[Pentikonian]

Not sure if this would be "macro" or "nature"? Tabletop work, so I picked "macro".

Looking for critique/ tips on how to improve... (Other than lighting. Currently using two desk lamps. Will be getting some proper lighting later this year.)

Minimal post processing for color, cropping, re-sizing, saving for web.



Larger original image here:

Blue Iris Photo

Thanks!

---

Last edited by Pentikonian; 10-24-2011 at 06:39 AM.

[frank44]

I like it good detail and colour the lighting work for you.

[Pentikonian]

Thanks.

[luftfluss]

I'd classify this as "nature" rather than "macro", as macro is really supposed to be 1:1 ratio.

I'd also classify this as "lovely", because it is. It's both sharp and smooth, and I think you did a great job of capturing the delicate nature of the petals. I'd love to have an image as good as this.

[Pentikonian]

I'd classify this as "nature" rather than "macro", as macro is really supposed to be 1:1 ratio.

I'd also classify this as "lovely", because it is. It's both sharp and smooth, and I think you did a great job of capturing the delicate nature of the petals. I'd love to have an image as good as this.

I'll keep that in mind for future posts.

Thank you very much for the compliment.

[snappychappy]

Stunning colors, well taken.

[Gregory_51]

Since you're asking for suggestions. You don't need large investment in equipment for tabletop photography. I use a variety of lights with daylight florescent bulbs. I have a bank of 4' shop lights but also flexible lamps that are easy to adjust. I use LED flashlights a lot they are cheap and very useful for small subjects. I often use slow shutter speeds and move the light around " painting with light " as it's called. ( Don't know what this has changed to bold, can't seem to shut it off.) Please take this critique as advice as helpful advice not to trash your photo as feelings are easily hurt when someone doesn't like an image we are pleased with. Here goes. The photo is rather flat. If you look at your levels you need to drag in the left slider to the base of the steep hill. This is OK since the subject doesn't contain blacks and this will make the background truly black as it's rather a muddy dark now, that will help give separation and contrast. Next move the right slider to the left till it reaches the toe of significant pixels. Do this on an adjustment layer so you can turn it off and on to see the difference also that way you haven't altered the image and you can redo it to your hearts content, increase, decrease fade it and so on. The lens used is a beauty, I've got one too. The f8 is the sweet spot for resolution, if you stop down to f16 say you get more depth of field but the resolution plummets due to diffraction. Because depth of field is very small in close up/macro photography you need to use focus stacking software and take multiple images at different settings and merge them together to get sharpness front to back. On this image the front and center is sharp but the far petal isn't. As for the lighting you can experiment with backlighting etc. and use diffusers and reflectors etc. Experiment and try different angles, perhaps just part of a petal and so on. I often will spend a couple of hours playing around with a subject changing angles and lighting.
Regards
Greg

[Pentikonian]

Stunning colors, well taken.

Thanks!

Nice flickr stream - love the Vulcan shots!

[Pentikonian]

Since you're asking for suggestions. You don't need large investment in equipment for tabletop photography. I use a variety of lights with daylight florescent bulbs. I have a bank of 4' shop lights but also flexible lamps that are easy to adjust. I use LED flashlights a lot they are cheap and very useful for small subjects. I often use slow shutter speeds and move the light around " painting with light " as it's called. ( Don't know what this has changed to bold, can't seem to shut it off.) Please take this critique as advice as helpful advice not to trash your photo as feelings are easily hurt when someone doesn't like an image we are pleased with. Here goes. The photo is rather flat. If you look at your levels you need to drag in the left slider to the base of the steep hill. This is OK since the subject doesn't contain blacks and this will make the background truly black as it's rather a muddy dark now, that will help give separation and contrast. Next move the right slider to the left till it reaches the toe of significant pixels. Do this on an adjustment layer so you can turn it off and on to see the difference also that way you haven't altered the image and you can redo it to your hearts content, increase, decrease fade it and so on. The lens used is a beauty, I've got one too. The f8 is the sweet spot for resolution, if you stop down to f16 say you get more depth of field but the resolution plummets due to diffraction. Because depth of field is very small in close up/macro photography you need to use focus stacking software and take multiple images at different settings and merge them together to get sharpness front to back. On this image the front and center is sharp but the far petal isn't. As for the lighting you can experiment with backlighting etc. and use diffusers and reflectors etc. Experiment and try different angles, perhaps just part of a petal and so on. I often will spend a couple of hours playing around with a subject changing angles and lighting.
Regards
Greg

Flashlights... been known to use them once or twice.

I'm very limited on space, and am still debating on exactly which route to go, but leaning towards lighting that can be spot or have a larger, more diffuse emission - and be broken down into smaller components for storage when not in use. But a new desktop computer and monitor (6+ years old now) will probably take precedent, as the difference between the (better) monitor on my new notebook and my old desktop is brutal.

As for critique - I have thick skin. And I still have much to learn with regards to photography and post processing, so I'm always open to constructive criticism and suggestions.

I took the photos with various positions, light on one side or the other, etc... and this is the one that came out the best of that batch. I'll continue to experiment as well. I spent some time re-processing the image this morning using your suggestions. Did not have as much space as you evidently did, but I was able to get the black point set so the black background is actually black. I was also able to pull the right slider back a little, but not much - some of the blues on the edges of the petals began to over-saturate. The reworked image looks better than the first attempt on the notebook with the newer/ better monitor. Doesn't look good at all on my internet machine (old desktop). I will be continuing to reprocess images as I learn more.

Thanks for the critique and suggestions, Greg.

Reworked image is here if anyone is interested.