > > > If anyone has any suggestions to improve quality, please fire away. > > Thanks, > > Geoff > > The Canon G3 allows for setting the white balance manually. I would > suggest that you get a 15% grey card and use that as a target to set > the white balance before each tongue picture. That way, the colors > will be the same in a relative way. Also, use the manual controls to > set the shutter speed and aperature, making sure that they are the > same each time. With this and consistent lighting (not flash), the > pictures should all be decent and be able to be compared to one > another to see acurate relative changes. > > Brian C. Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 One idea that was expressed was to use a paint sample (say one universal like Kelly Moore). The paint sample would match the color of the tongue and may be taken alongside the person as well. Then even if the image appears differently due to different monitors, computers ect. all the viewer would need is the same set of paint samples. It should work nicely as CM and paint samples share some flowery words. sorta like a tongue that is reminiscent of Sunset at the oasis. as far as some established standards on taking images of tongues for use on the web see USC's home page offers a study guide Study Guides O R A L P A T H O L O G Y http://www.usc.edu/hsc/dental/opath/Guides/index.html of course, for those that haven't seen my favorite tongue http://insanefunnies.com/pictures/twisted_tongue.shtml Ed Kasper LAc. Licensed Acupuncturist & Herbalist Acupuncture is a jab well done www.HappyHerbalist.com Santa Cruz, CA. Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:05:02 -0000 " bcataiji " <bcataiji Re: digital tongue images , " yingsuke2002 " <list@a...> wrote: > If anyone has any suggestions to improve quality, please fire away. > Thanks, > Geoff The Canon G3 allows for setting the white balance manually. I would suggest that you get a 15% grey card and use that as a target to set the white balance before each tongue picture. That way, the colors will be the same in a relative way. Also, use the manual controls to set the shutter speed and aperature, making sure that they are the same each time. With this and consistent lighting (not flash), the pictures should all be decent and be able to be compared to one another to see acurate relative changes. Brian C. Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 I asked this question (how to take digital pictures of tongue) to a friend of mine, who is both a photographer and an acupuncturist. She has 15 or more years of experience as a professional photographer, and I think she's very good at it. She asked if the original poster (geoff?) could give some more info as to how the pictures were taken. She reckons one of the problems could be the lack of flash-synchronisation. With additional info she means diaphragm aperture, TTL metering or not, flash power, lighting (ambient light or dark), what kind of lens (mm), the distance to the flash (most flashes have a minimun distance e.g. not closer than 1 m, or use a macro function). She asks if the tongue coating looks 'burnt out' by the flash? Lastly : ) she would like to see some examples of pictures you are unhappy with. you may send them to my address. If she knows all the technical details, she might be able to give some advice. She mentioned a ring flash may be better (no shadows), but she thinks ambient light will be the best. Regards, Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2005 Report Share Posted March 1, 2005 Tom, OK - I just put them on my site. Please keep the site private to you and your photographer friend. You can access the page from: http://www.acupunctureandherbs.com/tsample.htm I downgraded the pix quality a bit so it doesn't take forever to download, but it's not too bad. I guess these aren't horrible - maybe I'm getting too picky in my ways.. ;-) Here's the specifics - AE priority Evaluative mode 1/60 sec f3.0 28.8mm focal (7.2-28.8 digital lense) External E-TTL flash (canon speedlite 380ex) w/ bounce, 2nd curtain sync. I think I backed off the flash power manually on some pix about 1-1.5 stops. Manual white balance Manual focus Thanks, Geoff ( ghudson ) , " Tom Verhaeghe " <verhaeghe_tom@h...> wrote: > > I asked this question (how to take digital pictures of tongue) to a > friend of mine, who is both a photographer and an acupuncturist. She > has 15 or more years of experience as a professional photographer, > and I think she's very good at it. > She asked if the original poster (geoff?) could give some more info as > to how the pictures were taken. She reckons one of the problems could > be the lack of flash-synchronisation. > With additional info she means diaphragm aperture, TTL metering or > not, flash power, lighting (ambient light or dark), what kind of lens > (mm), the distance to the flash (most flashes have a minimun distance > e.g. not closer than 1 m, or use a macro function). She asks if the > tongue coating looks 'burnt out' by the flash? > Lastly : ) she would like to see some examples of pictures you are > unhappy with. you may send them to my address. > If she knows all the technical details, she might be able