Critics Corner

[mollyc]

Unfortunately not, the tree is in the neighbours garden so i have zoom over my fence. I used the long lens because i thought that would create better dof - it didn't!
How would it make a difference with a wider lens? I thought the closer we could zoom the better, I guess thats not the case though, would a wider lens enable the subject to 'pop' out? and then crop the photo?

No, you would defintitely get better DOF with a longer lens than a wider lens, especially if you are so far away from it. I think the bigger issue is that the part you want in focus is bisected by the branch behind, and it being so dark, it competes visually. DOF also relates to how far the subject is from the background, so by shooting in the middle, you've not created any separation. And also you need to be closer to the subject for good separation. You are probably too far away to achieve what you want.

I would focus at the part of the tree that was closest to me, and i would even haul out a ladder if I were really determined. I don't usually for macros, but I do use a ladder for first day of school portraits because my kids always sit on the front porch, which is four-five steps above a sloping driveway (so I'm even lower when I get to the right part of the driveway for where I need to stand).

I took a lot of different tree branch images similar to this in the spring when they were in flower, and only one or two really worked in the end. They are surprisingly more difficult than one would think.

Could you ask permission from your neighbor to go into their yard?

 

[Cheese&Apple]

I was trying to get the light shining through the Oak tree leaves and get a shallow dof at the same time, i am not sure if it has ended up too bright. I like the framing and the way the eye is drawn to the central part of the tree which it what i intended but there is something i am not happy about, maybe it is the dark branch under them, i dont know.
Anyway, I am going to lie down in a dark room now and get ready for your comments, thanks in advance.
View attachment 762210

@keyrex if I understand correctly, I think the effect you're going for is more about lighting.

In wildlife terms this is commonly referred to as rim or fringe light.

With leaves on a tree, it wouldn't be rim light as the light is shining through the entire leaf but the effect could be similar with the leaves standing-out against a dark background.

• You need strong backlight on the leaves (you want to be facing towards the sun with the leaves between you and the sun),
• The sun should be fairly low on the horizon but still above and out of frame,
• Focus on and expose for the brightest backlight leaf or leaves and forget about the exposure for everything else in the shot. You'll likely be shooting at low or base ISO with a fast shutter speed
• Use spot metering on the brightest leaf if possible - again - expose for the bright leaves only. Your histogram shouldn't be much more than a single spike over on the right but not clipped,
• I don't know what app your using to process your shots but you can try increasing shadows and blacks, increasing highlights and then finally, adjusting overall exposure so that the leaves really pop against the dark background.

For added fun and interest, once you've got focus and exposure right, lock them down and ask someone to spray water (gently) from a garden hose in an arc so that you've water drops/fine spray coming down into the frame from above and catching the sunlight as well.

~ Peter

 

[keyrex]

No, you would defintitely get better DOF with a longer lens than a wider lens, especially if you are so far away from it. I think the bigger issue is that the part you want in focus is bisected by the branch behind, and it being so dark, it competes visually. DOF also relates to how far the subject is from the background, so by shooting in the middle, you've not created any separation. And also you need to be closer to the subject for good separation. You are probably too far away to achieve what you want.

I would focus at the part of the tree that was closest to me, and i would even haul out a ladder if I were really determined. I don't usually for macros, but I do use a ladder for first day of school portraits because my kids always sit on the front porch, which is four-five steps above a sloping driveway (so I'm even lower when I get to the right part of the driveway for where I need to stand).

I took a lot of different tree branch images similar to this in the spring when they were in flower, and only one or two really worked in the end. They are surprisingly more difficult than one would think.

Could you ask permission from your neighbor to go into their yard?

I thought the lens choice would give me better dof but wasn't sure so i'm happy for that confirmation, thanks. I did try to get distance between the subject and the background as best i could but sadly it wasn't enough. I agree about the branch, it is too dark and contrasts way too much. I could get a bit closer, ill give that a go. Thank you. I think i might give the ladder a miss though, i hate heights and with concentrating on the camera i would end on my backside and be lucky not to break something. Thanks for the suggestion though, much appreciated. I am learning about the level of difficulty involved, i have owned a camera for years but usually just took shots for personal reasons, now i want to take better shots i am beginning to understand how hard it is to get it right, just when you think you're nearly there you realise how far away you really are. Like the say, the more you know, the more you realise how little you know.
Your photos are absolutely stunning and if i can take photos half as good as those, ill be chuffed to bits. Thanks for the advice.

@keyrex if I understand correctly, I think the effect you're going for is more about lighting.

In wildlife terms this is commonly referred to as rim or fringe light.

