Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object...
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
Donn Thorson wrote:
An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object... Hi Donn, Please accept this critique in the spirit in which it was given, ie.,to help you produce better macro shots of flowers. You take a lot of Macro shots of flowers which are my favorite photographic subjects. But for some reason, the vast majority of then are out of focus and lack sharpness. Perhaps part of the reason might be that you are shooting at maximum aperture and the depth of field is extremely shallow. But on many shots, including this one, the central image itself is out of focus. Perhaps your AF control is faulty or if you are using manual focusing, the diopter setting on your eyepiece may be set incorrectly. From the picture of your Macro rig, which you recently posted, it seems that you use your laptop as your viewing screen. One would think that this would give you excellent control of image quality before tripping the shutter. But something is awry. See if you can figure out why the images are not sharp and remedy it as best you can. I enjoy looking at your images but would enjoy them much more if they were sharper. Good Luck on your efforts. Bob Williams |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
"Bob Williams" wrote in message
... Donn Thorson wrote: An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object... Hi Donn, Hello Donn. I'd like to second Bob's comments. I know they are sincere and not meant to be insulting or hurtful. And we all love flowers and good photography, otherwise we wouldn't bother coming to a.b.p.g., so all of us would love to see your results improve. I looked at the picture of your macro rig the other day and frankly there's nothing wrong with your equipment. It's at least as good or better than anything I use, so by all rights you ought to be producing better pictures. I've looked for your EXIF data to see if there are any clues there but I see you've blocked it --- probably as a way to reduce your file sizes and there's certainly nothing wrong with that idea. Bob does very nice garden photography. He may or may not be willing to share some of his success tips --- I can't speak for him. But speaking for myself there's no black magic or secrets. I'd be happy to share a few pointers via e-mail if you'd like. -- Pat Durkin PS --- I can't help thinking that maybe the root of the problem may be that you have vision problems, in which case I ought to shut up and mind my own business. If so, please accept my apologies. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 05:10:45 -0700, "Paddy's Pig"
wrote: "Bob Williams" wrote in message ... Donn Thorson wrote: An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object... Hi Donn, Hello Donn. I'd like to second Bob's comments. I know they are sincere and not meant to be insulting or hurtful. And we all love flowers and good photography, otherwise we wouldn't bother coming to a.b.p.g., so all of us would love to see your results improve. I looked at the picture of your macro rig the other day and frankly there's nothing wrong with your equipment. It's at least as good or better than anything I use, so by all rights you ought to be producing better pictures. I've looked for your EXIF data to see if there are any clues there but I see you've blocked it --- probably as a way to reduce your file sizes and there's certainly nothing wrong with that idea. Bob does very nice garden photography. He may or may not be willing to share some of his success tips --- I can't speak for him. But speaking for myself there's no black magic or secrets. I'd be happy to share a few pointers via e-mail if you'd like. Hi pat, good suggestions and I know you could help Donn. I too enjoy his garden pictures and would love for them to be better. BTW irfanview as you know a free and great program saves EXIF data when changing sizes or whatever. I think there is a setting to that effect. I remember a few years ago it did not. I sent irfan skiljan an email and asked if he could add saving EXIF data. He responded to me, thanked me and said he would try. I gather he did just that as it now saves EXIF data. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
In article ,
Bob Williams wrote: Donn Thorson wrote: An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object... Hi Donn, Please accept this critique in the spirit in which it was given, ie.,to help you produce better macro shots of flowers. You take a lot of Macro shots of flowers which are my favorite photographic subjects. But for some reason, the vast majority of then are out of focus and lack sharpness. Perhaps part of the reason might be that you are shooting at maximum aperture and the depth of field is extremely shallow. But on many shots, including this one, the central image itself is out of focus. Perhaps your AF control is faulty or if you are using manual focusing, the diopter setting on your eyepiece may be set incorrectly. From the picture of your Macro rig, which you recently posted, it seems that you use your laptop as your viewing screen. One would think that this would give you excellent control of image quality before tripping the shutter. But something is awry. See if you can figure out why the images are not sharp and remedy it as best you can. I enjoy looking at your images but would enjoy them much more if they were sharper. Good Luck on your efforts. Bob Williams Hmmm...bye-bye group! Moving On. -Donn |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
Donn Thorson wrote:
Hmmm...bye-bye group! Moving On. Well that's a shame. As I saw it, Bill was trying to be helpful, there's not many of us who can't do without an outsider pointing out a different or better way of presenting our photos. I always welcome constructive criticism, it jolts me out of my complacency. Personally I think the softness is caused by you compressing the photos a little too much, trying to make the files small but images large, though I may be wrong. Not knowing what software you use for editing (there's no EXIF info in your photos) it's hard to say, but I feel that is where there is a slight problem, also I wonder if you apply some form of sharpening after resizing? For digital photos this is a must. I've done something that I never do, that is, I've resized one of your photos and added a bit of sharpening it to it, I apologise if this offends you, but it does illustrate the difference when sharpened after resizing. ( I normally do not believe in playing with someone else's photos) I also understand that macro photos do mean a small depth of field, but emphasising what is in focus via sharpening after resizing and not compressing the files too much, can make an awful big difference. If all of the above is out of order, I apologise. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
In article ,
Bob Williams wrote: Donn Thorson wrote: An UFO: Unidentified Flowering Object... Hi Donn, Please accept this critique in the spirit in which it was given, ie.,to help you produce better macro shots of flowers. You take a lot of Macro shots of flowers which are my favorite photographic subjects. But for some reason, the vast majority of then are out of focus and lack sharpness. Perhaps part of the reason might be that you are shooting at maximum aperture and the depth of field is extremely shallow. But on many shots, including this one, the central image itself is out of focus. Perhaps your AF control is faulty or if you are using manual focusing, the diopter setting on your eyepiece may be set incorrectly. From the picture of your Macro rig, which you recently posted, it seems that you use your laptop as your viewing screen. One would think that this would give you excellent control of image quality before tripping the shutter. But something is awry. See if you can figure out why the images are not sharp and remedy it as best you can. I enjoy looking at your images but would enjoy them much more if they were sharper. Good Luck on your efforts. Bob Williams You are totally correct...and I don't mind being criticized...but I never do that to others...be careful when you hand out unsolicited advice. FYI: Although it appears I am somewhat new to digital photography, I was trained and degreed in film photography. I presently make my living doing technical publications, which includes doing industrial photography for major corporate clients. I worked for General Motors Photographic for a number of years, and I have over forty-years in the business. Presently my equipment includes a medium format Mamiya RB67, Canon EOS 1N, Canon EOS 650 and my Canon Digital XTi and I have a couple of dozen different lens. I know a little something about photography. To clarify... (1) Any photos I posted that were older (before 2008) were done with point and shoot cameras that had between 1.3 and 5MP. Naturally those cameras don't take "sharp macros" in comparison to modern digital equipment: Even when manipulated in Photoshop. (2) I run all pictures thru Photoshop...or Aperture...and reduce their size, adjust their appearance, and save them for the web to reduce their physical size. By saving them for the web it reduces the appearance of the pictures significantly from the originals. If I were to post them smaller, as many do...they would sharpen them up a bit. (3) The nature of a true macro lens has a bearing on the focus of the object, especially the closer you get to the photographed object. enough said -Donn |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
"Donn Thorson" wrote in message
... enough saidS Yep. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Macro Flowers - White-Flower_5645.jpg (1/1)
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:26:26 +1000, "Maroochy" BarbaraH*REMOVE
wrote: Donn Thorson wrote: Hmmm...bye-bye group! Moving On. Well that's a shame. As I saw it, Bill was trying to be helpful, there's not many of us who can't do without an outsider pointing out a different or better way of presenting our photos. I always welcome constructive criticism, it jolts me out of my complacency. Personally I think the softness is caused by you compressing the photos a little too much, trying to make the files small but images large, though I may be wrong. Not knowing what software you use for editing (there's no EXIF info in your photos) it's hard to say, but I feel that is where there is a slight problem, also I wonder if you apply some form of sharpening after resizing? For digital photos this is a must. I've done something that I never do, that is, I've resized one of your photos and added a bit of sharpening it to it, I apologise if this offends you, but it does illustrate the difference when sharpened after resizing. ( I normally do not believe in playing with someone else's photos) I also understand that macro photos do mean a small depth of field, but emphasising what is in focus via sharpening after resizing and not compressing the files too much, can make an awful big difference. If all of the above is out of order, I apologise. Nice Barbara, I relly like the way you brought that one up. I think some people just refuse to learn anything new, once they have learned it all. ) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Macro Flowers - Petunnia-White-n-Red_5608.jpg (1/1) | Garden Photos | |||
Macro Flowers - Balloon-Flowers_6143.jpg (1/1) | Garden Photos | |||
Macro Flowers - Lillies.jpg (1/1) | Garden Photos | |||
Flowers: - Marigold-Macro-2web.jpg (1/1) | Garden Photos | |||
Flowers: - Marigold-Macro-1web.jpg (1/1) | Garden Photos |