|
Thoughts? I'm still trying to get the hang of the off-camera flash. Are the shiny spots too distracting?
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2011 07:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Thoughts? I'm still trying to get the hang of the off-camera flash. Are the shiny spots too distracting?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2011 10:00
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Yeah a diffuser might help. Thanks- i had a home-made diffuser (the clear plastic drawer liner version that someone posted somewhere in Dorkroom a few months ago) on the off camera flash, so either I need to dial that one down more or my diffuser isn't very effective. No diffuser on the on-camera pop-up. Probably should have tried it without the pop-up too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
 DSC_0034.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  I love this reversed pentax lens setup, but I think the reversing ring is stuck to my 18-55. As in literally stuck, I can't get it off. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2011 02:25
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:As in literally stuck, I can't get it off. Press it up against the bottom of a sneaker and twist. It's how I've gotten some stuck filters off before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2011 04:13
|
|
|
Anti_Social posted:Press it up against the bottom of a sneaker and twist. It's how I've gotten some stuck filters off before.  That worked perfectly, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2011 05:09
|
|
|
 SD 073 13 Fly by Execudork, on Flickr  SD 073 14 Fly and Bee by Execudork, on Flickr  SD 073 15 Bee by Execudork, on Flickr  SD 073 16 Spider by Execudork, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2011 06:06
|
|
|
I made myself a ring-flash entirely out of painters tape and tinfoil. I still don't have a wire for my flash, so I made an aluminum foil tube to connect to the ring itself. Here are some pics I took with it: Ring-Flash Macro Test 004 by Abnegātus, on Flickr  Ring-Flash Macro Test 016 by Abnegātus, on Flickr  Ring-Flash Macro Test 012 by Abnegātus, on Flickr  Ring-Flash Macro Test 022 by Abnegātus, on Flickr Yes, my diffuser was a paper towel. Pastry Mistakes fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Oct 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 08:55
|
|
|
I was surprised how much more colorful this guy looks than he did to the naked eye (at least on my 2nd monitor): Abnegatus: that paper towel pattern reflected in the eye is actually quite awesome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
What kind of tripods are people using for insect/low ground shots or for walking around with? Do they help with insect shots? I see some really amazing dof on these shots and I am not nearly getting anywhere like it (canon5d2, 100mm macro) and am curious, how I can improve my dof for insect shots. I figure it is quite difficult because I've found by the time I plonk my camera down if I'm using a tripod the bugger has flown off on me. Or walked off. I'm pretty slow. So I've mostly been handholding it, and it kinda shows. Very blurry. I've also tried using a flash, but for some things even with a diffuser the flash just kills it (particularly fungus) so a tripod that can get me close to the ground with lots of angles is great. I've been recommended a gorilla-pod but wondering what actual macro users use. I guess. Anyway here are some of my (admittedly crappity) shots showing my favourite photo subjects. Shells (random shells from the local beach):  Plants/Fungus (these are Mycena interrupta)  Textures and patterns (this is a sea urchin shell):  Insects (my ultimate favourite insect is this one - the hoverfly)   Love looking at everyone's insect shots - amazing little buggers up close aren't they!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 02:13
|
|
|
Shot this for the leaf's texture Anthocyaninic Leaf by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
Finally got all my new kit in (used to just use 100mm Canon 2.8 w/ XTI - got a 7D and added a 430ex with a flash bracket and cheap diffuser)  Went out and shot for an afternoon before fall really hit - first impressions are that using a flash allowed me to get a LOT more shots than I was used to.  Fly on tree by alctel, on Flickr  moth by alctel, on Flickr This last was is too 'lit up' if that makes sense, I think I needed to dial down the flash a tad for that, or get a better diffuser.  jumper by alctel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 19:47
|
|
|
What bracket is that, and do you like it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
It's a Manfrotto 330B Macro Flash Bracket It's pretty good, feels very solid and well-made - comes with two arms, I took one off though. I'm also going to add a cheap little ballhead to make it more flexible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 21:12
|
|
|
Alctel posted:It's a Manfrotto 330B Macro Flash Bracket Thanks! Just looked on B&H and that's less pricey than I expected. Going on my x-mas list (unless I can't wait and just buy it for myself).
