Fangs for a good year - 2005

[DeSwitch]

I think the spider here is very small and to get higher magnification, the distance from the subject could be very close. correct me if I'm wrong so it verh hard to get good magnification and at the same time getting the whole subject in focus. I have a DOF calulator on my PDA so a rough indication on the DOF is:

Assume focal length is 90mm, distance is 200mm from subject and aperature is f22 (my calculator do not have f25) The actual subjuct in focut will be from 199.0mm to 201.0mm which is only 2mm. I believe the spider is not any smaller than 2mm, so the whole spider cannot be in focus.

I'm a newbie and I have seen the photo taken by both party. Photography is a form of ART. There should be no hard rules to follow. Every artist have their own style. Lets not argue too much and move on.

Cheers.

 

[Bluesteel]

Hi all the sifus, gurus and Masters!!

I am fairly new to photography, very enlightening thoughts and subject matters on Macro photography are being deliberated here.

I am trying to learn how to walk within the box of technicalities before venturing Out of the box by bending the rules ,or to fly with souls and creativity so to speak.

Please bear with this newbie for the following queries and opinion:

Is subject matters in Macro photography being treated as a whole or are we at Liberty to isolate only parts of the subject matter and use the rest as a background?

I experimented with such an apporach , while it is fun to have very stunning detailed shots on the isolated focus area. I found it weird as the human eye does not perceive object with such perspective. The only photos with such a perspective/approach is perhaps some medical Investigative shots I seen on the net, but that is Photomicrophy... meeting special needs of the medical field.

While I applause Mr. Ortega’s attempts in striking out of the box for greater "soul and creativity " in his pictures, all of us have our individual likes and dislikes , at the end of the day it is the perception of those within the immediate vicinity and the larger opinion in the photography world that counts. That is the main reason we are here,posting and seeking feedback and learning together by taping the larger view and experience of others.

It will be the death for the learning curve if one insists one's approach is correct or an acceptable norm, basing on whatever "being there, done it" experience. All of us are but just a grain of sand in the desert of photography experience. Experience are relative ,to be a moutain , one has to be seen and perceived and acknowleged as one.

To better gauge the acceptability of one's creativity or approach ,perhaps Mr. Ortega could consider posting some of his pieces on other local and international photo forums and seek a large pool of impartial opinions. In my humble opinion CS is just another well in the world of photography.

I am equally appreciative to Mr jason and Garion for voicing their expert opinions on the subject matter , I truely learn from their perspectives and opinions on the approach to macro photography.

There are lots of newbies (frogs) like me learning Macro photography here and my concern is:

If day in and day out one is presented with narrow DOF photos as a norm and touted as an art form, being adaptable our brains will condition us that such pictures is an acceptable norm and this could easily be another story of

" The Emperor and his New clothes " !




Just my humble opinion!

 

[sumball]

I think the spider here is very small and to get higher magnification, the distance from the subject could be very close. correct me if I'm wrong so it verh hard to get good magnification and at the same time getting the whole subject in focus. I have a DOF calulator on my PDA so a rough indication on the DOF is:

Assume focal length is 90mm, distance is 200mm from subject and aperature is f22 (my calculator do not have f25) The actual subjuct in focut will be from 199.0mm to 201.0mm which is only 2mm. I believe the spider is not any smaller than 2mm, so the whole spider cannot be in focus.

I'm a newbie and I have seen the photo taken by both party. Photography is a form of ART. There should be no hard rules to follow. Every artist have their own style. Lets not argue too much and move on.

Cheers.

Hi,

It is the matter of whether a correct technique used to get the desired output. See Bob's thread below, he can get almost the whole spider in sharp and focus.

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=170677

 

[DeSwitch]

Agreed, provided you have all the tools. Bob is using quite a lot of attachements as indicated in his post. Otega took his picture during his lunch time as indicated in his post and we wont expect him to lurk around all his gears at that time.

Qazwer, these were shot with the Canon EF 75-300mm + 25mm extension tube + 500D closeup lens mounted on a 20D.

Bob's shot are really nice and sharp.

 

[ortega]

I agree to disagree

but to each his own, change is inevitable
and one must strive to change and create new things

I have been in this industry for many years and i have seen many
good technical photogs come and go.

So cheers and shoot what you like.

 

[Bluesteel]

"I agree to disagree

but to each his own, change is inevitable
and one must strive to change and create new things

I have been in this industry for many years and i have seen many
good technical photogs come and go.

So cheers and shoot what you like."

Mr ortega are you disagreeing with the fundamentals of macro photography or are you diasagreeing with the general opinion expressed here.Or are you disagreeing with both.

The "I agree to disagree" cliches has been used by you too often to convey any meaning at all.

