Nature - C&C are most welcome !!

[Tejal]

Kindly share your C&C for my below image.

Regards,

Tejal

a by Tejal Imagination, on Flickr

[Shadowman]

Hi Tejal,

Nice composition and color, not as detailed as it should be at f/9, perhaps shooting at ISO 3200 robbed the insect of some detail or perhaps shooting at the long end of your lens affected the quality. Your shutter speed of 1/320sec shooting at 250mm might be a tad too slow if this was handheld. Then again, I tend to pixel peep.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Tejal,

I agree with John's diagnosis, it isn't quite as sharp as I'd like - this could be improved a little if downsized and (small radius) sharpened for my monitor size, which would also help a bit with noise.

Compositionally, that crop works well, particularly with the leaf starting in the corner.


Although - the subject's 'pose', looking down like that, suggests another possibility;
That of adding a lot more canvas below the subject, filling it with similar blurred green background, and positioning the subject on the top third and titling it "That's a long way down"

[madcrow]

Tejal. it is a nice image. Not easy to shot.

[Tejal]

Hi Tejal,

Nice composition and color, not as detailed as it should be at f/9, perhaps shooting at ISO 3200 robbed the insect of some detail or perhaps shooting at the long end of your lens affected the quality. Your shutter speed of 1/320sec shooting at 250mm might be a tad too slow if this was handheld. Then again, I tend to pixel peep.

Thank you for your comment. Yes I have tried to reduce ISO as it was 3200. 1/320s shutter speed...... still need higher ?? I have fixed ISO at 3200 max as even at 3200 ISO image looks bad .... too bad. I have some more pics too. I will check those too. Hope I have any pic with lower ISO.

[Tejal]

Hi Tejal,

I agree with John's diagnosis, it isn't quite as sharp as I'd like - this could be improved a little if downsized and (small radius) sharpened for my monitor size, which would also help a bit with noise.

Compositionally, that crop works well, particularly with the leaf starting in the corner.


Although - the subject's 'pose', looking down like that, suggests another possibility;
That of adding a lot more canvas below the subject, filling it with similar blurred green background, and positioning the subject on the top third and titling it "That's a long way down"

Thank you Dave for your feedback.

Sharpness..... yes i can try it. It may make it little better.

Although - the subject's 'pose', looking down like that, suggests another possibility;
That of adding a lot more canvas below the subject, filling it with similar blurred green background, and positioning the subject on the top third and titling it "That's a long way down"

with masking ?

[Tejal]

Tejal. it is a nice image. Not easy to shot.

He he he...

Thank you.

[bnnrcn]

Nice composition Tejal, I agree with Dave about sharpening the image some more

[Tejal]

Nice composition Tejal, I agree with Dave about sharpening the image some more

Thank you for your valuable suggestion. I will work on this image again.

[Geoff F]

Personally I never go beyond Iso 800 for a shot like this and expect a lot of problems even at that setting. So you have done very well with such a high Iso and difficult light angle.

[Tejal]

Personally I never go beyond Iso 800 for a shot like this and expect a lot of problems even at that setting. So you have done very well with such a high Iso and difficult light angle.

Thank you for your comment. It is difficult to work in low light. I was forced to boost ISO. And moreover my camera doesn't give good quality at high iso.

[NorthernFocus]

Tejal, the bug experts have offered the technical comments. All I will say is that your eye for composition extends to nature. I agree with the prior suggestion for a bit more room on bottom. Overall nicely done.

[Dave Humphries]

That of adding a lot more canvas below the subject, filling it with similar blurred green background, and positioning the subject on the top third and titling it "That's a long way down"

with masking ?

Not masking no.

I think you know how to add canvas, but adding canvas is the easy part.

Filling that on such a scale (I imagined almost doubling the image height) is going to be the tricky part and I haven't ever tried to fill that much.