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2011 21:50
|
|
|
FINALLY got one of these shots.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
Alctel posted:It's a Manfrotto 330B Macro Flash Bracket That is awesome, I think I'm going to have to pick one of those up along with a flash of some sort. Would be nice being able to get a quick shot instead of needing a 2.5 second exposure like I did with this one.  DSC_0500.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr Anyone have good tips for lighting with a reverse lens setup? When the lens is a few cm away from the subject it seems tricky to get good lighting. Also I really need to go back and clean up the background in that picture still.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2011 20:26
|
|
|
Alctel posted:Finally got all my new kit in (used to just use 100mm Canon 2.8 w/ XTI - got a 7D and added a 430ex with a flash bracket and cheap diffuser) Those shots are phenomenal - are you still using the 100mm for these?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 06:25
|
|
|
Meal time 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
Tambaloneus posted:Those shots are phenomenal - are you still using the 100mm for these? Yup, the non-IS version - it really is an amazing lens Slightly related - all the exif data that used to come across automatically now seems to be stripped - grrrrr Raikyn posted:
These are great, what kit/lighting did you use? Alctel fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Nov 2, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
quote =! edit
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
I'm assuming you're talking to Raikyn- mine was natural light (and those are much better photos). In case anyone cares- I used the same lens as you (Canon 100mm 2.8 non-L),60D, with the big and small from the three-pack Opteka extension tubes, on a tripod. f6.3, 1/500s, ISO 500.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
I have the 100mm 2.8 non IS non L version of that lens and I don't think I've ever gotten a photo anywhere near as kickass as those. I need to practice more I think. Maybe a tripod will help. And, well, being less retarded about what settings I use.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
Tambaloneus posted:I have the 100mm 2.8 non IS non L version of that lens and I don't think I've ever gotten a photo anywhere near as kickass as those. I need to practice more I think. Maybe a tripod will help. And, well, being less retarded about what settings I use. Don't worry about the glass and focus on the light: how you create it and how you control it. One of these was taken with a 20 year old Minolta 50/1.7, the other with a high-end Zeiss 135/1.8. Guess which is which! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 00:08
|
|
|
I saw an academic seminar by Alex Wild a couple of weeks ago that was all about taking better bug pics, and he definitely spent the most time on lighting. He shot a lot of things indoors in home-made white-boxes similar to what you might use for taking pictures of stuff for eBay. Even some of his outside stuff was set up- he had an armature with a clamp so he could position a stick with a bug clinging to it just the way he wanted. Definitely big diffusers on his flashes, and he often had backlighting flashes to add color to transparent leaves and bugs. He paid a lot of attention to the backdground as well- making sure there was something pleasing and interesting in color (he often used fruit, but sometimes dead leaves or living foliage). He recommended sort of mid-size apertures, not too wide open or the depth of field is too narrow, but not totally closed down either since apparently sharpness takes a bit of a hit (I didn't realize this). Also you need a butt-load of patience- some of the outdoor shots took him several days of shooting when the light was just right to get the effect and focus he wanted. One other thing- he was actually pretty upbeat about macro small-sensor p&s and even cellphone cameras for photos that don't need to be super-high resolution. Something about the size of the bug and size of the sensor, and how close you can get the front of the lens to the subject.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:I'm assuming you're talking to Raikyn- mine was natural light (and those are much better photos). In case anyone cares- I used the same lens as you (Canon 100mm 2.8 non-L),60D, with the big and small from the three-pack Opteka extension tubes, on a tripod. f6.3, 1/500s, ISO 500. tripod and extension tubes? You have more patience than me 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
Alctel posted:tripod and extension tubes? You have more patience than me I was trying to get some video too. Plus, they were really small spiders!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 04:18
|
|
|
