|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
I claim the prize for the closest answer :-)
But others can disagree. |
Jun 26th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
Don't be shy! Other groups often show canera ohone shots. It's a good way for those of us with simpler phones to see what is possible nowadays. |
Jun 26th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
It's very easy with a motor-driven focus rack! Even easier when it's controlled by a computer. |
Jun 15th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
Thanks Carol, you have given me several things to think about. At the moment, due to the temperature here which I struggle with, I have about as much energy as a 90 year old, so I've only briefly looked at your leads.
Wabi -sabi is something I've not heard of before, and I like the overviews I've read, but it's clearly a deep philosophy which takes time to understand. However I like the overall concept.
Lisa and Tom seem to be prolific photographers. I don't see much wabi-sabi in their macro section, but their "rusty, dusty, and-or crusty closeup" page certainly suggests wabi-sabi to me.
As for lots of images in the bracket yet a very out-of-focus stem, well of course we know that bracketting and stacking lead to a fall-off in sharpness outside the stacked area that can be perceptually abnormal - it goes from sharp to very blurred, very quickly. Maybe that is why it is so.
I have been changing my workflow recently, and amongst other things I'm also deleting large brackets once they are stacked to reduce the HDD space I use, so I can't go back to the originals to check anything. Maybe I'll regret this change! But I'd like to halt my past tendency to keep going out and buying more computer storage, it's so wasteful I think. But I think you're right, the very blurry stem does spoil the whole fnal result. Lesson noted! |
Jun 15th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
You've really thought about this image, Fran! I think it's a good result. Your focus is spot on for the purpose, and the DoF fits with your aim of an artistic image. It's interesting that one grass blade is visible through the petals.
I would suggest that it's a little dull, and selectively dodging the lily inside area would brighten it and give it more punch. |
Jun 11th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, Gloria.
Brackets of over 100 images are unusual for me - 10-20 would be more typical, but the results is usually the same crisp quality. |
Jun 11th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
I look forwards to your results! Don't forget, the server has a 1 MPx limit! :-) |
Jun 11th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
Yes, I'm sure the R5 will have bracketing and stacking built in, as reviews say it's a formidable camera.
I might have gone that way too, but it didn't fit my desire for light and small equipment, and also my MP-E lens is for APS-C. But the R is light for full frame, so I borrowed an R and an RP I think from Canon a couple of years ago and was delighted when my photos taken on this lens (and my 100mm macro) came out "full frame". I didn't understand what had happened as I get a bit confused over Canon lens mount systems, but somehow twigged just before ordering a body. When I looked at the image details, they were only 9-10 MPx. The camera "knew" it was an APS-C lens and so only used the part of the sensor that the lens covered, which is clever, but instead of a 30 MPx full frame image, the best it could do was a 10MPx APS-C image. I could have got a 45MPx R5, but still would only have got 15-20MPx APS-C images with these lenses, which is not the purpose of having such an expensive body! So I had to accept that a full frame Canon is not for me. I'm happy with my M50ii though, it's a 22 MPx marvel despite being dubbed a "beginners' camera" :-) |
Jun 11th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Reply |
Thanks, Keith.
The background is a piece of blue card (hence a bit boring in colour and texture. I have some printed random backgrounds, but they often seem to detract rather than add to the result). The camera is looking vertically down on the subject so the card is simply resting below it. |
Jun 10th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
I'm sure Carol can give you chapter and verse on that subject.
The colours and background make it pop nicely. Super sharpness in most places. The high ISO isn't spoiling it for me.
The ends of the nearer petals are blurred and distracting from what otherwise is a nice image, I think.
I would try using the dodge tool in your software to lighten the stem a little to reveal its presence, as the flower seems to be floating in the air at the moment. |
Jun 8th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
I think it's quite a nice result, Gloria. A mystery subject! but intriguing. Considering how much you cropped it, the outlines of the spheres are quite clear. You have lots of specular highlights, which can be annoying but difficult to avoid. A polarising filter helps sometimes, otherwise my advice is to take expose carefully in RAW, and use the RAW editor in Affinity or Photoshop etc pull back any blown highlights. Otherwise, it's lots of editing!
There's no substitute for a macro lens to get close to the subject and avoid loss of quality from cropping. Your R5 is a formidable camera, but only with the right lens fitted! Canon macro lenses are good. |
Jun 8th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
There are only two ways to get more in focus, Gloria. The easiest is to stop down the lens more, you might have f16 or f22, and some macro lenses have f32 and even f45. The trouble is, at small apertures the sharpness of the image falls. This applies to all lenses, it's a matter of physics, you have to lump it. Having said that, it depends what you want to photo for, and you might get an acceptable sharpness at a small aperture.
The second way is called focus stacking. Here, you take several or many photos of the subject, each one refocussed slightly so that the depths of field overlap, and overall you finish up with photos of all parts of the subject from the closest to the furthest points that you want to be in focus. This is called a "focus bracket". Then you amalgamate most of, or all of, these images using suitable software, which picks out the sharp bits from every image and amalgamates them into one final product, called a "focus stack". Editors like Photoshop, Affinity Photo and others offer a stacking facility. There are also dedicated focus stacking softwares, such as Helicon Focus and Zerene Stacker, which are more versatile, but not necessariy better.
The hard bit is taking the focus bracket of photos, and for that you need a focus rail. This is the cheapest way to do it, and it's very reliable, but needs time and practice to use. We can give you advise on what to buy - these vary from about $20 to $400. I find mid-priced ones work well, but the cheap ones are fine to find out how it works and if you like it. Tom and I can give you lots of information on focus bracketting and stacking. Some cameras can do in-camera focus brackets, and some of those can also do focus stacks. My Olympus M1ii can take the photos so quickly that it can be done without a tripod, and will stack up to 15.
See my image this month - it was made from over 130 separate images! But it gave me a depth of field of about 12mm at a magnification of 1.0, when the depth of field of each image was probably about 0.2mm. Great fun!
|
Jun 8th |
| 95 |
Jun 23 |
Comment |
Hmmm, let's see. Concrete? Granite? Bullet hole in the outside wall of the General Post Office in Dublin ?? (1915 riots)
How much photographic control do you have using that phone camera? What macro lens are you using? With my "proper" camera, I'd have been setting higher ISO and smaller aperture. The subject all seems parallel to the sensor, so no DoF problem, but a better lens performance at say f5.6? |
Jun 8th |
6 comments - 7 replies for Group 95
|
6 comments - 7 replies Total
|
