I truly thought this photo was AI, wow!
There is an interesting video of his rig for this shot in this article: https://www.nikonsmallworld.com/masters-of-microscopy/ole-bi...
The video is nice but the movement is inverted from the photo.
I would like to redo the setup myself.
"Neurons in an expanded mouse brain" (3rd place) is also stunning:
https://www.nikonsmallworld.com/galleries/2026-photomicrogra...
I didn't know brains actually look like this inside. Our world truly is beautiful, across all scales!
i'm not an expert but i think the word expansion here is referring to techniques they use to spread everything out in order to make it easier to see. someone told me that they use the same material that baby diapers are made out of which expands when you soak it in water.
Thanks for sharing - what an incredible perspective on the mundane. Seriously seems like peering into an alien world and really it's just what's happen while someone sips their coffee and stares at a wall haha.
Anyone seen Thirteenth Floor that old 90s VR movie? Really reminds me of the power for that.
The same photographer has two other photographs[^1] which previously were ranked highly in the contest. All seem to focus on chemical reactions and are stunning.
Interestingly, the previous two—of a candle and match—used 2.5x magnification, where as this one required 20x magnification, which just goes to show as to how tiny the printer mechanics really are.
Next, I would like him to visualize the "macro" economy side of things too.
I've been seeing this photo all over the place recently.
Pollen (second photo with the spider) looks so sinister!
Looks like this is the instragram page of the photographer for the inkjet photo.
It's very obviously not a standard inkjet printer setup, but if you poke around you'll see some custom rigs that make it come together.
Inkjet printers for their faults are some of the most insane technology that I can think of.
Yep, the entire field of MEMS is both outlandishly complex and fascinating. For those who are curious, take a quick look at https://courses.washington.edu/me557/nthu/mems.pdf, which gives a nice overview of the different mechanisms and manufacturing processes involved.
Linking to a page that links to the source is wild.
It’s a great photo, but the second-place jumping spider is my favorite: it is just so adorable.
https://www.nikonsmallworld.com/galleries/2026-photomicrogra...
Holy moly, I love it
The parasitoid wasp doing its little dance move [1] gave me a chuckle.
[1] https://www.nikonsmallworld.com/galleries/2026-photomicrogra...
This pic reminds me of the Children of Time series of novels
Portia!
It is! What are the little balls, are they pollen?
Yes, the title of the photo is “Jumping spider (Salticus scenicus) with pollen”
Hah, ok, totally missed that, thank you. But it seemed an obvious candidate, they reminded me of those clingy balls that come off some plants so I figured they must be something like that.
When I first saw this photo I refused to believe it was real. This is just so otherworldly, it's fantastic.
I still have misgivings that it is AI generated or modified, but assume that the judges have done their due diligence. I’m a little saddened that I now have to question things such as this.
I think they had a problem with that last year, so I suspect they may be extra vigilant.
From the article: “Bielfeldt does not use AI in his images, preferring to rely on traditional techniques.”
Yes. Macro photography always looks a little fake. Plus Nikon Small World doesn't have a good track record in 2026.
I see that it uses stacked images, so that can account for the lack of normal focus cues.
Presumably he used software for this rather than doing it in a darkroom?
FWIW I’m an astrophotographer, and I don’t really view 30 hours of stacked exposures as “a photo I took”, rather as the outcome of a lengthy signals processing chain.
I suppose the question is where the line is drawn. Ten years ago, I doubt “I made this picture in photoshop” would have qualified as photography. Now that we have AI, the window has moved.
I think it matters to what extend the representation in the image is derived from reality (as opposed to creative decisions made while modifying the image), really. Stacked exposures and photo stacking are largely there to remove the effects of the camera on the image, and better reflect the underlying reality, so I would still call the result a photograph. (color grading and such are often far more driven by creative decisions than the underlying reality and still that doesn't usually disqualify a photograph. In-camera visual effects are also still photographs).
>I don’t really view 30 hours of stacked exposures as “a photo I took”, rather as the outcome of a lengthy signals processing chain
Is there a difference? It's still a photometrically correct capture of the scene, unless you're using narrow-band filters or multispectral compositing you would see the same if you had huge eyes. In the same way a stacked smartphone photo is still a photo unless it's also using AI, and even then AI denoisers are pretty much accepted in photography as long as they don't meaningfully affect the subject (as well as more traditional things like CPLs or extra lighting).
Nothing in Nikon's challenge is natural, it's still a photo as long as it represents something real.