Critique thread?

[jammin]

Re: Critique thread?

With the nice wispy clouds, I wonder if the composition would have been better if you panned up a bit, so the base of the image would be just below the waterline/rocks/algae? To me the sand is less interesting / visually pleasing than the sky, otherwise I like the exposure.

Good point, although the intention was for the sharp rock to be at the very centre of the image and for your eye to be drawn to it. It could have worked in the bottom third though 

I'm also wondering what it would have been like if you zoomed in a bit so that the composition consisted of the hills in the middle left, with their reflection in the water, and that small rock outcropping in the middle of the picture - I guess if you imagine roughly cropping it so you just had the top left "quarter" of the image or so. I think this might work, as I guess you intended on the rocks in the middle of the image to be the focal point, but I only just noticed them when thinking about cropping it down/zooming, they're maybe a bit "drowned out" by their surroundings?

Unfortunately, it wasn't possible to zoom with a 24mm prime. However, I did take a portrait shot too:

Where is this place? it's cool.

Broad Haven, south Pembrokeshire.

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

I'd say the portrait works much better, maybe either because you've lost some of the less interesting foreground sand, or by clipping the sides you get drawn to the central feature much quicker?

I'll be going along the Pembrokeshire footpath for a bit in a few weeks, awesome

[Eggtastico]

Re: Critique thread?

same problem in both photos.
NO TITS

[jammin]

Re: Critique thread?

same problem in both photos.
NO TITS

Excellent point   

[Russell]

Re: Critique thread?

Apart from Eggs point which tbh is where so many photos are lacking I think Zypder got it right, the sand in the bottom right of the image doesn't actually add anything and means the foreground isn't that strong.  If you actually cover the bottom 1/3rd with your hand the image actually looks a bit stronger imo.  What you need to do is decide what your trying to shoot, the sky and the hills or the water and the hills, especially at 24mm, with a wide angle you'd get most of it in but you've tried to compromise and ended up with the horizon in the middle of the frame.

I tend to use my wide angle for everything these days so don't know how I'd really approach this for myself at 24mm, maybe go portrait and see about using the edge of the beach where it curves at the right of the image as a lead in line.

The portrait version is better but I still think it looks a bit better covering without those rocks.

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

Slight twist on the theme. Venus flytraps growing in the wild in the New Forest! After first hearing of the plants existence 4 years ago, I finally found out the coordinates of them earlier in the week. Popped out yesterday morning to have a look. Rather than a specific photo, how about using the ones below to paint a better picture of the layout and the subject, and then you can say what you would have done, if you had to produce a single image?

So, there are about 3 crowns of plants on a single mossy tummock in a boggy area:

Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) mound by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

Two of the plants are quite close, whilst the 3rd plant is on the other side of the tussock:

Venus flytraps (Dionaea muscipula) by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

They're quite healthy though, which I was surprised at:

Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) crown 2 by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

If I were to take ONE photo, this is the one I would take:

Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) landscape 2 by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

However, I did do a slight different angle, not sure about it. I think for the image below to work, I should have used a ND Grad filter or something. The plants lose some of their dominance in the frame I think too.

Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) landscape 1 by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

For those last two pictures, I chose that angle and those plants as I felt two plants was better than one, also, the grass was less in the way on that side, so it all felt "right". I chose to put a bit of the surroundings in the shot to put the fact these plants are growing in the new forest into context, rather than just focusing on the plants themselves.

Thoughts?

[Russell]

Re: Critique thread?

I quite like the 3rd one down actually except for the stem coming up into the camera thats out of focus the entire plant is in focus.  One thing with all of them is that you could have removed some of the grass stems from the shots, they're a bit distracting but I imagine you didn't want to disturb them too much.

I'm not sure how I'd go about doing the same sort of shot, maybe try putting my 10-20 on and go portrait to see if I could get the plants in the shot at bottom and the hills/trees in the background, hard to say if that'd actually work without trying it though.  If that didn't work out I'd probably go macro and try and get one of them sets of jaws, its an unusal suject in these sorts of surroudings, I was going to see about buying myself one this year to try and get a macro shot something like this but I never got round to it


Sensitive Plant Flower by russellcram, on Flickr

[Mongoose]

Re: Critique thread?

Russell that flower shot is amazing, I feel like I could reach into my screen and pick it! I always get the focus point slightly off in this type of shot, probably because I'm too lazy/impatient to set up properly with a tripod and so on, but you've nailed it.

[Russell]

Re: Critique thread?

Russell that flower shot is amazing, I feel like I could reach into my screen and pick it! I always get the focus point slightly off in this type of shot, probably because I'm too lazy/impatient to set up properly with a tripod and so on, but you've nailed it.

Thanks Mongoose, in some ways its still my best macro shot yet.  Focus is always a problem with macro especially as I normally find I'm below 100th/s on my 105mm so it ends up with a little motion blur which is why I used a flash on that shot, helped me with get a shutter speed of 200th and more DoF too, both of which will help with getting the focus right so if I were you'd I'd give it a try, it doesn't work everytime but it certainly helps.  If putting a flash on a tripod takes too long look at a flash/LED macro ring, that should help nicely and isn't difficult to setup, think Zypder has or at least was talking about getting one a while ago.

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

Yeah, I managed to get a good deal on the MP-E 65mm macro lens and a ring flash. cost about 50% what they retail at

I've seen some interesting non-ringflash set up with specialist bounce/diffuser cards mounted to the flash. In theory having the flash offset, instead of lens mounted, will give better lighting, though the ring flash allows you to modify the output on the left or right side.

The thing I need to get to grips with is using the flash to increase shutter speed without darkening the background, if such a thing were possible.

[Russell]

Re: Critique thread?

Yeah, I managed to get a good deal on the MP-E 65mm macro lens and a ring flash. cost about 50% what they retail at

I've seen some interesting non-ringflash set up with specialist bounce/diffuser cards mounted to the flash. In theory having the flash offset, instead of lens mounted, will give better lighting, though the ring flash allows you to modify the output on the left or right side.

The thing I need to get to grips with is using the flash to increase shutter speed without darkening the background, if such a thing were possible.

Hmm only way I can think of doing that is lowering the shutter speed but then that might cause problems with motion blur depending on how far down you go with your 65mm guess you don't want to go too far below 1/80th hmm not sure without having one to hand to try!

You do seem some wonderful (and weird!) creations with cardboard for bouncing flash around, can't say too much though I've got a pringles can snoot!

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

I guess you could always use some powerful constant light sources to backlight or just increase the general light available for the composition. Good for still life, not so easy for bugs

[Mongoose]

Re: Critique thread?

what's the high ISO performance like on your 7D? crank the ISO a couple of stops and you'll need less light for the background, although of course you'll start to get noisy beyond a certain point.

Thanks for the tips Russell, I really must give this a go, I've got a decent flash (though not a ring flash) with a diffuser and a Tamron 90mm macro lens, so I should be able to achieve something.

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

I find the noise on the 7D to be pretty bad to be honest. ISO 100-200 is ok. Anything higher and the noise is noticeable. I'm curious if/when the 7D MKii is announced how the noise will be on that.

[zpyder]

Re: Critique thread?

Ring flash:


Common purple and gold Moth by Chris_Moody, on Flickr

The wings were deceptive, they looked pretty flat when I took the shot, but obviously f11 wasn't enough to get them all in focus with the angle they apparently were at. This was in the shade at 7pm or so I think, so I'd have never got the background exposed anyway.

Ring flash again I think, almost got the background exposed enough:

Rhododendron leafhoppers mating by Chris_Moody, on Flickr