to give some > advice. She mentioned a ring flash may be better (no shadows), but she > thinks ambient light will be the best. > > Regards, > > Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Geoff et al, here's the reply I got from my friend (my translation): - she likes your pics and sees you also took some with lateral ambient light. She does not recommend direct sunlight= too harsh. If you use sunlight, filter it through chalk paper or a very thin curtain - she noticed some pictures are out of focus. She thinks the main reason is because people moved, but there are also instances where other parts of the face are really sharp. Probably because you lost sharpness using a bigger aperture. She recommends shooting in aperture priority mode, if possible. Use a smaller diaphragm, e.g. use 2.8 instead of 8 or 11. This way your depth of field will increase, making the whole tongue sharp, instead of only part of it, or only the face. - if you have flash synchronisation at faster shutter speeds, make use of it. Try 1/125 and always make sure you have enough depth of field= small diaphragm - standardization: she noticed you used a grey card. That's great, but you let your clients hold them, so you lose any standardization you might get. Always use a grey card from the same distance and from the same angle. She further recommends to have the clients seated against a wall or head support, so that they won't move. Use a tripod. To make maximum use of available light, you may use a piece of white cardboard in which you make a hole so that your camera's lens can peep through it. The panel will reflect light and brighten shadows. BUT this can also increase glare on the wet spots on tongue surfaces. Explore. She thinks the glare you got on your pics is really not too bad. She reckons it could function as a control for wetness of the tongue. Always ask people to close their eyes, especially children, when you flash from such a short distance. Children better cover their eyes, as this can be dangerous. She noticed that the colour of the garments clients wear also influences colour balance to some degree. If you really want to niggle, you can let the clients wear a light grey scarf, so everyone will get the same reflex. Even the photographer's clother can influence the picture... - you can soften your flash by using chalk paper or professional half tough spun or full tough spun from LEE filters, or ROSCO (sorry don't know what these are). Chalk paper may be the easiest, but you will need stronger light. - as long as you use a flash, you will get some glare. But, she thinks it is not too bad... Thanks to Kari Decock, the photograper/ acupuncturist for her tips! She also sends her regards to Geoff... Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 sorry the diaphragm aperture should be 8 or 11 instead of 2.8, not otherwise- my mistake. Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2005 Report Share Posted March 2, 2005 Very useful information. Thanks. I just noted a minor mistake, but significant: If you want a larger depth of field, you need a smaller lens aperture. However, lens apertures are measured in a reciprocal scale, so you want the larger numbers - i.e., an aperture of " 8 " is smaller in diameter than " 2.8 " . Sort of like wire gauges - larger number is smaller in diameter. ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/ Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org > Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:04:20 -0000 > " Tom Verhaeghe " <verhaeghe_tom >Re: digital tongue images > > >Geoff et al, > >here's the reply I got from my friend (my translation): > >- she likes your pics and sees you also took some with lateral ambient >light. She does not recommend direct sunlight= too harsh. If you use >sunlight, filter it through chalk paper or a very thin curtain >- she noticed some pictures are out of focus. She thinks the main >reason is because people moved, but there are also instances where >other parts of the face are really sharp. Probably because you lost >sharpness using a bigger aperture. >She recommends shooting in aperture priority mode, if possible. Use a >smaller diaphragm, e.g. use 2.8 instead of 8 or 11. This way your >depth of field will increase, making the whole tongue sharp, instead >of only part of it, or only the face. >- if you have flash synchronisation at faster shutter speeds, make use >of it. Try 1/125 and always make sure you have enough depth of field= >small diaphragm >- standardization: she noticed you used a grey card. That's great, but >you let your clients hold them, so you lose any standardization you >might get. Always use a grey card from the same distance and from the >same angle. >She further recommends to have the clients seated against a wall or >head support, so that they won't move. Use a tripod. To make maximum >use of available light, you may use a piece of white cardboard in >which you make a hole so that your camera's lens can peep through it. >The panel will reflect light and brighten shadows. BUT this can also >increase glare on the wet spots on tongue surfaces. Explore. She >thinks the glare you got on your pics is really not too bad. She >reckons