Macro First macro attempts

nandystam · 02-10-2011, 06:17 PM

I finally decided to be brave and put up a few macro shots of some roses (in full and half bloom) in the garden. A bit of morning rain helps as well!

I'm only starting out so please be nice

EDIT: I re-shot them with custom white balance, happier with the colours now. Did some light unsharp mask in Photoshop.. are they too sharp maybe?

The second version of the rose in half bloom has reduced depth of field for better subject isolation, hopefully that helps in the composition stakes!

Thanks in advance for your comments

Last edited by nandystam; 02-10-2011 at 07:37 PM.

PentaxKX-2011 · 02-11-2011, 03:59 PM

I think they are really nice. I am just starting out, yours inspires me. I can't wait till spring so I can get serious with the pics.

JeffJS · 02-11-2011, 04:54 PM

In my honest opinion, you could back off on the exposure a little bit. Colors are fine but they look overexposed to me.

2010 Roses - a set on Flickr

Coeurdechene · 02-11-2011, 06:22 PM

+1 on JeffjS advice...if you do that, the background will look better too and the rose will still be as beautifull...Maybe you could try someway to make a better background too (something greenier to contrast with the rose's colors?).

Svendinvenn · 02-11-2011, 07:26 PM

Hey Nandystam! You're starting off with macro exactly the same way as I did! That lens should be a very good tool for learning : )

+2 to Jeff. The color of the rose seems to have lost its saturation due to overexposure.

Also, try playing around with depth of field, it is often the most efficient tool when doing macro. This is entirely subjective I think, but in my opinion you've focused on the "wrong" part of the rose in the last picture. My eyes are drawn towards the stilk, although it's the rose that's pretty.

A thing I find very neat for outdoor macro is an external flash. Using this you can get your motive in focus, and darkening the background a lot. I might be lying, but I think I used that setup in this shoot. Here I also used the same Vivitar as you're using. It's not in any way perfect, but it gives you a feel of how stuff looks with it.

I think you're off to a good start! Macro is a lot of fun, especially trying out new techniques etc!

nandystam · 02-11-2011, 07:51 PM

Thanks for the feedback thus far everyone

From memory I thought I underexposed these a little bit (-0.5 or -1.0), maybe I didn't!

JeffJS · 02-11-2011, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by nandystam

Thanks for the feedback thus far everyone

From memory I thought I underexposed these a little bit (-0.5 or -1.0), maybe I didn't!

Or maybe you did. When shooting flowers, I leave the Auto modes all together and go full manual. The old rule that I follow with them is to expose for the highlights and process for the shadows. Even if the highlights are in the background or bokeh. Exposing your particular flower shots for the highlights would darken the flowers some and give you a lot of room to move in post processing. Retaining plenty of detail. I've taken a lot of flower photos and have yet to take one or a flower (not that they don't exist) that has no texture at all.

I Personally, that is esthetically, prefer the background to be darker than the flower (or insect or coin or whatever you are macro-ing). To me, it really helps make things pop. It pushes the subject off of the screen at the viewer. To me, the hallmark of a good macro is one that shows every possible detail. Get that down and my attention will be drawn to the fine job you did on photographing the flower and I'll concern myself with the rest later in the view. That is, unless the 'rest' is meant to be part of the habitat (such as a bug on a plant).

I'm not knocking your efforts, red flowers are among the most difficult to photograph. Right up there if not closely following Yellow flowers. That is because it's difficult to keep the colors from bleeding together, making the petals look paper-like. That's fine if you're taking pictures of paper flowers.

Those of course, are only one persons opinions.

**Ash** · 02-13-2011, 01:30 PM

Each lens manages exposure differently, and some lenses overexpose even more when stopping down (like my FA 100 macro). But these images have been beautifully rendered. #1 is a keeper. Keep an eye on your backgrounds and the way the light plays with your subject and background - these are of paramount importance in macros.

