Macro bugs in the yard

Goosey · 11-27-2014, 09:49 PM - **4 Likes**

gday guys
I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot
now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Rimfiredude · 11-28-2014, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by Goosey

gday guys
I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot
now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey

But a pretty bug.

stillshot2 · 08-05-2018, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by Goosey

gday guys
I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot
now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey

I feel like you are doing fine with this lens. A lot of people focus on getting so close that a lot of times the composition turns out awkward. This isn't the case in yours; I like how the butterfly is framed and for that your photo caught my attention

Photogoof · 08-09-2018, 01:10 PM

Nice one!

p0pa · 08-11-2018, 08:55 AM

I think for casual macro shooting - you can go with the Sigma. If you find that you shoot more often - then you can go for a macro lens (100mm/2.8 or a shorter macro lens). Also, keep in mind that with long lens (such as the Sigma) you can have more distance between you and the object, so you will deal with shadows from you and the camera a lot more easier.
Just a not about the photo - the green in the background is a bit distracting. Maybe you can reduce its saturation and brightness?

**Schraubstock** · 08-14-2018, 07:44 PM - **1 Like**

Just a simple brightening of this underexposed image and a slight reduction in the red and green channel will get you this; it has to be better, don't you agree ?

I am at a loss why I see so many underexposed and yellow cast images being posted here. There has to be a reason. The white balance of most cameras these days is pretty good. Better colour rendition then should not be such a big problem. Yellow casts have been very popolar with a lot of people and again I could not imagine why. It could be O.K. sometimes in the name of “art” but why so often. There is more to it than just adding yellow to images to make it arty.

And then the underexposure, I am at a loss why I see this so often. Is it a technical question, like poor monitors ? What is puzzling to me is, it can becorrected quickly and easily, not much time involved, why not do it.

Apart from all that, it is a lovely shot of a beautiful flutter by.

stillshot2 · 08-15-2018, 08:29 AM

Originally posted by Schraubstock

And then the underexposure, I am at a loss why I see this so often. Is it a technical question, like poor monitors ?

I think it could be a problem of people having a difference in monitors, because on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull.

Even though the original poster may have a bit of extra saturation, I think his photo is great the way it is and the green in the background is not as big of a problem as you all are making it out to be.

**Schraubstock** · 08-15-2018, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by stillshot2

because on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull.

Hi
Thanks for the reply.
This is more than just of casual interest to me. What you see on your monitor is worrying. I will do some tests to find out where my posted image sits in the reality “landscape”.
I will come back with my findings at a later date.
In the meantime, can you tell me what sort of monitor you use and what its settings are, like gamma, brightness, contrast and so on. Also is your monitor calibrated ?

Thanks again, speak to you later.

stillshot2 · 08-15-2018, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by Schraubstock

In the meantime, can you tell me what sort of monitor you use and what its settings are, like gamma, brightness, contrast and so on. Also is your monitor calibrated ?

I use a laptop but my monitor is not calibrated with a dedicated software, just the little tool that came with my windows operating system so it could be off a little, but when posting to flickr I usually check how my photos look on a few other devices such as a smartphone, wife's laptop, etc. to make sure they look decent enough so I think I got my settings pretty close. You could try seeing how things look on a friend's device? Your edit of the OP's photo basically brought out a lot more noise/grain when you brought the exposure up. Are you able to see this?

**Schraubstock** · 08-16-2018, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by stillshot2

Your edit of the OP's photo basically brought out a lot more noise/grain when you brought the exposure up. Are you able to see this?

Thanks
Yes, this will always be the case, JPGs are only 8bit colour and on top the PF upload algorithm degrades images a bit as well. Working with compromised JPGs will never give optimal results.

I print a lot of photos of mine for sale and for a number of years now I have been using CorelDraw for pre-flighting images in print preview. When I do this with the original image it clearly indicates underexposure. Print comes out much too dark and colours are suppressed.

I also use a commercial printer for all images A2 and bigger (I don't run an A2 printer anymore) and all my image files do not need to be optimised. They print perfectly and reliably so much so that my printer says my files are always easy to print. No corrections required.