With leaves on a tree, it wouldn't be rim light as the light is shining through the entire leaf but the effect could be similar with the leaves standing-out against a dark background.

• You need strong backlight on the leaves (you want to be facing towards the sun with the leaves between you and the sun),
• The sun should be fairly low on the horizon but still above and out of frame,
• Focus on and expose for the brightest backlight leaf or leaves and forget about the exposure for everything else in the shot. You'll likely be shooting at low or base ISO with a fast shutter speed
• Use spot metering on the brightest leaf if possible - again - expose for the bright leaves only. Your histogram shouldn't be much more than a single spike over on the right but not clipped,
• I don't know what app your using to process your shots but you can try increasing shadows and blacks, increasing highlights and then finally, adjusting overall exposure so that the leaves really pop against the dark background.

For added fun and interest, once you've got focus and exposure right, lock them down and ask someone to spray water (gently) from a garden hose in an arc so that you've water drops/fine spray coming down into the frame from above and catching the sunlight as well.

~ Peter

Thanks, Peter. That is a great guide and one i can use. I have trouble with metering so to know which one to use is great too. I used ISO 100 and adjusted the rest to get the exposure, which i am pretty happy with, but its not the way i wanted it to look and the rim light sounds like my intention, that would surely make the picture stand out in the way i'm after. I (try to) use photoshop cs5 but i admit i don't have the time to get to know it well enough to know what i'm doing, i usually just fiddle until i get an effect i like. I like the idea of the water spray too, i have seen that done it looks really good but again, i have to admit i would have never thought of doing it without your suggestions. Thank you for the advice. Once more it goes without saying, if i could take shots half as good as yours......


Thank you all of you for this advice, my head is full of things to try out. I am planning to go and visit some derelict industrial greenhouses soon, i'll probably go around 6-7pm after what will hopefully have been a beautiful sunny day. Is there any advice or tips anyone can give with regards to settings? Thanks in advance.

 

[deep diver]

No, you would defintitely get better DOF with a longer lens than a wider lens, especially if you are so far away from it. I think the bigger issue is that the part you want in focus is bisected by the branch behind, and it being so dark, it competes visually. DOF also relates to how far the subject is from the background, so by shooting in the middle, you've not created any separation. And also you need to be closer to the subject for good separation. You are probably too far away to achieve what you want.

I would focus at the part of the tree that was closest to me, and i would even haul out a ladder if I were really determined. I don't usually for macros, but I do use a ladder for first day of school portraits because my kids always sit on the front porch, which is four-five steps above a sloping driveway (so I'm even lower when I get to the right part of the driveway for where I need to stand).

I took a lot of different tree branch images similar to this in the spring when they were in flower, and only one or two really worked in the end. They are surprisingly more difficult than one would think.

Could you ask permission from your neighbor to go into their yard?

I know this. Sorry for the bad advice. This is why my wife tells me I should never speak when I am sick (pneumonia) and tired. I'll shut up now, and chime in again when I feel better.

 

[Apple fanboy]

.

??

 

[keyrex]

I know this. Sorry for the bad advice. This is why my wife tells me I should never speak when I am sick (pneumonia) and tired. I'll shut up now, and chime in again when I feel better.

I hope you feel better soon, being a man i don't do illness very well so you have my total sympathy.
It wasn't bad advice, there is no reason not to try what you suggested, my understanding is that it would probably give a really unique perspective. The more i think about it the more i think i might just give it a try to see what it does look like up close and wide.
All advice is good advice its up to the advisee to decide whether or not to act upon.

 

[deep diver]

I hope you feel better soon, being a man i don't do illness very well so you have my total sympathy.
It wasn't bad advice, there is no reason not to try what you suggested, my understanding is that it would probably give a really unique perspective. The more i think about it the more i think i might just give it a try to see what it does look like up close and wide.
All advice is good advice its up to the advisee to decide whether or not to act upon.

That is very generous. Thank you.

When you go out to play, remember that DOF is a function of focal length, distance, and aperture.

 

[Cheese&Apple]

I have trouble with metering so to know which one to use is great too.

You're quite welcome @keyrex

As far as metering goes...a good rule of thumb is to always meter and expose for the subject of your shot. In other words:

• If your subject is something like a person or animal that is a small portion of the frame, spot meter for the person or animal and don't worry about the background, and
• If your subject is something like a broad landscape or flower that fills the frame, meter for the entire frame - in Nikon terms it's matrix metering. For landscape or other frame-filling shots live view metering works very well.

I never use centre weighted metering as, on my Nikon camera, the spot metering point follows the focus point so you're more likely to focus and meter accurately.

~ Peter

 

[0007776]

I just posted this in the POTD thread, but I find I never get much criticism there and would like to improve more so please give me your comments.

