Macro spices... Testing out Brian's tutorial

photocat

First of all I want to thank Lord Vetinari for this tutorial, as I could crack the code with it.
I have been playing with my Nikon D200 with Nikkor 60mm 2.8 macro lens today, and this is what I came up with...
I could use some help in determining which one is the best as I have to enter a photoclub contest next week.



The full gallery is here:

http://photocat.smugmug.com/gallery/3471724#195267007

Any help or comment would be appreciated.

D.Rodgers

I like the 11th picture in the gallery has the most interest for me ..
I need to throw in 2 cents though studio macro is accepted but the white bottom throws me off.
I use 19x30 photos with ground shots and leaves as a canvas looks very real.

Btw great subject and you have done good with the lighting..

photocat

I use 19x30 photos with ground shots and leaves as a canvas looks very real.

Btw great subject and you have done good with the lighting..[/QUOTE]

You would shoot the spices on a ground shot?
I am not really a studio shooter, give me the out doors. Might try it again tomorrow on the kitchen table... grin
Thanks for the comment, image 11 has one vote!
Thanks again

Lord Vetinari

Think I prefer the composition in #11 but would get rid of the bright spots on the BG if I could.
BTW fascinated to know which tutorial helped ?
Brian V.

photocat

BTW fascinated to know which tutorial helped ?
Brian V.[/QUOTE]

Will have a go at the lights Brian...
So far I did your first tutorial:

Macro Exercises #1 DOF, Aperture and diffraction

I loved it that it showed us a starting point: use this aperture, use this ISO, put on the flash (which I never would have done before your tutorial, I am big on without flash shooting...)
I just did what you said, and it worked. I don't see though why using the on camera flash makes the difference between a working shot and a way too underexposed shot. If I can now get to grips with the why behind it, I am sure that it will be even better.
I am planning on doing all the tutorials...
Thanks Brian

D.Rodgers

photocat wrote:

I use 19x30 photos with ground shots and leaves as a canvas looks very real.

Btw great subject and you have done good with the lighting..

You would shoot the spices on a ground shot?
I am not really a studio shooter, give me the out doors. Might try it again tomorrow on the kitchen table... grin
Thanks for the comment, image 11 has one vote!
Thanks again[/quote]

The background wont have any clarity if you shoot at the right magnification..
The color should complement the subject ..
The stark contrast of white against the natural hues of the spice seems to studio/stock.

photocat

The stark contrast of white against the natural hues of the spice seems to studio/stock.[/QUOTE]


What do you mean by "seems to studio/stock"? )))

Lord Vetinari

photocat wrote:

BTW fascinated to know which tutorial helped ?
Brian V.

Will have a go at the lights Brian...
So far I did your first tutorial:

Macro Exercises #1 DOF, Aperture and diffraction

I loved it that it showed us a starting point: use this aperture, use this ISO, put on the flash (which I never would have done before your tutorial, I am big on without flash shooting...)
I just did what you said, and it worked. I don't see though why using the on camera flash makes the difference between a working shot and a way too underexposed shot. If I can now get to grips with the why behind it, I am sure that it will be even better.
I am planning on doing all the tutorials...
Thanks Brian[/quote]

The settings you put in the camera in manual mode will not give a good exposure without the flash. The flash effectively measures how much light is missing (using a very brief pre-flash) and then adds enough flash to give you a properly exposed picture. This is different to using flash in Tv or Av modes where the camera sets itself for a normal exposure and then adds enough flash to highlight the nearest subject.
Brian V.

photocat

The settings you put in the camera in manual mode will not give a good exposure without the flash. The flash effectively measures how much light is missing (using a very brief pre-flash) and then adds enough flash to give you a properly exposed picture. This is different to using flash in Tv or Av modes where the camera sets itself for a normal exposure and then adds enough flash to highlight the nearest subject.
Brian V.[/QUOTE]

After fourty years of photography, I still have a lot to learn! Lucky for me I learned more in the last 5 years then in the previous 35... does the little in camera flash have a pre-flash? I thought only my SB800 could do that... Oops, no, guess if I put the in camera flash on red eye, it will fire a pre-flash, or am I mixing it all up????
Thanks Brian

D.Rodgers

photocat wrote:

The stark contrast of white against the natural hues of the spice seems to studio/stock.