Nevertheless, I will visit a commercial colleague tomorrow who like me has a fully calibrated setup in his studio with four EIZO monitors and let him have a look at the butterfly. You put doubts in my head and I need confirmation. Speak to you tomorrow with the finding.

Cheers

**Schraubstock** · 08-16-2018, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by stillshot2

on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull

Can you please tell me:
I am interested to know, do these two images on your screen look overexposed or underexposed or in other words too bright or too dark.

They are test images lifted off the internet.

Cheers

stillshot2 · 08-16-2018, 11:51 AM

These sample images appear to be ok. I think your setup is probably fine I wouldn't worry too much. From what I saw from your samples on the steamship and polar bear photo they seem to be exposed correctly and look quite nice.

Lucky-Luc · 08-23-2018, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by Goosey

gday guys
I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot
now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey

Unless you are rich, for only now and then keep the 300. But if you want to get more serious in macro a macro lens will have much advantage.

WildPortraits · 08-25-2018, 06:44 PM

I love the subtle colors in the wings and body of the butterfly. Each lens has its own look. I use a range of telephoto and macro photos, it depends on whether you want to enhance the details- most macro lenses are made to be extremely accurate, or with telephoto compress some of the difference between foreground and background, creating a different feel and bokeh. Try them all, each has a purpose.

coloradoRB · 08-26-2018, 08:34 AM

True macro lenses show an amazing amount of detail in a subject. Using a telephoto lens as you know adds compression giving a much different perspective. Depends on what you want for your image.
I like your shot.

08-14-2018, 07:44 PM - 1 Like	#6
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Just a simple brightening of this underexposed image and a slight reduction in the red and green channel will get you this; it has to be better, don't you agree ? I am at a loss why I see so many underexposed and yellow cast images being posted here. There has to be a reason. The white balance of most cameras these days is pretty good. Better colour rendition then should not be such a big problem. Yellow casts have been very popolar with a lot of people and again I could not imagine why. It could be O.K. sometimes in the name of “art” but why so often. There is more to it than just adding yellow to images to make it arty. And then the underexposure, I am at a loss why I see this so often. Is it a technical question, like poor monitors ? What is puzzling to me is, it can becorrected quickly and easily, not much time involved, why not do it. Apart from all that, it is a lovely shot of a beautiful flutter by. Last edited by Schraubstock; 10-27-2018 at 10:51 PM.

08-16-2018, 06:46 AM	#11
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by stillshot2 on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull Can you please tell me: I am interested to know, do these two images on your screen look overexposed or underexposed or in other words too bright or too dark. They are test images lifted off the internet. Cheers Last edited by Schraubstock; 10-27-2018 at 10:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature friends in the yard	Goosey	Post Your Photos!	5	07-03-2018 12:31 AM
Nature In the yard	Cee Cee	Post Your Photos!	15	09-22-2014 03:11 AM
Nature Monsters in the yard	Westoz	Post Your Photos!	14	02-27-2014 05:39 PM
Black & White Brick in the Yard...	Eric Auer	Post Your Photos!	3	02-22-2013 08:42 AM
Pets Terrors In The Yard..	Eric Auer	Post Your Photos!	7	02-15-2013 10:59 AM

11-28-2014, 08:53 AM	#2
Rimfiredude Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Washington Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,176	Originally posted by Goosey gday guys I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey But a pretty bug.

08-05-2018, 02:43 PM	#3
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	Originally posted by Goosey gday guys I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey I feel like you are doing fine with this lens. A lot of people focus on getting so close that a lot of times the composition turns out awkward. This isn't the case in yours; I like how the butterfly is framed and for that your photo caught my attention

08-09-2018, 01:10 PM	#4
Photogoof Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Prague Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,422	Nice one!