02-11-2011, 04:54 PM	#3
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	In my honest opinion, you could back off on the exposure a little bit. Colors are fine but they look overexposed to me. 2010 Roses - a set on Flickr Last edited by JeffJS; 02-11-2011 at 07:38 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature First macro attempts	CWyatt	Post Your Photos!	5	10-11-2009 09:25 PM
First macro attempts: bees and a wasp	causey	Post Your Photos!	6	06-12-2009 10:06 AM
Not quite cherry blossom (macro attempts)	Rense	Post Your Photos!	11	03-01-2009 02:47 PM
Some macro attempts	dbh	Post Your Photos!	8	07-14-2008 07:13 AM
first attempts with the Sigma 180mm macro	sholtzma	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	04-20-2008 07:31 PM

02-10-2011, 06:17 PM	#1
nandystam Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Melbourne, Vic. Posts: 135	First macro attempts Lens: Vivitar Series 1 70-210 Camera: K-r I finally decided to be brave and put up a few macro shots of some roses (in full and half bloom) in the garden. A bit of morning rain helps as well! I'm only starting out so please be nice EDIT: I re-shot them with custom white balance, happier with the colours now. Did some light unsharp mask in Photoshop.. are they too sharp maybe? The second version of the rose in half bloom has reduced depth of field for better subject isolation, hopefully that helps in the composition stakes! Thanks in advance for your comments Last edited by nandystam; 02-10-2011 at 07:37 PM.

02-11-2011, 03:59 PM	#2
PentaxKX-2011 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 63	I think they are really nice. I am just starting out, yours inspires me. I can't wait till spring so I can get serious with the pics.

02-11-2011, 06:22 PM	#4
Coeurdechene Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: madrid Photos: Albums Posts: 833	+1 on JeffjS advice...if you do that, the background will look better too and the rose will still be as beautifull...Maybe you could try someway to make a better background too (something greenier to contrast with the rose's colors?).

02-11-2011, 07:26 PM	#5
Svendinvenn Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: San Diego Posts: 59	Hey Nandystam! You're starting off with macro exactly the same way as I did! That lens should be a very good tool for learning : ) +2 to Jeff. The color of the rose seems to have lost its saturation due to overexposure. Also, try playing around with depth of field, it is often the most efficient tool when doing macro. This is entirely subjective I think, but in my opinion you've focused on the "wrong" part of the rose in the last picture. My eyes are drawn towards the stilk, although it's the rose that's pretty. A thing I find very neat for outdoor macro is an external flash. Using this you can get your motive in focus, and darkening the background a lot. I might be lying, but I think I used that setup in this shoot. Here I also used the same Vivitar as you're using. It's not in any way perfect, but it gives you a feel of how stuff looks with it. I think you're off to a good start! Macro is a lot of fun, especially trying out new techniques etc!

02-11-2011, 07:51 PM	#6
nandystam Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Melbourne, Vic. Posts: 135 Original Poster	Thanks for the feedback thus far everyone From memory I thought I underexposed these a little bit (-0.5 or -1.0), maybe I didn't!

02-11-2011, 08:24 PM	#7
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by nandystam Thanks for the feedback thus far everyone From memory I thought I underexposed these a little bit (-0.5 or -1.0), maybe I didn't! Or maybe you did. When shooting flowers, I leave the Auto modes all together and go full manual. The old rule that I follow with them is to expose for the highlights and process for the shadows. Even if the highlights are in the background or bokeh. Exposing your particular flower shots for the highlights would darken the flowers some and give you a lot of room to move in post processing. Retaining plenty of detail. I've taken a lot of flower photos and have yet to take one or a flower (not that they don't exist) that has no texture at all. I Personally, that is esthetically, prefer the background to be darker than the flower (or insect or coin or whatever you are macro-ing). To me, it really helps make things pop. It pushes the subject off of the screen at the viewer. To me, the hallmark of a good macro is one that shows every possible detail. Get that down and my attention will be drawn to the fine job you did on photographing the flower and I'll concern myself with the rest later in the view. That is, unless the 'rest' is meant to be part of the habitat (such as a bug on a plant). I'm not knocking your efforts, red flowers are among the most difficult to photograph. Right up there if not closely following Yellow flowers. That is because it's difficult to keep the colors from bleeding together, making the petals look paper-like. That's fine if you're taking pictures of paper flowers. Those of course, are only one persons opinions.

02-13-2011, 01:30 PM	#8
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Each lens manages exposure differently, and some lenses overexpose even more when stopping down (like my FA 100 macro). But these images have been beautifully rendered. #1 is a keeper. Keep an eye on your backgrounds and the way the light plays with your subject and background - these are of paramount importance in macros.