Yes , change is inevitable but change for the sake of changing without a sound basis or reasons for doing so is at best to meet one's own desire/fancy for change than for the sake of changing for the better.


I have read and seen many good technical photos in the last few months too and the photogs are long remembered for their works by the photography world at large . As a newbie I have not seen sufficient technically sound photos from you to give you credit that you are amongst those that I admire or will be remembered as yet.

However I must admire your steadfastness in sticking to your gun, insisting you are right without any substantiating supports/references from a wider audience.... I am at a loss to find a suitable word to discribe such an attitude, obstination perhaps?


If you deem that your works are just for your own consumption for a creative streak then that is fine, please do so .However, when posted on a public forum it is assumed that you are seeking approval or appraisal for what they are worth. Blanket "disagreeing to agree or agreeing to disagree " is a childish way to answer to feedbacks if you are seriously seeking approval.


Just a wet-behind-the-ear newbies' comments .

 

[Pixelated]

I am a newbie here and got excited with this thread.
Please allow me to chip in some.

Mr.Ortega's picture is not that bad, but it's not good either. The OOF of the JS is very obvious and think try to cover up only by fancy composition but will not help. Macro must show the details of the subject although composition will put some X-factor. If you only put creativity in composition but the end result is a OOf subject, it will be a waste only. Putting the basic foundamentals together with the creativity will create a stunning picture.

Can see that Mr. Ortega always mentioned that he has been there for so long, but looks like he is just there and doing nothing. He also mentioned he see a lot of good photo come and go but looks like he just see it without looking. We must understand the true concept of photography first before we divert to creativity. Too much creativity will leads to OOF images if we don't pay attention to the basic foundamentals.

 

[tchuanye]

Interesting thread.

We are all here to learn. So do take comments positively.

Frank but constructive comments helps. I have been to other forums where not so good photos have been labelled 'Great' 'Excellent' etc when it is quite clearly not. So how can the photographer improve? He will still continue in doing those 'Great' photos.

For me, ( if you see my first post here in Aug 04), and those recently, I have learnt alot. Thanks to critiques and comments which I received here and other forums that are very helpful. Things like, clutter BG, parallel to plane, watch for the whites, and etc etc. If no one point that out to me, I would never learn. Of course, sometimes I feel paisei to say all this comments and seem like pouring cold water, but to me, we are all here to learn....and best way to learn is by is to learn by mistakes.....or areas to improve. Many times, someone will pt out something that I did not take note, and I will learn that lesson and so on.

Of course, sometimes we will experiment certain shots e.g. for me, a backlit butterfly, and a framing shot of a JS and we do that to get feedback of how pp perceive it. Than you learn what pp like to look at and not. If one like it and most pp don't, than so be it. Everyone is entitle to their view. If one only wants to hear positive things abt the shots...than don't expect to improve.

Ortega, views of your shallow DOF photos have been mentioned by many csers here. And I generally agree that that does not work for me in macro photography, though I would agree with you that the lighting is not bad at all. So if you disagree with that, thats fine as all are entitled to their own views.

Mr. Jason, referring to your post:
"I guess the kind of people which used to find it fun taking a memorable technically good shot which adhered to the fundemental principles of photography are fading in the macro section, giving way to more 'abstract' styles which bend the rules."
if you think that the standard here has been dropping, we will appreciate you pointing it out to us on those post and critique our photos so that we will know what to avoid. You are one of the good macro photographer here, and your comments would be beneficial to all here.

 

[ortega]

Mr ortega are you disagreeing with the fundamentals of macro photography or are you diasagreeing with the general opinion expressed here.Or are you disagreeing with both.

The "I agree to disagree" cliches has been used by you too often to convey any meaning at all.

it means that i see and understand your point but you don't understand my point
(or refuse to see things from another view)
and i am giving up trying to explain, so i agree that we disagree.

I do not mean to sound aloof but, i am from the creative industry
and we have our way of thinking. I have been trying to explain it to
the people here but it seems that i have failed.

But i'll try one last time. Here goes nothing...

i did not say i disagree with the sound technical way of things
I too, have also tried it and learned from it.
I noticed that using the formula for a good technical shot
i get images that look the same, so i am experimenting with
a different way of doing things.

I DO NOT purposely try to get less DOF.
Less DOF is a trade off to better lighting and a different pose/angle.
is that clear enough.

 

[ortega]

I am a newbie here and got excited with this thread.
Please allow me to chip in some.

Mr.Ortega's picture is not that bad, but it's not good either. The OOF of the JS is very obvious and think try to cover up only by fancy composition but will not help. Macro must show the details of the subject although composition will put some X-factor. If you only put creativity in composition but the end result is a OOf subject, it will be a waste only. Putting the basic foundamentals together with the creativity will create a stunning picture.

