Stinky and the Fly

[bloodhound31]

Today I thought I would go practice with RAW instead of JPEG, thanks to the good advice from Troy.

I also used the Canon Digital Professional Software for the initial processing (very subtle) and conversion to JPEG. I then put it through Photoshop as usual just to crop a little and whack my name on them.

Stinky - 55mm 1/125sec F5.6 ISO 800 no flash.
The Fly - 51mm 1/80sec F5.6 ISO 800 no flash.

Troy, I also took the filters off and used only the 4x on its own. I have a 1x, 2x, and 4x. Previously I have been using combinations but your advice about image degradation through multiple layers of glass at the expense of magnification is good.

Definitely a lot smoother.

Baz.

I am keeping a log of my progressive improvements on Photobucket. http://s136.photobucket.com/albums/q...ry%20Armstead/

[Jen]

wow Baz that is so cool even though i hate bugs

[troypiggo (Troy)]

Like the action of the first shot, it's a great pose. And you're definitely getting the natural light exposure down pat now. I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but see how narrow the depth of field is? You're right at the limits of balancing ISO/noise, shutter speeds/motion blur, aperture/depth of field I reckon. If you had a flash it gives you more light to allow you to do a bit more with the aperture and maybe drop that ISO or something. I don't know any more tricks for natural light shooting - I've given you all I've got... unless you reflect sunlight maybe. Get something to bounce sunlight off to make the area you're shooting brighter?

[bloodhound31]

Originally Posted by troypiggo

Like the action of the first shot, it's a great pose. And you're definitely getting the natural light exposure down pat now. I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but see how narrow the depth of field is? You're right at the limits of balancing ISO/noise, shutter speeds/motion blur, aperture/depth of field I reckon. If you had a flash it gives you more light to allow you to do a bit more with the aperture and maybe drop that ISO or something. I don't know any more tricks for natural light shooting - I've given you all I've got... unless you reflect sunlight maybe. Get something to bounce sunlight off to make the area you're shooting brighter?

Thanks Jen.

I'm hearing ya Troy. Yeah, trying to get that light meter to balance in the zero without the flash is hard, especially in the late afternoon overcast failing light. I opened the aperture up as much as I could, dropped the shutter speed as much as I dared, and it was still underexposed. I had no choice but to up the ISO, which I would prefer to keep down to 400 or even 200.

The built in flash introduces all kinds of horrible reflections and sometimes when I am real close, it even inrtoduces shadows from the lens. Yuk.

I will keep practicing though, but I might be limited to brighter times of day until I get the new gear next year. Thanks again for your tips mate.

Baz.

[dpastern (Dave Pastern)]

Interestingly, I used the inbuilt flash on my D60 (Canon) for a while and was quite happy with the results. Not perfect, but certainly usable imho.

Good shots Baz, although the first one isn't a stink bug. Flash is the way to go with macro imho. When I get a Mark IV, then I'll be doing natural light macro images. Here's a fly shot, natural light that I took from a few years ago:

http://www.macro-images.com/images/M...s/F79C8528.jpg

Dave