Dinoscaris gallieni - side view

Specimen at 45mm. Originally from Madagascar, in the very obscure Dinoscaris genus.
The species is pitch black all over whilst also being highly reflective.

As this is somewhat of a worst case example, it might be "fun" to describe the time and steps involved...

First comes cleaning. An insect looking superficially clean is most often extremely dirty when magnified strongly. My first treatment is to submerge it in contact lens cleaner for at least 24 hours. Not only does this remove loose dust particles, it also "attacks" sticky dirt, yet in a way that does not damage the specimen. Furthermore, contact lens cleaner is a softener, it brings back some flexibility to a dried specimen.

On some subjects, in particular beetles, this is not enough to remove the very sticky dirt. In such cases, I escalate the cleaning strategy to Decon90. A chemical used in laboratories to decontaminate surfaces. I dip a small paint brush into Decon90 and paint the subject with it gently. I'll let it be for 30 mins. Then I do it again, but this time using an applicator, actively rubbing the dirty spots. You can't keep Decon90 on a specimen too long, so next I rinse the specimen in plain water.

To speed up drying, I have a small but powerful fan. This still leaves the problem of trapped water. Drops of water stuck in little ridges of the subject. These create massive artifacts when focus stacking, so I remove them with dry applicators, basically absorbing the water.

I'll then do a first focus stack test shot. Not to produce an attractive photo, just to inspect the subject in maximum detail. More often then not, I discover new dirt, and have to repeat the Decon90 step.

My final option, not used in this case, is Butylglycol. A solvent used in many industrial and household cleaning products. In pure form, it's highly dangerous, you should avoid any contact with it, avoid breathing it, and don't let its vapor get in your eyes either.

Next comes the challenge of illuminating something that doesn't want its details resolved. I'll spare you the painful details, but this one required 4 light sources and a total of 6 diffusers. The background is a sheet of Fineshut Pro, one of the darkest (anti-reflection) materials available.

Finally, there's color correction, even though the subject doesn't have any. The many light sources create unwanted color casts (warm and cool ones) that need normalization.

Altogether it took some work every night of this week just to produce this outcome. Is all of this worth it for such a dull subject and relatively "meh" result?

Hell yes it is. What kind of a question is that?