seravid posted:Don't worry about the glass and focus on the light: how you create it and how you control it. Those spiders are so soooo cute! They're the puppies of the arachnid world. And yes, light and framing and all that I am really just starting to learn. I am also having to learn one very important thing that underlies all of these skills and that thing is patience! I'm really quite bad at that. Still, practice makes perfect and the more I do the better I ... hopefully will get. I haven't used much in the way of lighting before, I have a reasonably prominent spasticity (uncontrollable shake) which means without a tripod I have to keep the camera light or I can't hold it still, or I have to use a tripod and since mine is old, clunky and not very useful in odd angles so far I just haven't. Or just use really fast shutter speeds and high ISO. Buuut those are excuses. I've got a gorillapod on layaway and the next will be a nicer tall tripod, with maybe some better light setup some way down the road. For now I'll learn how to bounce light around from the cheapass speedlite using some maguivered together reflectors or something. Somehow. I want to some day learn to take pics like these too (though not as magnified this guy is using microscopes for these): http://www.sandgrains.com/Sand-Grains-Gallery.html Also keep those jumping spider shots coming they are gorgeous shots and so ... soooo very cute :3
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 05:38
|
|
|
Alctel posted:
I used a 7D + MPE-65 + 580exII for mine, taken at 1:1, I usually use that or a Tamron 90mm for the bigger stuff. Just taken this at 4:1 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 06:13
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:I was trying to get some video too. Plus, they were really small spiders! Ughhh video of jumping spiders is a real pain. I spent about 5 minutes trying that and I got about 30 seconds of footage that I felt was good enough to post in the critterquest thread, and by that I meant "hey you can tell it's a spider". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQQ7IC2PmjI Handheld macro video just doesn't work very well for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
Don't think my clips turned out very well either. Besides just being really difficult to follow, it was on the other side of a really dirty window.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 06:39
|
|
|
Raikyn posted:I used a 7D + MPE-65 + 580exII for mine, taken at 1:1, I usually use that or a Tamron 90mm for the bigger stuff. I would LOVE the MPE-65 , but apparently it's a real bastard to use well. Nice pic!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2011 15:46
|
|
|
Alctel posted:I would LOVE the MPE-65 , but apparently it's a real bastard to use well. Nice pic! Hardest thing sometimes is trying to find in the viewfinder what you are actually trying to shoot. For those unaware the mpe-65 unlike all/most other lenses has a maximum working distance as well as the usual minimum. Maximum WD is 101mm, which is a 1:1 shot Minimum WD is 41mm, which is 5:1 The canon 100mm macro by comparison focuses at a maximum of infinity down to a 1:1 shot, where I think the WD is 150mm. Yeah so think of your canon macro at 1:1, go another 50mm towards the target and that is where the mpe-65 starts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
Yeah, getting so close without spooking the insect must be tough - I bet you also need a TON of light so can't stop down too much. It's still probably going to be my next purchase however
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 16:18
|
|
|
BetterLekNextTime posted:Don't think my clips turned out very well either. Besides just being really difficult to follow, it was on the other side of a really dirty window. This is pretty much the best I got... Even though this guy hardly moved at all and I was on a tripod, still very hard to keep in focus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
I'm happy with how these turned out. I've got a 58mm reverse mounted lens and a few short extensions on a micro four thirds body.   
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2011 13:39
|
|
|
Whitetail, an aussie original but into NZ now. Noticed it hanging from my shorts as I stood up. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 10:57
|
|
|
Does anyone have any recommendations for focus stacking software for macro work? I don't have (and won't buy) Photoshop. Helicon Focus looks neat, and it's only $30, but I don't know what else is out there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:45 |
|
|
Graniteman posted:Does anyone have any recommendations for focus stacking software for macro work? I don't have (and won't buy) Photoshop. Helicon Focus looks neat, and it's only $30, but I don't know what else is out there. I tried CombineZM and Zerene Stacker. I shoot by hand so they didn't produce any usable results, but they got (surprisingly) close. I imagine they'd be great for tripod work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 03:43
|
|