I'd just try a few things and see how it goes, if none of the PS 'automation' worked (content aware, patch, etc.), I'd have to revert to manual cloning of the blank areas of frame, being careful to avoid recognisable repetitive patterns, by a combination of crafty techniques;
a) frequent re-assignment of clone source with respect destination, avoiding doing things directly vertically
b) if necessary, use of blur or smudge tool to disguise any small recognisable areas
c) use of spot healing tool is another way to deal with those quickly
d) perhaps even change the luminance and/or colour in some patches, then yes, doing that with layer(s) and masking/opacity might be wise

I don't get enough practice to advise any more, perhaps others know of a better way?

HTH, Dave

[DickyOZ]

Tejal, I like the composition and background. For me the image is quite sharp enough for general viewing - it's only when you pixel peep that the flaws start to really show. Your camera limits the upper level of acceptable ISO; my EXIF viewer doesn't work too well on CIC so I don't know what camera you have; My E-M1 will return acceptably low noise images at 3200 but I rarely go beyond 1600; I then reach for the flash and diffuser. On a 'flat' subject I would also open up the aperture at the expense of DOF
At my age remembering to do all these things is the biggest challenge.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Dicky,

~ it's only when you pixel peep that the flaws start to really show. ~

I agree, but equally, images presented on the web must (should) be viewed at 1:1 pixels on our screens - if they aren't, it is because our web browser is downsizing them and that will certainly soften them.

So I will click to view in LyteBox and if an oversized (for my screen) picture is published, I will hit "F" key to enlarge it to 1:1 and if that shows flaws, then I'll comment.

You may be saying that at full resolution on the originator's screen, when pixel peeping at capture resolution, the flaws will be even more obvious, and I'd certainly agree with you there, that's why images need to be downsized and then output sharpened for web display at a resolution that suits the display the typical (but ideally 'every') viewer will be using.

Unfortunately, that varies enormously these days and if someone has a iPad device with a 'retina' display with amazing pixel density crammed in to say 13 inches, vs someone (like me) viewing on a full HD (1920 x 1080) 23 inch diagonal screen, vs viewing on an 'average' mobile phone (< 5 inches and likely < HD pixel count); the resultant impressions are going to be vastly different (and that's assuming typical viewing distances for these devices).

Currently, there is no 'clever' way to account for these differences (IMO most people don't even realise their significance) - even if the resolutions are fairly similar in pixel count, as long as output sharpening has been done adequately, they should be 'sharp enough', even on the larger screens, but that still may not address the 'impact' of (particularly) wide angle scenes with good foreground content, which will be less on a smaller physical screen size.

But I digress ... (from the thread subject)

Dave

[JohnRostron]

Interesting to read the reactions of the pixel-peepers to this image. My immediate reaction was that this is a great shot of a flatback millipede. It shows clearly the distinguishing features of millipedes (two pairs of legs per apparent segment), as well as showing off the flat back characteristic of the family. I also found it a great composition.

John

[Tejal]

Tejal, the bug experts have offered the technical comments. All I will say is that your eye for composition extends to nature. I agree with the prior suggestion for a bit more room on bottom. Overall nicely done.

Thank you Dan for your feedback.

[Tejal]

Interesting to read the reactions of the pixel-peepers to this image. My immediate reaction was that this is a great shot of a flatback millipede. It shows clearly the distinguishing features of millipedes (two pairs of legs per apparent segment), as well as showing off the flat back characteristic of the family. I also found it a great composition.

John

Thank you John for sharing your view.

[JBW]

I have the same problem with ISO. My solution is to set ISO to 100, fill flash compensated to -0.7, F/14 and I can shoot at a reasonably fast shutter speed.

You have the eye. Now you simply need experience.

[Tejal]

I have the same problem with ISO. My solution is to set ISO to 100, fill flash compensated to -0.7, F/14 and I can shoot at a reasonably fast shutter speed.

You have the eye. Now you simply need experience.

Thank you Brian.

To be very honest with you, using flash, doesnt come in my mind at all. I simply forget that this option is also there with me .