08-11-2018, 08:55 AM	#5
p0pa Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Posts: 26	I think for casual macro shooting - you can go with the Sigma. If you find that you shoot more often - then you can go for a macro lens (100mm/2.8 or a shorter macro lens). Also, keep in mind that with long lens (such as the Sigma) you can have more distance between you and the object, so you will deal with shadows from you and the camera a lot more easier. Just a not about the photo - the green in the background is a bit distracting. Maybe you can reduce its saturation and brightness?

08-15-2018, 08:29 AM	#7
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	Originally posted by Schraubstock And then the underexposure, I am at a loss why I see this so often. Is it a technical question, like poor monitors ? I think it could be a problem of people having a difference in monitors, because on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull. Even though the original poster may have a bit of extra saturation, I think his photo is great the way it is and the green in the background is not as big of a problem as you all are making it out to be.

08-15-2018, 09:40 PM	#8
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by stillshot2 because on my screen, your photo is overexposed a looks a little dull. Hi Thanks for the reply. This is more than just of casual interest to me. What you see on your monitor is worrying. I will do some tests to find out where my posted image sits in the reality “landscape”. I will come back with my findings at a later date. In the meantime, can you tell me what sort of monitor you use and what its settings are, like gamma, brightness, contrast and so on. Also is your monitor calibrated ? Thanks again, speak to you later.

08-15-2018, 11:53 PM	#9
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	Originally posted by Schraubstock In the meantime, can you tell me what sort of monitor you use and what its settings are, like gamma, brightness, contrast and so on. Also is your monitor calibrated ? I use a laptop but my monitor is not calibrated with a dedicated software, just the little tool that came with my windows operating system so it could be off a little, but when posting to flickr I usually check how my photos look on a few other devices such as a smartphone, wife's laptop, etc. to make sure they look decent enough so I think I got my settings pretty close. You could try seeing how things look on a friend's device? Your edit of the OP's photo basically brought out a lot more noise/grain when you brought the exposure up. Are you able to see this?

08-16-2018, 12:43 AM	#10
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by stillshot2 Your edit of the OP's photo basically brought out a lot more noise/grain when you brought the exposure up. Are you able to see this? Thanks Yes, this will always be the case, JPGs are only 8bit colour and on top the PF upload algorithm degrades images a bit as well. Working with compromised JPGs will never give optimal results. I print a lot of photos of mine for sale and for a number of years now I have been using CorelDraw for pre-flighting images in print preview. When I do this with the original image it clearly indicates underexposure. Print comes out much too dark and colours are suppressed. I also use a commercial printer for all images A2 and bigger (I don't run an A2 printer anymore) and all my image files do not need to be optimised. They print perfectly and reliably so much so that my printer says my files are always easy to print. No corrections required. Nevertheless, I will visit a commercial colleague tomorrow who like me has a fully calibrated setup in his studio with four EIZO monitors and let him have a look at the butterfly. You put doubts in my head and I need confirmation. Speak to you tomorrow with the finding. Cheers

08-16-2018, 11:51 AM	#12
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070	These sample images appear to be ok. I think your setup is probably fine I wouldn't worry too much. From what I saw from your samples on the steamship and polar bear photo they seem to be exposed correctly and look quite nice.

08-23-2018, 03:48 PM	#13
Lucky-Luc Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Montreal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 330	Originally posted by Goosey gday guys I have been trying out a bit of macro, but I do not have a macro lense so I just use my 70-300 sigma what would the benefits be to own one as I only shoot now and then. i put in this photo to show what the sigma will do let me know thanks goosey Unless you are rich, for only now and then keep the 300. But if you want to get more serious in macro a macro lens will have much advantage.

08-25-2018, 06:44 PM	#14
WildPortraits Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Posts: 259	I love the subtle colors in the wings and body of the butterfly. Each lens has its own look. I use a range of telephoto and macro photos, it depends on whether you want to enhance the details- most macro lenses are made to be extremely accurate, or with telephoto compress some of the difference between foreground and background, creating a different feel and bokeh. Try them all, each has a purpose.

08-26-2018, 08:34 AM	#15
coloradoRB Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 27	True macro lenses show an amazing amount of detail in a subject. Using a telephoto lens as you know adds compression giving a much different perspective. Depends on what you want for your image. I like your shot.