What do you mean by "seems to studio/stock"? )))[/quote]

You have beenShooting for 40 yrs and i need to explain what stock photos are?
Meh!
Sorry I offered any help now..

saurora

photocat wrote:

The stark contrast of white against the natural hues of the spice seems to studio/stock.

What do you mean by "seems to studio/stock"? )))[/QUOTE]

Hi Cat! I like #11 as well. Seems the sharpest and the most interesting composition. I believe what D.Rogers was attempting to say to you was "too studio/stock." By using a white background, (instead of something more natural or nature-like such as he was suggesting), your shots come across as a typical studio shot for producing stock photography for food (where they commonly use stark white backgrounds.) I wonder about using something like brown sugar or sand? Could be fun to experiment with different textures of food or grain for a background. I don't do this kind of photography, but I can see his point.

photocat

D.Rodgers wrote:

What do you mean by "seems to studio/stock"? )))

You have beenShooting for 40 yrs and i need to explain what stock photos are?
Meh!
Sorry I offered any help now..[/QUOTE]

I know what stock photography is, and I know what studio photography is, I just did not understand your building of your sentence...
I am flemish speaking, and sometimes people say something that I don't get.
If you would have written it seems to BE studio/stock photography" I would have gotten it and not have wondered if there was anything out there that I did not know of... And to be sorry that you offered help is a nasty thing to say... This community thrives on help and asked questions. :pissed

photocat

Thanks Saurora, I had no idea that they set up macro shots on white for product shots. I can indeed easily reshoot... (I do have a dark brown kitchen table, maybe that would be a better idea then put it in a bright plate what I did in this case).
Will have a go at it later on the day! Thanks for the constructive feedback... It means a lot to me!

Art Scott

D.Rodgers wrote:

What do you mean by "seems to studio/stock"? )))

You have beenShooting for 40 yrs and i need to explain what stock photos are?
Meh!
Sorry I offered any help now..[/quote]


Not here to win any friends are ya???


I see there is another page to read.....but this asinine attitude stopped me dead in the tracks.........actually I am wondering the same thing about your remark.....Do you mean it is too STUDIO AND STOCK STYLED or what.....

Cat said she is still learning and as I have heard very great and learned men and women say .....We should never stop learning or helping...When we do we are dead.

This is a forum to help those that ask for help and not to slap someone for not understanding something we write......for one thing is she a native english speaker......for some reason I have my suspicion that english (whether American or British or Aussie) may not be her first language.......

Your mother should wash your mouth out with lye soap and your father should tan your hide with a belt......
Your answer and attitude is appalling!!

D.Rodgers

Art Scott wrote:

You have beenShooting for 40 yrs and i need to explain what stock photos are?
Meh!
Sorry I offered any help now..

Not here to win any friends are ya???


I see there is another page to read.....but this asinine attitude stopped me dead in the tracks.........actually I am wondering the same thing about your remark.....Do you mean it is too STUDIO AND STOCK STYLED or what.....

Cat said she is still learning and as I have heard very great and learned men and women say .....We should never stop learning or helping...When we do we are dead.

This is a forum to help those that ask for help and not to slap someone for not understanding something we write......for one thing is she a native English speaker......for some reason I have my suspicion that English (whether American or British or Aussie) may not be her first language.......

Your mother should wash your mouth out with lye soap and your father should tan your hide with a belt......
Your answer and attitude is appalling!![/quote]


Do you Feel better now ..

Make friends Lol ,I don't think so I come here for advice and to give where i can..
This is a public forum I offered up a simple comment that turned into a huge waste of my time .
The op know what i meant and was giving attitude as far as I'm concerned.
Give attitude get attitude.
If im wrong i apologize.
Also you need to get out into more forums becuase you're reacting like I made aracil comment or worse.
nothing of the sort happened here just frustrated from re explaining myself..

Ps This is the worst forum i have seen for non posting anyways ,.
I even pulled an image from the bottle assignment thread ,It was up two days and I was ignored ,It was supposed to be a guided thread.
Friendly forum keep it.