it could function as a control for wetness of the tongue. >Always ask people to close their eyes, especially children, when you >flash from such a short distance. Children better cover their eyes, as >this can be dangerous. >She noticed that the colour of the garments clients wear also >influences colour balance to some degree. If you really want to >niggle, you can let the clients wear a light grey scarf, so everyone >will get the same reflex. Even the photographer's clother can >influence the picture... >- you can soften your flash by using chalk paper or professional half >tough spun or full tough spun from LEE filters, or ROSCO (sorry don't >know what these are). Chalk paper may be the easiest, but you will >need stronger light. >- as long as you use a flash, you will get some glare. But, she thinks >it is not too bad... > >Thanks to Kari Decock, the photograper/ acupuncturist for her tips! >She also sends her regards to Geoff... > >Tom. > > > > > >______________________ >______________________ > >Message: 7 > Wed, 02 Mar 2005 16:38:18 -0000 > " Tom Verhaeghe " <verhaeghe_tom >Re: digital tongue images > > >sorry the diaphragm aperture should be 8 or 11 instead of 2.8, not >otherwise- my mistake. > >Tom. > > > > > >______________________ >______________________ > >Message: 8 > Tue, 1 Mar 2005 12:49:58 -0800 (PST) > Brian Hardy <mischievous00 >10 Voters on Panel Backing Pain Pills Had Industry Ties > > > >The New York TImes > >February 25, 2005 > >10 Voters on Panel Backing Pain Pills Had Industry Ties > >By GARDINER HARRIS and ALEX BERENSON > >en of the 32 government drug advisers who last week endorsed continued marketing of the > >huge-selling pain pills Celebrex, Bextra and Vioxx have consulted in recent years for the > >drugs' makers, according to disclosures in medical journals and other public records. > >If the 10 advisers had not cast their votes, the committee would have voted 12 to 8 that Bextra > >should be withdrawn and 14 to 8 that Vioxx should not return to the market. The 10 advisers with > >company ties voted 9 to 1 to keep Bextra on the market and 9 to 1 for Vioxx's return. > >The votes of the 10 did not substantially influence the committee's decision on Celebrex because > >only one committee member voted that Celebrex should be withdrawn. > >Eight of the 10 members said in interviews that their past relationships with the drug companies had > >not influenced their votes. The two others did not respond to phone or e-mail messages. > >Researchers with ties to industry commonly serve on Food and Drug Administration advisory > >panels, but their presence has long been a contentious issue. > >The agency has said it tries to balance expertise - often found among those who have conducted > >clinical trials of the drugs in question or otherwise studied them - with potential conflicts of interest. > >Several of the panel members flagged with conflicts said most or all of the money went not to > >themselves but to their universities or institutions. > >The Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group in Washington that maintains a > >large database of scientists' industry ties culled from disclosures in medical journals and other public > >documents, analyzed the panel members' affiliations at the request of The New York Times. > >The center has been a frequent critic of the F.D.A. and of the pharmaceutical industry. The center's > >analysis may understate the industry ties of the panel participants because some ties may not have > >been previously disclosed publicly. > >Dr. Sheldon Krimsky, a science policy expert at Tufts University, said such conflicts were common > >on F.D.A. advisory panels. The agency often conceals these conflicts, and studies have shown that, > >taken as a whole, money does influence scientific judgments, Dr. Krimsky said. > >He added, " F.D.A. has to work harder to fill panels with people without conflicts, and if they feel > >they have the best committee, they at least ought to make it transparent. " > >But Dan Troy, a Washington lawyer who was until last year the agency's general counsel, said that > >finding knowledgeable experts without financial conflicts was difficult. Suggesting that such > >conflicts skew a panel's decisions " buys into an overly conspiratorial view of the world, " Mr. Troy > >said. > >A spokeswoman for the F.D.A. said no one at the agency would comment on specific panel > >members' industry ties. > >Before each of three meetings of the advisory board last week, an agency secretary read a statement > >absolving panel members of conflicts of interest because the committee's agenda involved " issues of > >broad applicability and there are no products being approved. " > >The secretary also said, " The Food and Drug Administration acknowledges that there may be > >potential conflicts of interest, but because of the general nature of the discussions before the > >committee, these potential conflicts are mitigated. " ---Roger Wicke, PhD, TCM Clinical Herbalist contact: www.rmhiherbal.org/contact/ Rocky Mountain Herbal Institute, Hot Springs, Montana USA Clinical herbology training programs - www.rmhiherbal.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.