Done especialy for NeilL

Mr. Quiet

NeilL has issues with my DOF, so I went out today to improve my skills and prove to him that I am getting better. It is a half-joke-half serious-thing.


1)



2)



3)



So, are you still going to be obdurate about my DOF gramps?:D:rofl:D:rofl

NeilL

Well, m' boy, I'm honored. And impressed, yes sir! And less obdurate, mebbe. But still pretty persnickety! rofl It's me oiy, that's the problem. It feels cheated by not getting more of that lovely in focus area of interest.

You need a DOF formula to be expert at macro, and I'll try to find it for ya. You also, in me 'umble hopinion, need to pay attention to what of your subject is near and far, and possibly rotate it or yourself so your chosen DOF is covering what needs to be in it and not what doesn't. A third thing (ya got me goin', lad!) is lighting. Ya need to get some shadows in them thar macros to give 'em some 3D (4D or 5D'd be better, o'course - yeah, I'd like a 5D, come to think of it ).

DOF, positioning and lighting, the three pillars of macro. Take it from an ex spurt!! :ivar:ivar:ivarscratch

Thanks for your kind dedicaton and congratulations on your progress.

PS Are they with your D200?

Neil

GOLDENORFE

not to bad:D
DOF not an issue, [ who is this neil guy anyhow? ]

composition and lighting are the main problems, all too central, need to have main subject over to one side with more space to where the hoverfly is facing. focus needs to be on the eyes/head. 1 st frame focus is good, second frame the body is in focus!
they all look flat, try levels/contrast adjustment to brighten highlights and darken shadows a bit.
keep posting.
phil

NaturePics

Mr. Quiet wrote:

NeilL has issues with my DOF, so I went out today to improve my skills and prove to him that I am getting better. It is a half-joke-half serious-thing.

I'm not Neil and I don't care much about technique for its own sake. I think your shots are very effective at capturing the look of a lovely flower and the insect (hover fly?). I enjoyed looking at all three pictures and I would re-visit #1 and #2.

I've had a real macro lens for about 3 1/2 months and am still working on the depth of field issue.

Edit: I spend a lot of time outdoors doing habitat restoration as well as just enjoying wildlife, wildflowers and insects. I prefer images that capture something of nature and look real rather than artificial. Your #1 is especially good in that regard. #3 is good too. The color in #2 seems a bit less real but is not off-putting. I sometimes feel that posing an insect on a featureless, artificial surface produces a technically perfect but sterile image. if you are taking pictures in a natural setting with insects that move when they want to, you need to quickly capture the image. Thanks for capturing these images.

Bill

Mr. Quiet

NeilL wrote:

Well, m' boy, I'm honored. And impressed, yes sir! And less obdurate, mebbe. But still pretty persnickety! rofl It's me oiy, that's the problem. It feels cheated by not getting more of that lovely in focus area of interest.

You need a DOF formula to be expert at macro, and I'll try to find it for ya. You also, in me 'umble hopinion, need to pay attention to what of your subject is near and far, and possibly rotate it or yourself so your chosen DOF is covering what needs to be in it and not what doesn't. A third thing (ya got me goin', lad!) is lighting. Ya need to get some shadows in them thar macros to give 'em some 3D (4D or 5D'd be better, o'course - yeah, I'd like a 5D, come to think of it ).

DOF, positioning and lighting, the three pillars of macro. Take it from an ex spurt!! :ivar:ivar:ivarscratch

Thanks for your kind dedicaton and congratulations on your progress.

PS Are they with your D200?

Neil

Yes they are! I think as to composition, 2 is best?

Lord Vetinari

LIke the first 2 shots - like the light - DOF seems fine to me as well. Just missed clean focus on the hoverfly head in #2

Brian v.

NeilL

Re DOF, I don't think I said there was actually something wrong with it in these shots, just that it didn't satisfy me. But that goes hand in hand with other things like positioning/arranging of subject or photographer, and lighting. DOF is the photographer's call, but to make the best call they need to be able to calculate the best DOF for their purpose, and to light and compose for that DOF.

Neil

Mr. Quiet

Agreed.....Hey gramps, did you find those yet?

At least I am trying

NeilL

Mr. Quiet wrote:

Agreed.....Hey gramps, did you find those yet?

At least I am trying

To get you in the mood, babe:

http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html

Neil

Mr. Quiet

O, I am in the mood alright! I got a question about that chart though. Its shortest distance is a foot! I get to about 2" of my subject sometimes....most of the time actually.....

Thank you.

PS
the chart is very helpful though, thanks again

Lord Vetinari

If you want to work out the DOF for macro shots- this formula works pretty well http://liewwk-macro.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-depth-of-field-dof-you-have-while.html

Brian V.