Flight by mrkramer, on Flickr

It was taken with a D750 with a 70-300mm lens on it
Shutter speed 1/4000
F8
ISO 640
The bird was flying directly overhead and moving fairly quickly so I didn't have a lot of time to set up the shot, and had to shoot handheld.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I just posted this in the POTD thread, but I find I never get much criticism there and would like to improve more so please give me your comments.

Flight by mrkramer, on Flickr

It was taken with a D750 with a 70-300mm lens on it
Shutter speed 1/4000
F8
ISO 640
The bird was flying directly overhead and moving fairly quickly so I didn't have a lot of time to set up the shot, and had to shoot handheld.

I like it. I know how hard birds in flight can be. Did you crop much? The sky looks a little noisy. At ISO 640 it shouldn't be. You might be able to reduce in post, but you might just end up loosing definition on the bird.
But I love the bird positioning in the frame and the lighting on his wing tips.
Nice job.

 

[0007776]

I like it. I know how hard birds in flight can be. Did you crop much? The sky looks a little noisy. At ISO 640 it shouldn't be. You might be able to reduce in post, but you might just end up loosing definition on the bird.
But I love the bird positioning in the frame and the lighting on his wing tips.
Nice job.

I did crop it a bit. I’m wondering if the noise is from increasing the blue saturation a bit too much in post, any tips for the best way of fixing that? It was shot in raw, and edited in Lightroom.

 

[kenoh]

I did crop it a bit. I’m wondering if the noise is from increasing the blue saturation a bit too much in post, any tips for the best way of fixing that? It was shot in raw, and edited in Lightroom.

Hmm, what I do is use a local adjustment brush with reduced clarity and sharpness, then paint over the bits that are not to be sharp to remove a lot of it. I have varying degrees of success with it.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

I did crop it a bit. I’m wondering if the noise is from increasing the blue saturation a bit too much in post, any tips for the best way of fixing that? It was shot in raw, and edited in Lightroom.

Hmm, what I do is use a local adjustment brush with reduced clarity and sharpness, then paint over the bits that are not to be sharp to remove a lot of it. I have varying degrees of success with it.

I'd go one step further with Ken's suggestion and select the blue colour in Lightroom only with your Adjustment Brush, fine-tuning the Range Mask with the blue colours and its sensitivity. Then once you have your selection all good, play with the noise, clarity and sharpness sliders until you get rid of the visible noise according to your requirements.

 

[kenoh]

I'd go one step further with Ken's suggestion and select the blue colour in Lightroom only with your Adjustment Brush, fine-tuning the Range Mask with the blue colours and its sensitivity. Then once you have your selection all good, play with the noise, clarity and sharpness sliders until you get rid of the visible noise according to your requirements.

Never thought of this... good tip!

 

[kenoh]

I just posted this in the POTD thread, but I find I never get much criticism there and would like to improve more so please give me your comments.

Flight by mrkramer, on Flickr

It was taken with a D750 with a 70-300mm lens on it
Shutter speed 1/4000
F8
ISO 640
The bird was flying directly overhead and moving fairly quickly so I didn't have a lot of time to set up the shot, and had to shoot handheld.

In POTD you need to say you want comments or we will be quiet. A couple folks in the past got feedback and didn't want it so we have somehow gone silent. Happy to comment.

 

[0007776]

In POTD you need to say you want comments or we will be quiet. A couple folks in the past got feedback and didn't want it so we have somehow gone silent. Happy to comment.

I’ll try that again, I feel like a few months ago when I had been last active in that thread I tried that method and didn’t get much response.

 

[kenoh]

I’ll try that again, I feel like a few months ago when I had been last active in that thread I tried that method and didn’t get much response.

Hmm, try again... we have all been woken up to it a bit more of late..

Also, feel free to nudge us in private messages if you want someone specific to look at an image for you.

 

[0007776]

Hmm, try again... we have all been woken up to it a bit more of late..

Also, feel free to nudge us in private messages if you want someone specific to look at an image for you.

I’ll give it a try this evening when I post the picture for today. Now I just have to decide between another bird or a musk ox.

 

[kenoh]

I’ll give it a try this evening when I post the picture for today. Now I just have to decide between another bird or a musk ox.

Musk Ox sounds interesting... and what about some more landscape shots like the winter tundra ones you posted previously?

 

[0007776]

Musk Ox sounds interesting... and what about some more landscape shots like the winter tundra ones you posted previously?

I can probably pull out a few more of those. Our snow is just about gone finally so I won’t be getting any new winter shots soon, but I’ve probably got some good ones I haven’t posted yet in my archives.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

A response to @mrkramer in regards to his Musk Ox that he shared with us on the POTD thread.

