It's a Small World (share your macros!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy Noelle

Here is more of that Japanese Anemone that I was working on so hard, this past summer. If only I'd known, then, what I know, now. I feel really impatient for next year and another chance at it. It just falls short, doesn't it. Is it the bland background? Any feedback?

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5046/...6be8738d_z.jpg

AV 55mm 1/100 -0.33ev f5.6 ISO100 and pattern metering because I didn't know anything else, at the time.

---

I certainly don't think it falls particularly short. I love the overall idea behind the image (I'm rather fond of abstracts) the only thing that comes to my mind is
#1 it could use just a little more depth of field to get a little more of the center of the blossom in.
#2 I don't think the background is bland, I like a good clean background for macro work, the one thing I noticed is the broad dark band with a little light spot above it is a little distracting. Perhaps coming at the shot from an ever so slightly higher angle could have fixed that.
#3 I might have turned the saturation in the greens down just a bit to make the stem and leaf a bit less noticeable. But then that might have affected the center somewhat... something that only experimentation will tell :)

All in all I personally like it.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/...ae178c6e_b.jpg

This is one of my favorite macros... almost. I was shooting free-hand one handed with the other hand holding a speed light on an off-camera shoe cord shooting through a diffuser. All that to say that the focus is just a smidgen too close and the DOF should have been a little deeper. Can't wait until next season when I can try again ;) We hatched this one from an egg. He's about ready to make his chrysalis here.

Canon 30D w/ 100mm f/2.8L IS macro and Canon 540EZ speed light (antique :p)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1167/...6bdfb622_b.jpg

My wife shot this one. She thinks she doesn't have photographic skill... I think she's got more than I do :D

Canon 30D w/ 100mm f/2.8L IS macro lens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy Noelle

Here is more of that Japanese Anemone that I was working on so hard, this past summer. If only I'd known, then, what I know, now. I feel really impatient for next year and another chance at it. It just falls short, doesn't it. Is it the bland background? Any feedback?

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5046/...6be8738d_z.jpg

---

No, no, no Katy - you're always* putting too much pattern in your backgrounds and I think it is you musical background that is responsible :)

I'm half serious here; so stick with it! ;)

Imagine a pianist playing a simple tune; usually accomplished with one hand right? (and right!)
The other (left) hand is usually playing an accompanying chord rythm (harmony?), an octave or two down which complements the main tune.

I know I haven't used the correct musical vernacular to describe that, but hopefully you 'get my drift'?

With many of your pictures, you have a subject, usually a flower, but can't resist putting a background pattern in for good measure. In photography, that concept often doesn't work so well.

* oh, and if I've told me once, I've told me a million times, "don't exagerate" :)

Hope that's received in the light hearted way intended, but I do think there's an element of truth in my theory.

Cheers,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Humphries

No, no, no Katy - you're always* putting too much pattern in your backgrounds and I think it is you musical background that is responsible :)

I'm half serious here; so stick with it! ;)

Imagine a pianist playing a simple tune; usually accomplished with one hand right? (and right!)
The other (left) hand is usually playing an accompanying chord rythm (harmony?), an octave or two down which complements the main tune.

I know I haven't used the correct musical vernacular to describe that, but hopefully you 'get my drift'?

With many of your pictures, you have a subject, usually a flower, but can't resist putting a background pattern in for good measure. In photography, that concept often doesn't work so well.

* oh, and if I've told me once, I've told me a million times, "don't exagerate" :)

Hope that's received in the light hearted way intended, but I do think there's an element of truth in my theory.

Cheers,

---

Absolutely received well! :p

I have a ton of thoughts but, not the time to express them.

To the point, I was thinking that the COLOR of the background was bland. That day, I was working on simple backgrounds. I could prove it but, alas, I have to be on my way.

Thanks to Jeff, too! I appreciate your input and it's raised the questions that I've put up in an earlier comment, all over again. Anyway, your photos are lovely and appear to me to be very deftly executed.

Thanks, Guys! It's thanksgiving on Thursday and I have pies to bake, cheese balls to create and little boys who will want to tear the house apart in their excitement and will need redirection. :eek: See you all in a few days!

Pearl Crescent
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...0&d=1290597376

5DII Sigma 150 f/16 ISO 200 1/200" 580ex with Lumiquest mini-softbox on maco bracket

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy Noelle

Which is better? Is it up to the intent of the photographer?

---

Hi Katy, yes it's really up to the photographer depending upon what treatment you think a shot needs. If the shot is aesthetically pleasing you can use sharpness creatively. For record shots I generally strive for a sharp subject against a distraction free background but that's really only possible at lower magnifications than I took those butterfly shots at. At higher macro magnifications used for closeups of their eyes and suchlike you get shallow DoF whether you like it or not.

For example in this shot of a large subject (low magnification) I think it was clear what should be sharp and what shouldn't:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3629/...db929ef7_o.jpg

Not that every shot is as clear cut and it's not everybody's cup of tea but to my mind it's one of those shots where there was right and wrong. I consider them a technical excercise for honing technique mostly.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/...75725a4e_o.jpg

Although mostly I shoot much smaller (requiring higher magnifications) and more active subjects where it's enough of a challenge just getting the important bits in focus:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/...263dacda_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/...051d6388_o.jpg

Hope that helps answer your other questions too? You just have to do the best you can at the time :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

For example in this shot of a large subject (low magnification) I think it was clear what should be sharp and what shouldn't:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3629/...db929ef7_o.jpg

Not that every shot is as clear cut and it's not everybody's cup of tea but to my mind it's one of those shots where there was right and wrong. I consider them a technical excercise for honing technique mostly.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/...75725a4e_o.jpg

Although mostly I shoot much smaller (requiring higher magnifications) and more active subjects where it's enough of a challenge just getting the important bits in focus:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/...263dacda_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/...051d6388_o.jpg

Hope that helps answer your other questions too? You just have to do the best you can at the time :)

---

Hi Andy

These are great photos. I don't like spiders but these photos are fascinating. I love dragonflies and I am in awe of people photographing them. I only ever see dragonflies flying.