Can see that Mr. Ortega always mentioned that he has been there for so long, but looks like he is just there and doing nothing. He also mentioned he see a lot of good photo come and go but looks like he just see it without looking. We must understand the true concept of photography first before we divert to creativity. Too much creativity will leads to OOF images if we don't pay attention to the basic foundamentals.

i agree with your last point.

but please re read my statements b4 commenting.

"I have been in this industry for many years and i have seen many
good technical photogs come and go."

Means that i have been working in the creative industry for a long time.
And I have seen many good technical photographers come and go.
The industry needs creativity and technical excellence.
If you only strive for technical excellence, then you are only half way there.
You cannot suggest a picture that will suprise the client enough that will have them come back to use your services and increase your value as a photographer.

BTW you don't need to address me as Mr. Ortega,
i typed Mr Jason because that is his nick .

for the other points please read the posts above

 

[Pixelated]

I do not mean to sound aloof but, i am from the creative industry
and we have our way of thinking. I have been trying to explain it to
the people here but it seems that i have failed.

Agree with you that you are too creative, even taking picture that is no good looks excellent to you. If you really learn the fundamentals and technicalities of photography, put that in practise and don't deviate too much just for your creativity. You have lot's of friends always supporting all your posting and all of them say's very good, are you happy with it even you only show's your creativity? You think your creativity will works, why not try to post in other forums and see if you will get the same praise as you are getting from all your follower here.

 

[Tetrode]

Nice Pics. All your subjects look as though they are looking at you. Love the third pic especially. Love the expression on it's face - the 'What the!' look. :what:

I know insects don't have facial expressions. But hey, it looks like they've got them they way you've shot them.

 

[ortega]

thank you tchuanye for your comments
i do like to read them

I did AGREE that if the OOF front legs were in focus it would have been better.

Comment by melvynyeo on post #2
and my agreement on post #4

so i do not undstand what the fuss is about.

 

[ortega]

to everyone misreading my text
I do not disagree, i am just experimenting with something different

I frequently tell ppl that I am still a noob (new to macro) and still on a learning stage.
Go find that tread yourself.

I do not claim to be a good macro photographer.
Like the more experienced macro photographers here, it was their images
that inspired me to take macro in the first place.
Go find that post yourself.

I was amused with the fangs as i have not seen them b4
and was suprised that they were so big!
That post somewhere in this tread.

 

[tchuanye]

thank you tchuanye for your comments
i do like to read them

I did AGREE that if the OOF front legs were in focus it would have been better.

Comment by melvynyeo on post #2
and my agreement on post #4

so i do not undstand what the fuss is about.

Noted on your OOF comment. No offence intended.

 

[stingrey]

Fellow CS'ers,

We are all here to learn and to get improvement from our works. This forum is very useful in learning things and also for finding new friends. Please do respect each other.

 

[ortega]

Agree with you that you are too creative, even taking picture that is no good looks excellent to you. If you really learn the fundamentals and technicalities of photography, put that in practise and don't deviate too much just for your creativity. You have lot's of friends always supporting all your posting and all of them say's very good, are you happy with it even you only show's your creativity? You think your creativity will works, why not try to post in other forums and see if you will get the same praise as you are getting from all your follower here.

now you want to start.

OK, please check the posts and you will notice that i do not know the people who reply
to my posts. Just like i do not know you.

I have never met most of the people here in the macro sub forum.
with the exception of a few.

I will refrain from being personal with your reply.

being creative is the ability to think differently
without wanting to do it a different way and trying to create something new
we would not have great people like Ansel Adams (zone system)
he experimented on a different way and came up with a system.

we would also not know gravity if one just went ouch! when an apple drops on your head.
you should use your brain and ask questions and look for other possibilities.

If a person just goes by the book and "put that in practise and don't deviate too much just for your creativity" then you would still be writing letters instead of posting here
on the internet.

Trying to see and think different is NOT a SIN, please see the big picture.
Let me know if you need more explaination.

Suddenly i feel like it again.

 

[ortega]

Noted on your OOF comment. No offence intended.

non taken

your post was well written to not be offensive

 

[ortega]

Fellow CS'ers,

We are all here to learn and to get improvement from our works. This forum is very useful in learning things and also for finding new friends. Please do respect each other.

thanks stingrey.

Just for the record, i have not met stingrey as well.
but would like to meet him and discuss birding

 

[ortega]

Nice Pics. All your subjects look as though they are looking at you. Love the third pic especially. Love the expression on it's face - the 'What the!' look. :what:

I know insects don't have facial expressions. But hey, it looks like they've got them they way you've shot them.

thanks Tetrode, thats was what i was shooting, the pose and expression

BTW also for the record I have not met Tetrode b4.