The image you didn't share definitely is the better one in regards to seeing the eye and over all POV. A little more breathing room around it may have been good.

I created two masks, one for the grass, and one for the shadows on the Musk Ox.

Here's the settings I used for the grass. I did a quick and dirty mask selection here with a hard edged brush painted all the way around the Musk Ox. Then went and refined it where it needed it by enlarging the image (spacebar + left-click) and then using the erase brush, which is actually pretty friggin' amazing at how it quickly refines the hairs! It could have done with further refinement in a lot of places, but for a quick illustration of what could be achieved, I couldn't be stuffed!

Initially, I went with 100% de-saturation, but upon seeing it, I softened that down to just under 70%. I quite like it with just that hint of colour to it.

Here's the settings I used for the shadow recovery and colour tweaks to the Musk Ox. I refined the selection by making 5 colour range selections with the colour-dropper tool. I also applied a soft yellow colour overlay, to bring out the warmth in its coat and also tweaked the Temp and Tint to enhance this as well. It's all subjective here, go with what pleases you in this regards. I'm drugged up on cold and flu tablets at the moment in a bit of a codeine haze, so this may not tick my boxes tomorrow!

If you press the letter "O" on your keyboard, it will show you the mask, allowing you to refine it better. Press "O" again and it will disappear from view.

The eye needed opening up a bit, just to make it pop, so here's what I did with an elliptical selection there.

Which resulted in the following image.

Here it is with the grass totally de-saturated, which just doesn't work for me, but, as I mentioned before, I am in a bit of a codeine haze, so what do I currently know!

Oh, and here's your original for comparison.

Edit:

I just realised that I failed to mention that with my erase brushes, which I use to refine the edges of my selections, I have a small amount of feathering and the Auto Mask turned on.

 

[0007776]

A response to @mrkramer in regards to his Musk Ox that he shared with us on the POTD thread.

The image you didn't share definitely is the better one in regards to seeing the eye and over all POV. A little more breathing room around it may have been good.

I created two masks, one for the grass, and one for the shadows on the Musk Ox.

Here's the settings I used for the grass. I did a quick and dirty mask selection here with a hard edged brush painted all the way around the Musk Ox. Then went and refined it where it needed it by enlarging the image (spacebar + left-click) and then using the erase brush, which is actually pretty friggin' amazing at how it quickly refines the hairs! It could have done with further refinement in a lot of places, but for a quick illustration of what could be achieved, I couldn't be stuffed!

View attachment 762920

Initially, I went with 100% de-saturation, but upon seeing it, I softened that down to just under 70%. I quite like it with just that hint of colour to it.

View attachment 762921

Here's the settings I used for the shadow recovery and colour tweaks to the Musk Ox. I refined the selection by making 5 colour range selections with the colour-dropper tool. I also applied a soft yellow colour overlay, to bring out the warmth in its coat and also tweaked the Temp and Tint to enhance this as well. It's all subjective here, go with what pleases you in this regards. I'm drugged up on cold and flu tablets at the moment in a bit of a codeine haze, so this may not tick my boxes tomorrow!

If you press the letter "O" on your keyboard, it will show you the mask, allowing you to refine it better. Press "O" again and it will disappear from view.

View attachment 762919

The eye needed opening up a bit, just to make it pop, so here's what I did with an elliptical selection there.

View attachment 762922

Which resulted in the following image.

View attachment 762923

Here it is with the grass totally de-saturated, which just doesn't work for me, but, as I mentioned before, I am in a bit of a codeine haze, so what do I currently know!

View attachment 762924

Thanks for that, I need to work on learning how to use more of the features in Lightroom so I can make edits like that more easily.

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

Thanks for that, I need to work on learning how to use more of the features in Lightroom so I can make edits like that more easily.

It's actually a pretty capable and powerful program. It's good enough for about 97% of my image editing these days.

 

[akash.nu]

It's actually a pretty capable and powerful program. It's good enough for about 97% of my image editing these days.

This is not the mobile version of Lightroom right?

 

[Alexander.Of.Oz]

This is not the mobile version of Lightroom right?

No, I've never used that one. Well, I lie. I did use it when it first came out, but then realised that there was no point as I was working from a tiny little screen in all manner of mixed and changing light. When you have the option of editing in a light balanced room, with a large, calibrated monitor, why would you?

I do realise that some people don't have this luxury and only have a mobile device to edit on. I would never choose this as an option though. If they could see their images on a large and calibrated screen, they may better understand why!

That is not having a dig at them either, I'm just expressing my opinion here.