What equipment are you using? What magnification have you used on the spider? Was this taken outdoors or in a controlled environment? Sorry for bombarding you with questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Camellia

I love dragonflies and I am in awe of people photographing them. I only ever see dragonflies flying.

---

Next time you see one flying (and you have your camera with you ideally), just stand still and watch where it goes, they are creatures of habit.

I agree it is very hard to spot them when not moving, so the trick is to 'follow' a moving one and see where it lands - it will - in my experience, they land for several minutes at a time, then fly a circuit and land again.

Cheers,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

Although mostly I shoot much smaller (requiring higher magnifications) and more active subjects where it's enough of a challenge just getting the important bits in focus:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/...263dacda_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/...051d6388_o.jpg

---

Love these Andy

Ok, this is my third attempt at posting this with my photo. This was the first macro type photo I had ever taken. It was shot with a Nikon D3000 55-200mm VR lens, and processed using PSE 5.0. I think the Monarch was quite fresh as the colour was very sharp.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...p;d=1290650922

Attachment 8247

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Camellia

What equipment are you using? What magnification have you used on the spider? Was this taken outdoors or in a controlled environment? Sorry for bombarding you with questions.

---

Thanks Raylee and Dave :)

The jumping spider was shot using a Canon MP-E 65mm 1-5x macro and MT-24EX macro twin-flash on a 7D. I think it was shot around 3:1.....wish it included the magnification in the EXIF! It was taken in the local butterfly farm where the heated greenhouse provides year round opportunities to shoot them - they aren't captive, they just like it there. There seems to be several non-native species of jumping spiders that have taken up residence in the greenhouse aswell as some native species that thrive on the fruit flies which are attracted to the fruit the keepers put out for the butterflies. A wonderful place to get my macro fix if it's raining ouside:D

They also have some cool lizards and loads of other reptiles, insects and spiders.

These were shot through glass cages:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/...6397bf68_z.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3501/...0bfbbbba_o.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

Thanks Raylee and Dave :)

The jumping spider was shot using a Canon MP-E 65mm 1-5x macro and MT-24EX macro twin-flash on a 7D. I think it was shot around 3:1.....wish it included the magnification in the EXIF! It was taken in the local butterfly farm where the heated greenhouse provides year round opportunities to shoot them - they aren't captive, they just like it there. There seems to be several non-native species of jumping spiders that have taken up residence in the greenhouse aswell as some native species that thrive on the fruit flies which are attracted to the fruit the keepers put out for the butterflies. A wonderful place to get my macro fix if it's raining ouside:D

They also have some cool lizards and loads of other reptiles, insects and spiders.

These were shot through glass cages:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/...6397bf68_z.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3501/...0bfbbbba_o.jpg

---

I love the detail of the lizard's eye. Thanks Andy for the info. Do you use rails with the 65mm macro? How do you find it?

Share your macro shots here (insects, plants objects or anything small)

Lynx spider
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1326/...41b17ee2_z.jpg

V Fly
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5165/...42fab2cb_z.jpg

Yellow Banded Moth
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/...69c1cfeb_z.jpg

Nice!

There already is a 'Share you Macro's here' thread, here.

If you wish to move your image into that thread, please do so, or let me know and I will do so.

John,

Nice shots. What is your setup? This is a cicada that happened to land on my back veranda. My first ever attempt at Macro with a Canon 50D 100 mm F2.8 Macro lens.

Nasseem

http://i53.tinypic.com/5x4rbc.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy

Hi Katy, yes it's really up to the photographer depending upon what treatment you think a shot needs. If the shot is aesthetically pleasing you can use sharpness creatively. For record shots I generally strive for a sharp subject against a distraction free background but that's really only possible at lower magnifications than I took those butterfly shots at. At higher macro magnifications used for closeups of their eyes and suchlike you get shallow DoF whether you like it or not.

For example in this shot of a large subject (low magnification) I think it was clear what should be sharp and what shouldn't:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3629/...db929ef7_o.jpg

Not that every shot is as clear cut and it's not everybody's cup of tea but to my mind it's one of those shots where there was right and wrong. I consider them a technical excercise for honing technique mostly.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/...75725a4e_o.jpg

Although mostly I shoot much smaller (requiring higher magnifications) and more active subjects where it's enough of a challenge just getting the important bits in focus:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/...263dacda_o.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/...051d6388_o.jpg

Hope that helps answer your other questions too? You just have to do the best you can at the time :)

---

Dear Andy,

I love your spiders. Great composition and model Lucky to have access to them all the time. I am a biologist but never knew spiders had so many eyes!!!!

Nasseem

Great work guys. My modest contribution to the thread of a Cicada shot with 100 mm Canon f2.8 macro. My first ever attempt at macro. Ill add afew more of the same insect. C&C please.

Nasseem
http://i53.tinypic.com/5x4rbc.jpg
http://i52.tinypic.com/28h2xsi.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/11sysme.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/29nyr08.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donald

There already is a 'Share you Macro's here' thread, here.

If you wish to move your image into that thread, please do so, or let me know and I will do so.

---

Sure Donald please merge this thread to 'Share your Macro's thread' and thank you